>...was all the vaping done thus far and into the future worth even one person dying needlessly?

This is a reduction to absurdity that I can't quite grasp: People die of all sorts of maladies every year and a single person dying from vaping is your apex priority because, "it could've been prevented by banning vaping"?

This almost seems like a variation of the "won't someone think of the children" argument.

To whit: What of all of the vehicular deaths every year? Or deaths via trains or planes? Should we just ban all life because it will result in death at an astounding success rate of 100%?