What does the evidence tell us?
Research led by the University of Bath, reported in September 2025, examined 1,923 e-cigarettes and e-liquids collected from 114 secondary schools across seven regions in England. Synthetic cannabinoids were identified in approximately 13% of the overall confiscated samples, with higher proportions in some regions. The underlying study and the university's later expanded sampling should be distinguished: the study published in Addiction focused on a smaller school sample, whereas the September 2025 University of Bath announcement reported the 1,923-product analysis.
A separate pilot in the Black Country and West Birmingham collected products from seven participating secondary schools. Of 204 analysed samples, 14 contained illicit substances (approximately 6.9%), predominantly synthetic cannabinoids. The study demonstrates why laboratory testing and local intelligence can be valuable.
Neither study establishes the proportion of all vapes used by young people that contain synthetic cannabinoids. These were selected, confiscated products, not a representative survey of every vape in circulation. There is no basis for assuming that every vape contains Spice, or that every young person found vaping is using an illicit drug.
What the findings demonstrate is that appearance, packaging and a young person's understanding of a product may not reliably establish what it contains.
Why does the distinction matter?
Synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists (SCRAs) are laboratory-produced substances acting on cannabinoid receptors. Although sometimes sold or described as cannabis or THC products, they are not equivalent to conventional cannabis. Effects can be unpredictable and potentially severe, including significant confusion, seizures, loss of consciousness and other serious medical complications.
Some young people may not know that the product they have been offered differs from what they believe they are buying. This matters particularly when products are supplied informally or marketed through online networks.
Staff should not attempt to identify substances from a device's colour, branding, flavour or a young person's description alone. The first consideration is the young person's welfare, not chemical identification.
1. Respond to the immediate situation, not an assumption
When a young person is found with a vape, establish whether there is an immediate health or safety concern. Are they alert and responsive? Are they experiencing unexpected symptoms? Is anybody else affected?
Where poisoning is suspected and someone is unconscious, having a seizure or experiencing severe breathing difficulty, call 999. For less urgent concerns about possible exposure, follow NHS advice and seek appropriate clinical support. Do not delay urgent help while attempting to work out what a device contains.
2. Follow established safeguarding and behaviour procedures
Confiscation and safeguarding are related, but not identical processes. Schools should follow their behaviour policy and the Department for Education's searching, screening and confiscation guidance alongside safeguarding procedures.
Where there are concerns about an unknown substance, involve the designated safeguarding lead or appropriate senior colleague promptly. Do not open a suspected device or attempt improvised testing. Follow organisational procedures for safe handling, storage, recording and, where appropriate, advice from the relevant authorities.
The objective is a response that is safe, clear and consistent across the team.
3. Consider the circumstances behind the incident
Possessing an illicit or unidentified vape does not automatically mean a young person is being exploited. However, the circumstances of supply may matter. Professionals may need to consider indicators of pressure, debt, threats, coercion, unusual supply arrangements or online contact connected with the product.
A calm safeguarding conversation can establish what the young person believed they had, who supplied it, whether anyone pressured them and whether they need additional medical, pastoral or specialist support. These are prompts for proportionate professional curiosity, not a checklist that proves exploitation.
- What does the young person believe the product contains, and where did it come from?
- Has anyone encouraged or pressured them to use, carry or distribute it?
- Are there concerns about debt, threats or another person's reaction?
- Do they need medical, pastoral or specialist support?
4. Make conversations constructive
Young people may be familiar with vaping messages without understanding the differences between nicotine, cannabis and synthetic cannabinoids. Dramatic or exaggerated messaging risks undermining professional credibility.
A useful conversation explains uncertainty, makes risks understandable and gives young people space to ask questions. Avoid shame and do not make disclosure feel like it must automatically result in punishment.
In alternative provision and SEND settings, accessible language, visual explanation, additional processing time and trusted relationships may help information become genuinely usable. Good education is not simply telling someone a fact; it supports safer decisions.
5. Review staff readiness before the next incident
Professional confidence should not depend on one colleague having dealt with a similar incident before. Leaders can use a short team discussion or scenario to identify where procedures and judgement need strengthening.
Focused briefings, realistic safeguarding scenarios and consistent local guidance can help staff move from awareness to practical response.
- Do staff know when a vaping incident needs a safeguarding response?
- Is the escalation route clear, including urgent medical support?
- Can colleagues distinguish observed facts from assumptions when recording?
- Are staff confident having a proportionate conversation with the young person?
- Are procedures understood across teaching, pastoral, residential and support teams?
What about the latest vaping regulations?
From 29 October 2026, UK rules extended age-of-sale protection to all vaping and non-medicinal nicotine products. They also extended restrictions on proxy purchasing and introduced controls on promotional giveaways, substantial discounts and vending machines. The changes strengthen protections for children and young people.
However, retail regulations do not alone resolve challenges involving illicit supply, unidentified substances or safeguarding concerns. For education and care professionals, effective practice still depends on informed judgement, clear procedures and access to appropriate support.
From awareness to confident practice
The discovery of synthetic cannabinoids in some confiscated vaping products is a legitimate concern. It is also a reason to examine the quality of everyday safeguarding responses.
Staff do not need to become toxicologists. They need to recognise the limits of identification, understand when health or safeguarding escalation is required and feel able to have constructive conversations with young people.
The proportionate response is neither to minimise the issue nor to treat every vape as evidence of a serious drug incident. Better information matters. So does knowing what to do with it.
Waymark Education provides practical, evidence-informed drug education, safeguarding briefings and workforce training for schools, alternative provision, SEND settings, children's residential care and professional teams. Sessions can be shaped around emerging substance risks, professional curiosity, safer conversations and local procedures.