First — talk for 2 minHave you noticed vaping getting more or less common in the last few years? What changed it — flavor bans, school stuff, family stuff? Pass freely if you'd rather just listen.

How fast is teen vaping really falling?

Each year the CDC runs the National Youth Tobacco Survey — a big, school-based survey that asks high schoolers across the country whether they have used an e-cigarette in the past 30 days. The answers, year by year, tell a story.

In 2019, vaping among high schoolers hit 27.5% — about one in four. Then it started falling. By 2024 it was down to 7.8% — fewer than one in twelve. In between: a federal flavor ban on cartridges (2020), Tobacco 21 (the legal sales age moved from 18 to 21), Truth Initiative quit-texts, state bans, FDA letters to disposable importers. The curve did not fall by itself. Real interventions, with measured effects, moved it.

The math today gets us a model that fits those five years. Once we have it, we can ask the questions that matter. What rate is the curve actually falling at — and what would it take to push it the rest of the way to zero?

Worked Example #1 — Fit the post-2019 decay (find the model)
ProblemLet \(P(t)\) be the % of US high schoolers who vaped in the past 30 days, where \(t\) = years since 2019. Find a continuous-decay model in the form \(P_0 \cdot b^{t}\).
DataNYTS reports 27.5% in 2019 (\(t = 0\)) and 7.8% in 2024 (\(t = 5\)). Because vaping is decreasing, expect \(0 < b < 1\).
Word Bank starting value growth factor decay rate divide subtract substitute root equation
Number Bank 27.5 7.8 0.2836 0.777 5 0.252 2024 (plus 2 distractors: 1.286 · 19.7)
#Reasoning (fill in)Math
1 Identify the \(P_0\) (the value when \(t = 0\), from the 2019 reading). \(P_0 = \)
2 the second data point into \(P_0 \cdot b^{t}\). \(27.5 \cdot b^{\,5} = \)
3 both sides by 27.5 to isolate \(b^{5}\). \(b^{5} = \dfrac{7.8}{27.5} \approx \)
4 Take the 5th of both sides to find \(b\) (raise to the \(\tfrac{1}{5}\) power). \(b = (0.2836)^{1/5} \approx \)
5 Write the . The per year is \(1 - b \approx 0.223\) (about 22% of vapers stop each year, net). \(P(t) = \) \(\cdot\) \(^{\,t}\)
Worked Example #2 — Use \(\ln\) to find when \(P(t)\) reaches a target (and a half-life)
ProblemUsing the continuous-rate form \(P(t) = 27.5 \cdot e^{-0.252\,t}\), find the year the model predicts vaping reaches 5%. Then find the model's \(\log_b(0.5)\) half-life.
DataThe same fit, written with base \(e\): \(P(t) = 27.5 \cdot e^{-0.252\,t}\). The continuous rate \(k = -0.252\) per year. The natural log \(\ln\) is the inverse of \(e^{x}\), so \(\ln(e^{kt}) = kt\).
Word Bank isolate divide natural log exponent target half-life add solve
Number Bank 5 0.1818 −1.704 −0.252 6.76 2.75 −0.693 2025 (plus 2 distractors: 1.704 · 5.50)
#Reasoning (fill in)Math
1 Set \(P(t)\) equal to the (5%). \(27.5 \cdot e^{-0.252\,t} = \)
2 both sides by 27.5 to the exponential. \(e^{-0.252\,t} = \dfrac{5}{27.5} \approx \)
3 Take the of both sides — this pulls the out. \(-0.252\,t = \ln(0.1818) \approx \)
4 Divide by to for \(t\). \(t = \dfrac{-1.704}{-0.252} \approx \)  \(\Rightarrow\) year
5 : set \(P(t) = k\) with \(k = 13.75\) (half of 27.5). Solve. \(t = \dfrac{\ln(0.5)}{-0.252} = \dfrac{-0.693}{-0.252} \approx \) yr
Activity 2 — graph the intersection (fill in as you work with your partner)
Step A (set up the system): Plot \(y = 27.5 \cdot e^{-0.252\,t}\) and \(y = \) . Their intersection point gives the time when vaping rate equals the target.
Step B (read the graph): The curves cross near \(t \approx \) , \(y = \) . That \(t\)-coordinate is the year-count since 2019, so the year is about .
Step C (check with \(\ln\)): Solving algebraically, \(t = \dfrac{\ln(5/27.5)}{-0.252} \approx \) . Graph and \(\ln\) agree to within of a year.
Step D (push it further): What \(t\) makes \(P(t) = 1\)? \(t \approx \) , which is roughly the year .
Agency Move · Pick a Bundle

What rate would halve teen vaping again by 2028 — and what would that take?

The current model halves vaping every 2.75 years. Halving from 7.8% (2024) by 2028 (4 years away) needs roughly the same rate as today — but every later halving is harder, because there are fewer marginal users left. Pick two interventions to combine. Each card below has a real, measured effect.

Bundle A · "This is Quitting" + Disposable enforcement Quit-texts: +9.8 pp absolute abstinence (RCT). Elf Bar share among HS vapers fell  % → 36.1% (one year). Together, plausible new \(k \approx \)  ?
Bundle B · State flavor ban + 75% excise tax MA HS vaping fell  % → 18.3% (2019→23). CT (no ban) fell similarly — effect partly confounded. Plausible new \(k \approx \)  ?

Defend your pick: I would push for bundle   because it changes   through  , shifting \(k\) from \(-0.252\) toward  .

Tier 2 · General Academic Words
Tier 3 · Vaping & Math Words