With the Juul ban still under scrutiny, U.S. consumers have begun to consider other brands.

For months, many health and anti-vaping groups have been pressuring the FDA to reject any of Juul's PMTA applications. In fact, earlier this year, several groups banded together and sent a letter to the FDA urging it to take action against the excellent PMTA and reject any applications for flavored vaping products.

To that end, last month, the FDA issued an MDO to Juul. The decision applies to "everything they currently sell in the U.S." and will force manufacturers to withdraw from the U.S. market entirely. "We recognize that these form an important part of available products, many of which have played a disproportionate role in the increase in teen vaping," said FDA Commissioner Robert M. Califf.

However, in response to this, Juul immediately filed an emergency motion to the federal appeals court, asking the court to take a position on the FDA's "extraordinary and illegal action." A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled in Juul's favor, allowing the product to remain on the market temporarily.

The FDA responded by suspending its decision for further review. “The FDA is reviewing the marketing denial order it issued to JUUL because, in the course of reviewing the litigation briefing materials, the agency determined that the application had unique scientific issues that required additional review,” Filter quoted an FDA spokesperson as saying. The spokesperson added that since Juul's "products do not have a marketing authorization, [the company] cannot legally market, ship or sell their products," and "the suspension will not change that."

Meanwhile, vape retailers report that customers have started to switch to alternative brands. Will Montgomery, a sales representative for Aj's Liquor, stressed that even if the Juul ban goes into effect, e-cigarette sales won't be affected because consumers will just switch to a different brand. "People still need nicotine," he said.

Ban prompts consumers to switch to other products or sources

Backing up these arguments, when San Francisco implemented its infamous flavor ban in 2020, Ted Egan, the city's chief economist who analyzed the economic impact of San Francisco's legislation, confirmed that the ban would only lead to increased smoking Rate.

In a revealing interview published in the San Francisco Chronicle on May 15, Egan explained that the ban will not affect the city's economy, as money spent on vaping products will still go to the city — Other nicotine products, such as traditional cigarettes. He went on to explain that consumers switch products based on availability.