Non-consequentialist ethicists have noted that small harms, goods, or claims should not count against large claims. For example, given a choice between saving on life and a large group of people with minor headaches, we ought to save the one life, no matter how large the group is. This principle has been called Limited Aggregation. In this paper, I argue that Limited Aggregation has implications for policies on e-cigarettes and alternative nicotine delivery systems. In deciding to allow or encourage the use of e-cigarettes or alternative nicotine delivery systems, we sometimes must weigh benefits to each existing smoker affected by the policy, against risks to each non-smoker affected. I argue in this paper that when these risks, to each individual non-smoker, are sufficiently small, we ought not to count them against more significant benefits to smokers. This applies even when the number of non-smokers affected by a policy exceeds the number of smokers.