View Single Post
  #186  
Old 09-12-2019, 09:36 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broomstick View Post
Because curing addiction is so damn hard I'm all for harm reduction. I'm not entirely convinced vaping is that much safer, but I'll admit I haven't put much study into it, either. It does seem to reduce (although not entirely eliminate) the second hand effects on non-users and that is definitely a win.
Quite a few of us are for harms reduction. Some of us are particularly concerned with net harms reduction.

There is the potential of the harms reduction you listed above on the one side.

And there is a potential increased harms of the wide easy availability of current product lines resulting in a huge number of NEW nicotine addicts in a generation that had been decreasing that dramatically with some still to determined but real health risks both from the products directly and from increased risk of smoking products as well.

The goal is a max-min question. Where do we draw the lines given what data we have, and which direction lays more burden of proof?

To completely ignore either the potential of benefits (over other methods) or the potential of harms is not ideal. IMHO.

Last edited by DSeid; 09-12-2019 at 09:36 AM.