Straight Dope Message Board

[DrDeth]

Originally Posted by AI Proofreader

I completely agree that tobacco is by far the most dangerous drug that can be taken, in terms of long-term fatalities. I still don't think it should be illegal; for the same reason you give for not making alcohol illegal. It's simply not practical.

If we lived in that same world where opium had to be transported from the other side of the world via boats costing enormous time and expense.. maybe. But if you outlawed tobacco, some would quit; many others would simply begin growing it hydroponically, or ordering it from The Silk Road, or getting it from their street dealer who got it from a distributor who smuggled it over the border.

It would be more expensive, it would be more dangerous. It would involve possible legal consequences as disastrous to their lives as the health problems they'll probably suffer later in life. But people will still do it. And those who grow it will still profit from it, arguably much more than they did while it was legal.

Yes, Prohibition didnt work. But it didnt really "fail" either:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1470475/

Do note that like 70% of Americans were drinkers, and 40% were pretty serious drinkers. Trying to ban something that 40-70% do is tough.

But only around 15% of Americans smoke. And vaping and nicotine patches would be there after a ban.

"Growing your own" is a lot tougher than brewing your own. You have to dry it, etc.

We could ban smoking.

Start with- Ban all smoking in public. 51

[Crazy Canuck]

Originally Posted by DrDeth

"Growing your own" is a lot tougher than brewing your own. You have to dry it, etc.

Yes, the tough restriction on having to "grow your own" has clearly stopped the marijuana industry dead in it's tracks, so it makes perfect sense that no one would grow tobacco either.

52

[Jackmannii]

Originally Posted by Crazy Canuck

Yes, the tough restriction on having to "grow your own" has clearly stopped the marijuana industry dead in it's tracks, so it makes perfect sense that no one would grow tobacco either.

I was unaware people are actually growing tobacco indoors under lights, but they're out there.

I saw an estimate from an LED lights seller that one can derive a carton's worth of cigarettes from just four tobacco plants. Even if that's so, I'd bear in mind that these plants get big (got eight foot ceilings in your basement?), there are curing/aging steps that might require special facilities, and you'd have to maintain a pretty large area under continuous cultivation in order to feed your nicotine habit.

I've grown tobacco (on an ornamental basis) outdoors, but it sounds like a potential mess in a basement grow setup, not to mention expensive. 53

[DrDeth]

Originally Posted by Crazy Canuck

Yes, the tough restriction on having to "grow your own" has clearly stopped the marijuana industry dead in it's tracks, so it makes perfect sense that no one would grow tobacco either.

Hemp grows like...well a weed. Tobacco, not so much, and likeI said,it requires drying sheds, etc.

By no means impossible, but also few grow marijuana for personal use, most grow to sell- at very high prices. Not $10 a pack prices. 54

[Jackmannii]

New York has joined the list of states that have banned vaping in indoor public places. 55

[Crazy Canuck]

Originally Posted by DrDeth

By no means impossible, but also few grow marijuana for personal use, most grow to sell- at very high prices. Not $10 a pack prices.

My eperience differs, as I know dozens of people who grow pot for personal use, and only a couple of industrial growers. My point was that having to grow a plant does not seem to be a sufficient barrier to entry to stop people from doing drugs. Hell, advanced chemistry that can blow up in your face and kill you does not seem to be a sufficient barrier to entry to stop people from doing drugs. 56

[Lorne Armstrong]

Originally Posted by AI Proofreader

Outlawing or heavily restricting drugs such as morphine, amphetamines, and opioids doesn't lead to decreased usage. .

Are you serious? 57

[AI Proofreader]

Originally Posted by Lorne Armstrong

Are you serious?

Absolutely.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/annab...b_3623714.html

https://www.theatlantic.com/national...orking/322592/ 58

[Jackmannii]

You don't have to outlaw or severely restrict sales of something to cut heavily into its use (although that can be effective - Prohibition for all its faults did cause Americans to significantly reduce drinking). Just raise taxes enough on it.

"...the evidence...strongly supports increasing cigarette prices through tobacco taxation as a powerful strategy for achieving major reductions in smoking behavior among some, but not all, high-risk populations.

For instance, increasing the price of cigarettes is a very effective policy tool for reducing smoking participation and consumption among youth, young adults and persons of low socioeconomic status."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3228562/

Make vaping expensive enough and that'll discourage young people from doing it. They'll stick to healthier alternatives, like churchgoing and pot smoking. 59

[mikecurtis]

Maybe not. . .
State health officials report vaping-related death, warn of dangerous symptoms

Illinois officials said Friday that a person who had recently used an e-cigarette and was hospitalized with severe lung illness died.

The death appears to be the first among a spate of mysterious lung illnesses now under investigation by state and federal health officials in connection with vaping -- at least 193 cases in 22 states, many in teens and young adults, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
. . .

The person who died in Illinois was an adult, said Jennifer Layden, chief medical officer for the state, on a call. No further details about the person or what device or product had been used was provided.

"The severity of illness people are experiencing is alarming and we must get the word out that using e-cigarettes and vaping can be dangerous," Illinois Public Health Director Ngozi Ezike said in a statement.

. . .

Emily Chapman, chief medical officer of Children's Minnesota, a hospital that has had several cases of lung injury related to vaping in the past month, said many of the cases have followed a similar and frightening pattern. The patient appears to have a viral infection -- with a fever, headache, muscle pain and an upset stomach -- that quickly progresses into what appears to be pneumonia. But testing turns up no signs of an infection. Instead, the condition continues to progress, with increasing inflammation in the lungs to the point that they stop functioning properly.

Several patients have been treated in the intensive care unit and even needed a ventilator to help them breathe.

"Even patients themselves have been stunned because there is this misconception that it's safe," Chapman said.

To be fair, it's not known at this point whether the death was caused by vaping or by what was vaped

While some of the cases appear similar, officials said they don't know whether the illnesses are associated with the e-cigarette devices themselves or with specific ingredients or contaminants inhaled through them. Health officials have said patients have described vaping a variety of substances, including nicotine, marijuana-based products and do-it-yourself "home brews."

60

[DSeid]

The explosion of popularity of vaping in High Schoolers and even Middle Schoolers has perplexed me. The numbers are scary high and it is a disconnect from other behavior choices they are making. Overall they are a group that has excelled at making healthier choices than those before them had made. Feedback from kids, not a scientific sampling, is a perception of safety and the flavors, along with low risk of getting caught, are major factors.

My personal opinion is that regulating the marketing that appeals to kids (inclusive of the flavors) and better education on the potential risks, is a minimum required. 61

[bobot]

It's coool, just like smoking was when I was a kid. But for fuck's sake, adults, if you're looking for a nicotine alternative, use the gum or the patch. 62

[Doug K.]

Originally Posted by mikecurtis

Maybe not. . .
State health officials report vaping-related death, warn of dangerous symptoms



To be fair, it's not known at this point whether the death was caused by vaping or by what was vaped

There's also this: (warning: satire)

FDA Investigating Link Between Vaping, Looking Like A Total Cheese Bag 63

[DrDeth]

Originally Posted by bobot

It's coool, just like smoking was when I was a kid. But for fuck's sake, adults, if you're looking for a nicotine alternative, use the gum or the patch.

If it is vaping that lets you quit smoking, then go for it.


One death, vs 500000. 64

[Broomstick]

Originally Posted by AI Proofreader

Outlawing or heavily restricting drugs such as morphine, amphetamines, and opioids doesn't lead to decreased usage.

Yes, it does.

What it does not do is eliminate usage.

You get less overall usage (some people are deterred by the illegality, others by difficulty of obtaining the drug and/or expense prior to becoming addicted) but the usage that remains is more damaging. 65

[KidCharlemagne]

I'm not terribly schooled on the issue but, anecdotally, every damn kid I know vapes and they all think it's safe. According to FDA, overall tobacco use has increased among teens significantly:

E-Cigarette use surge led to uptick in overall tobacco use. The significant rise in e-cigarette use among both student populations has resulted in overall tobacco product use increases of 38 percent among high school students and 29 percent among middle school students between 2017 and 2018, negating declines seen in the previous few years.

This is a cause for concern because tobacco use is the leading cause of preventable disease and death in the United States and because nearly all tobacco products contain nicotine. As adolescent brains are still developing, nicotine exposure during youth and young adulthood can change the way the brain works, leading to a lifetime of addiction and, in some cases, causing long-lasting effects such as increased impulsivity and mood disorders.5 Studies also find teens who use e-cigarettes have an increased risk of trying combustible cigarettes.

https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products...-cigarette-use 66

[Darren Garrison]

Originally Posted by Doug K.

There's also this: (warning: satire)

FDA Investigating Link Between Vaping, Looking Like A Total Cheese Bag

Spinoff thread. 67

[Jackmannii]

Originally Posted by KidCharlemagne

I'm not terribly schooled on the issue but, anecdotally, every damn kid I know vapes and they all think it's safe.

Chronic lung problems years down the road? No, not me. And I can quit anytime I want.

If this truly is a situation where vaping is the Big Solution for smoking cessation (and the jury is still out on that), then the vaping companies (including tobacco giants who've gotten into the market in a major way) should have no problem limiting access to prescription only. 68

[SamuelA]

Does anyone think there is more than a lottery winner's chance at winning of vaping being more dangerous than smoking?

Fundamentally, vape smoke is primarily 2 much less harmful (than cigarette smoke) ingredients. Most of these possibly toxic compounds are in relative small amounts, compared to a lungful of burning paper and tar.

Even chewing tobacco turns out to have half the death rate from smoking.

I would assume the limiting case - the worst case, the perfect storm of unexpected health consequences - would put the risk of vaping at somewhere less than that of chewing tobacco. At least half the risk of smoking, probably more like 5-10% like a hundred credible papers on the subject tend to estimate. 69

[DrDeth]

Originally Posted by KidCharlemagne

I'm not terribly schooled on the issue but, anecdotally, every damn kid I know vapes and they all think it's safe. According to FDA, overall tobacco use has increased among teens significantly:



https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products...-cigarette-use

Sure, but I have heard that many more adults are quitting using vaping. 70

[DSeid]

Originally Posted by SamuelA

Does anyone think there is more than a lottery winner's chance at winning of vaping being more dangerous than smoking? ...

The comparison for the many many kids who are now vaping is not between all of them smoking or vaping. It is between a very small and up until the vaping explosion long term decreasing number of kids and young adults being smokers (with that small number at long term high health risk), and the same or it seems MORE becoming smokers as a consequence of vaping and also a new overwhelming majority, perhaps even a true order of magnitude more being exposed to the more moderate but still very real health risk harms of vaping itself as well.

In that comparison vaping is a huge net harm.

The argument that vaping can help successful cigarette smoking cessation better than gum or patches is reasonable, but if vaping is then to be an ongoing habit, not quit itself later, then its longterm risks compared to those methods need to be better understood, and flavors and overall marketing that appeal to children cannot be allowed. Serious efforts to prevent this new explosion of addiction in children and young adults shuld be made. 71

[DrDeth]

Originally Posted by DSeid

The comparison for the many many kids who are now vaping is not between all of them smoking or vaping. It is between a very small and up until the vaping explosion long term decreasing number of kids and young adults being smokers (with that small number at long term high health risk), and the same or it seems MORE becoming smokers as a consequence of vaping and also a new overwhelming majority, perhaps even a true order of magnitude more being exposed to the more moderate but still very real health risk harms of vaping itself as well.

In that comparison vaping is a huge net harm.

The argument that vaping can help successful cigarette smoking cessation better than gum or patches is reasonable, but if vaping is then to be an ongoing habit, not quit itself later, then its longterm risks compared to those methods need to be better understood, and flavors and overall marketing that appeal to children cannot be allowed. Serious efforts to prevent this new explosion of addiction in children and young adults shuld be made.

Yes, if that is true. But what we need is to find the facts- is vaping getting more kids hooked (who then start tobacco) or is it letting more smokers quit?

However, i certainly agree that studies and programs designed to stop kids from vaping should be pursued.

I am not sure about laws designed to ban vaping, however. Lets ban cigarettes first. 72

[Broomstick]

Originally Posted by SamuelA

Fundamentally, vape smoke is primarily 2 much less harmful (than cigarette smoke) ingredients. Most of these possibly toxic compounds are in relative small amounts, compared to a lungful of burning paper and tar.

At least, that's the theory....

The recent outbreak of lung injuries connected to vaping is extremely troubling. It might connected to a particular device, a particular batch of juice, to a particular company, or even to particular "home brew" recipes for vape-juice. More investigation is called for. 73

[DrDeth]

Originally Posted by Broomstick

At least, that's the theory....

The recent outbreak of lung injuries connected to vaping is extremely troubling. It might connected to a particular device, a particular batch of juice, to a particular company, or even to particular "home brew" recipes for vape-juice. More investigation is called for.

Still, remember, smoking kills five hundred thousand (500,000) Americans a year, fifty thousand of them by second hand smoke.

There would have to be vapers keeling over in droves to beat that.

and there's no such thing as death by second hand vape.
74

[kanicbird]

The counter is that we don't want to make vaping to be appealing to non-smokers, as while vaping is safer then smoking, neither is safer then vaping. What we want to do it create a Maxwells Demon, were only smokers will be given easy access to vaping but make it hard for non-smokers to take up vaping (and smoking). One answer seems obvious, make vaping as hard as smoking, thus the smoker is already used to the restrictions so no hinderance in itself, but does raise some barriers to entry for the non-vapor. 75

[k9bfriender]

Originally Posted by kanicbird

The counter is that we don't want to make vaping to be appealing to non-smokers, as while vaping is safer then smoking, neither is safer then vaping. What we want to do it create a Maxwells Demon, were only smokers will be given easy access to vaping but make it hard for non-smokers to take up vaping (and smoking). One answer seems obvious, make vaping as hard as smoking, thus the smoker is already used to the restrictions so no hinderance in itself, but does raise some barriers to entry for the non-vapor.

It is just about harder to vape as it is to smoke. Back a few years ago, I used to vape at work, but it was just me, my sister (who vaped), and my friend who smoked. Vaping indoors wasn't something that bothered anyone. Now that I have employees, though, vaping is outdoors only, just like smoking.

I don't know how hard it is for a minor to get vaping material, but when I was a minor, it's not like it was hard to get cigarettes. I'm all for restricting underage sales and use, but, as I'm one of those people whose life may have been saved by vaping, I have a hard time advocating to make it harder to switch.

People still take up smoking every day. Why? I dunno. My reason is that I was already addicted living with two chain smoking parents, and so I would actually go through withdrawal whenever I was out or at school until I secured my own supply. As long as people are taking up nicotine, I prefer that they take it up as vaping, for both their health and that of those around them. 76

[dougrb]

My theory is people crank them up too much. I recently had to get a new vape because I couldn't find batteries for my old one anymore. You can turn the wattage up so high I can't hit it. At my normal setting, when I exhale, it looks like exhaling on a cold day. Not like the pic in this article.

https://nypost.com/2019/08/24/first-...ois-officials/ 77

[k9bfriender]

Originally Posted by dougrb

My theory is people crank them up too much. I recently had to get a new vape because I couldn't find batteries for my old one anymore. You can turn the wattage up so high I can't hit it. At my normal setting, when I exhale, it looks like exhaling on a cold day. Not like the pic in this article.

https://nypost.com/2019/08/24/first-...ois-officials/

It depends on your mix. More VG will make more smoke, in general. I generally prefer a higher VG percentage as it is less harsh on the throat, but I am aware that it makes for more vapor, and take that into account when I use it.

Hopefully we will learn more about these deaths and illnesses, but I suspect that it will be from some sort of adulterant in the mix, whether it be intentional or through negligence. This would mean that this news doesn't make vaping any less inherently safe than reports of e coli outbreaks makes kale any less safe.

Still, know where your supply comes from. Vaping is still a new and unregulated industry. 78

[SamuelA]

Originally Posted by DSeid

The comparison for the many many kids who are now vaping is not between all of them smoking or vaping. It is between a very small and up until the vaping explosion long term decreasing number of kids and young adults being smokers (with that small number at long term high health risk), and the same or it seems MORE becoming smokers as a consequence of vaping and also a new overwhelming majority, perhaps even a true order of magnitude more being exposed to the more moderate but still very real health risk harms of vaping itself as well.

In that comparison vaping is a huge net harm.

Hang on. Let's take the limit of your statement.

Let's say vaping is 10% as harmful as smoking. (many estimates are on the order of 5%)

Let's say 100% of Americans start vaping. So this would be the same thing as a U.S. population of 10% smokers....15% of Americans are smokers.

So this would be a net reduction in harm. (50% less death and illness from "smoking")

Let's say vape smoke turns out to have some toxic ingredient that causes long term damage and eventual death. Unlike cigarettes, because combustion isn't involved, a vape juice maker has far more control into what goes into the product. Only 2 ingredients - the glycol forming the smoke and the nicotine - are essential. So as long as those 2 specific ingredients are not found to be super harmful, it would be possible to reformulate the product to avoid causing harm, if necessary. (licensed manufacturers who document what goes into the product and use pharmaceutical style process controls is an important step forwards)

I don't see a rational claim here that vaping is causing a net harm to public health. You're going to need more support than vague claims that the stuff might be too harmful or the fact that kids are doing it. 79

[Lamoral]

Originally Posted by k9bfriender

It is just about harder to vape as it is to smoke. Back a few years ago, I used to vape at work, but it was just me, my sister (who vaped), and my friend who smoked. Vaping indoors wasn't something that bothered anyone. Now that I have employees, though, vaping is outdoors only, just like smoking.

If you use a small discrete vape like a Juul, you can basically do it anywhere, as long as you keep the vapor sucked into your lungs and don't exhale big clouds of it. Nobody will know or care. 80

[k9bfriender]

Originally Posted by Lamoral

If you use a small discrete vape like a Juul, you can basically do it anywhere, as long as you keep the vapor sucked into your lungs and don't exhale big clouds of it. Nobody will know or care.

I'm the owner, so I like to set a good example for my employees.

While I don't think that second hand vape has any potential for harm, it is not my place to expose people to it, or allow others to do so. I can't have a no vape policy if I do it myself. That said, I am here by myself sometimes, and I will vape then, where I would never smoke. 81

[DSeid]

Originally Posted by SamuelA

Hang on. Let's take the limit of your statement.

Let's say vaping is 10% as harmful as smoking. (many estimates are on the order of 5%)

Let's say 100% of Americans start vaping. So this would be the same thing as a U.S. population of 10% smokers....15% of Americans are smokers.

So this would be a net reduction in harm. (50% less death and illness from "smoking")

Let's say vape smoke turns out to have some toxic ingredient that causes long term damage and eventual death. Unlike cigarettes, because combustion isn't involved, a vape juice maker has far more control into what goes into the product. Only 2 ingredients - the glycol forming the smoke and the nicotine - are essential. So as long as those 2 specific ingredients are not found to be super harmful, it would be possible to reformulate the product to avoid causing harm, if necessary. (licensed manufacturers who document what goes into the product and use pharmaceutical style process controls is an important step forwards)

I don't see a rational claim here that vaping is causing a net harm to public health. You're going to need more support than vague claims that the stuff might be too harmful or the fact that kids are doing it.

Your analysis has some fundamental flaws.

On the plus side of vaping is the increase in those who manage to quit with vaping being easily obtainable and flavored in kiddie appealing tastes above and beyond those who would mange to quit using nicotine gum/patches or vaping only available in less kid-friendly formats and more tightly controlled.

How much is that? I accept that it is non-zero but I see no evidence that it is a big number. The rate of decrease in smoking rates among established smokers has not dramatically sped up since vaping has taken off. But let's be generous, and say that one out of ten of current smokers can manage to quit by vaping with these flavors and marketing who would not otherwise be able to quit.

That plus, a fairly small one, is weighed against the numbers of new smokers being created BY vaping and the direct harms of vaping in a much larger number of new users who would otherwise have been doing neither. A huge one.

But yes, I could accept controls on marketing and required testing for proof of safety on all ingredients. 82

[CarnalK]

I am not a big fan of the idea that I'm not allowed to buy cherry vape liquid because kids like cherry flavour. It's not like all kids vape cherry and adults all vape "tobacco" flavour. I'm sure the idea sounds fine, until they come after your wine coolers. 83

[Jackmannii]

And then they'll come for your assault weapons!! 84

[SamuelA]

Originally Posted by DSeid

Your analysis has some fundamental flaws.

On the plus side of vaping is the increase in those who manage to quit with vaping being easily obtainable and flavored in kiddie appealing tastes above and beyond those who would mange to quit using nicotine gum/patches or vaping only available in less kid-friendly formats and more tightly controlled.

How much is that? I accept that it is non-zero but I see no evidence that it is a big number. The rate of decrease in smoking rates among established smokers has not dramatically sped up since vaping has taken off. But let's be generous, and say that one out of ten of current smokers can manage to quit by vaping with these flavors and marketing who would not otherwise be able to quit.

That plus, a fairly small one, is weighed against the numbers of new smokers being created BY vaping and the direct harms of vaping in a much larger number of new users who would otherwise have been doing neither. A huge one.

But yes, I could accept controls on marketing and required testing for proof of safety on all ingredients.

Well, ok. Hypothetically would you then accept outlawing of manufactured cigarettes? I feel like if the FDA is going to regulate Vapes they should require cigarette companies to adhere to the same standards...which they would instantly and automatically fail.

In a world where Vapes are still readily available but smokers have to hand roll each cigarette or find someone who will roll it for them..and you could outlaw sales of tobacco leaf, only purified nicotine can be sold to licensed purchasers....it would force people to switch to a less harmful alternative or find a criminal. 85

[DSeid]

CarnalK, you do sound a bit like the NRA in defense against any gun regulations.

Did you also defend your right to laugh at Joe the Camel ads in media highly consumed by youth?

The nicotine addiction industry has a long done the best they can to implement what they know works, limited only by regulations and settlements: get kids hooked on your drug early by marketing in ways most effective for that target population and you can replace all those customers you lose to early death. For cigarettes controls that worked to help reduce children getting addicted included regulations that controlled those marketing practices. What the industry has been largely restricted from doing with cigarettes they are pulling back out of the playbook for vaping.

There need to be better controls of industry practices.

Such would NOT be a ban, any more than cigarettes are currently banned because they are under that authority, or improved gun regulations mean guns are grabbed.

There has to be a clearer understanding of what these products each contain and what the risks of their vaped consumption are.

Marketing practices that disproportionately (not exclusively) appeal to underage potential consumers/addicts, rather than to adults (ideally those trying to quit current tobacco use), must be highly restricted. 86

[DSeid]

Originally Posted by SamuelA

Well, ok. Hypothetically would you then accept outlawing of manufactured cigarettes? I feel like if the FDA is going to regulate Vapes they should require cigarette companies to adhere to the same standards...which they would instantly and automatically fail.

In a world where Vapes are still readily available but smokers have to hand roll each cigarette or find someone who will roll it for them..and you could outlaw sales of tobacco leaf, only purified nicotine can be sold to licensed purchasers....it would force people to switch to a less harmful alternative or find a criminal.

No, I would not be in support of such a move.

I agree that prohibition rarely works well in comparison to tightly regulated and controlled markets.

E-cigarettes have NOT been held up to the same regulatory standards as cigarettes. They should be with a clear and reasoned approach to maximizing their potential benefit in increasing the numbers of current smokers who manage to quit while minimizing the numbers of new nicotine addicts with special attention to reducing youth addiction onset. 87

[CarnalK]

Originally Posted by DSeid

CarnalK, you do sound a bit like the NRA in defense against any gun regulations.

Did you also defend your right to laugh at Joe the Camel ads in media highly consumed by youth?

The nicotine addiction industry has a long done the best they can to implement what they know works, limited only by regulations and settlements: get kids hooked on your drug early by marketing in ways most effective for that target population and you can replace all those customers you lose to early death. For cigarettes controls that worked to help reduce children getting addicted included regulations that controlled those marketing practices. What the industry has been largely restricted from doing with cigarettes they are pulling back out of the playbook for vaping.

Oh, come on. I sound like the NRA because I like vaping vanilla strawberry and don't want it banned? Yes, kids like candy but so do adults. Would you like a ban on fruit flavored alcohol? Is that a bad analogy for some reason? 88

[DSeid]

You sound exactly like the NRA because like them you go from "regulation" to bemoaning a "ban". They'll pry that vanilla strawberry e-cig from your cold dead lips!

Fruit flavored high alcohol beverages packaged and marketed in ways that disproportionately appeal to high school and middle school children? A high alcohol level very sweet fruity alco-pop advertised in media that those populations consume highly?

I would similarly support tight regulation of such products and of their marketing strictly enforced. But with much less vigor as alcohol is no where associated with the same level of addiction from casual use as nicotine is. 89

[DSeid]

To doublepost, CarnalK, do you think that the FDA was wrong when it in 2009 banned cigarette flavorings (other than menthol at that time) specifically on the rationale "that flavors make cigarettes more appealing to youth"? 90

[SamuelA]

Originally Posted by DSeid

No, I would not be in support of such a move.

I agree that prohibition rarely works well in comparison to tightly regulated and controlled markets.

E-cigarettes have NOT been held up to the same regulatory standards as cigarettes. They should be with a clear and reasoned approach to maximizing their potential benefit in increasing the numbers of current smokers who manage to quit while minimizing the numbers of new nicotine addicts with special attention to reducing youth addiction onset.

Pretty sure this position is both irrational and pro-death. Not admirable traits for a claimed doctor to have. 91

[Lamoral]

Add me to the group of people who think it's absolute bullshit that they try to ban certain flavors because they "deliberately are meant to appeal to children." It's TOTAL bullshit. People don't stop liking those flavors just because they're adults. Complete and total bullshit....isn't life enough of a pain in the ass? People need their vices. They need them because adult life is a giant pain in the ass. 92

[Jackmannii]

Originally Posted by SamuelA

Pretty sure this position is both irrational and pro-death. Not admirable traits for a claimed doctor to have.

Sorry, you'll have to count me as "pro-death" also, though I'm struggling to see the logic that says encouraging proven methods of smoking cessation while minimizing the number of young people that become nicotine addicts and potentially suffer chronic lung disease is "pro-death".

It puzzles me also that banning flavored vaping products would be harmful to adults. If you're trying to quit smoking as a lifesaving measure, does it really matter if you get your nicotine in "plain" as opposed to flavored form? 93

[Lamoral]

Yeah of course it matters what flavors you can get. If you find flavors you like, you are more likely to stick to the vaping instead of going back to cigarettes. You've obviously not spent any time browsing on vaping forums where many people search very hard trying to find a flavor that they like, and with advice of others and through trial and error, finally are able to find a flavor that becomes their go-to vape. That's one more person who's inhaling vapor instead of tobacco smoke.

Only a cold-blooded technocrat would say, "oh, you're saving your life, so just be happy with 'plain' nicotine instead of a flavor you like." We're human beings, we take great pleasure in different tastes and sensations. Jesus Christ, we bust our asses at work, we pay income taxes, we pay car insurance, we pay health insurance, we have to suffer through the political shitshow, our souls are constantly chiseled away at by all of the aggravations of life, don't we deserve to have fruit flavored nicotine vapor if we want it? 94

[SamuelA]

Originally Posted by Lamoral

Yeah of course it matters what flavors you can get. If you find flavors you like, you are more likely to stick to the vaping instead of going back to cigarettes. You've obviously not spent any time browsing on vaping forums where many people search very hard trying to find a flavor that they like, and with advice of others and through trial and error, finally are able to find a flavor that becomes their go-to vape. That's one more person who's inhaling vapor instead of tobacco smoke.

Only a cold-blooded technocrat would say, "oh, you're saving your life, so just be happy with 'plain' nicotine instead of a flavor you like." We're human beings, we take great pleasure in different tastes and sensations. Jesus Christ, we bust our asses at work, we pay income taxes, we pay car insurance, we pay health insurance, we have to suffer through the political shitshow, our souls are constantly chiseled away at by all of the aggravations of life, don't we deserve to have fruit flavored nicotine vapor if we want it?

Exactly. And then DSeid rides in on his horse of ignorance and spouts nonsense that cigarettes are heavily regulated. Yeah, about as "regulated" as slavery was. While I don't deny that laws apply, some federal agency is rubber stamping the sale of a product that involves inhaling burning combustibles including addictive industrial chemicals and a smoke so deadly it causes cancer in lab animals within weeks.

Again, it's fine if Vapes are regulated - so long as the laws applied to them have the same allowances for deadly smoke as cigarettes. Also DSeid claimed that making cigarettes illegal won't accomplish anything.... while simultaneously claiming that making fruit Vapes illegal is a major step forward. 95

[DrDeth]

Originally Posted by SamuelA

Well, ok. Hypothetically would you then accept outlawing of manufactured cigarettes? ....

Sure. And ban smoking in public or homes with children. 96

[DrDeth]

Originally Posted by DSeid

I agree that prohibition rarely works well in comparison to tightly regulated and controlled markets.
...

Yes, smoking prohibition would work. Look, when they tried booze prohibition, 60-70% of the adult population drank. Now, about 14% of Americans smoke. 1/4 of those who drank.

And there werent many substitutes for alcohol. Now we have snus, chaw, snuff, patches, vaping and gum. That 14% have many things they can turn to. We can ban smoking.

And despite all the blather here about the NRA and Gun Lobby owning politicians, their donations are small potatoes compared to big tobacco. (To be fair, the health and drug industry are the biggest). 97

[CarnalK]

Originally Posted by DSeid

You sound exactly like the NRA because like them you go from "regulation" to bemoaning a "ban". They'll pry that vanilla strawberry e-cig from your cold dead lips!

Fruit flavored high alcohol beverages packaged and marketed in ways that disproportionately appeal to high school and middle school children? A high alcohol level very sweet fruity alco-pop advertised in media that those populations consume highly?

I would similarly support tight regulation of such products and of their marketing strictly enforced. But with much less vigor as alcohol is no where associated with the same level of addiction from casual use as nicotine is.

What exactly is the difference between a fruity flavour geared at kids rather than adults? It's not like there's a cartoon rabbit on the label.

In my time in grade 7-12, I don't think I ever saw a kid smoking menthols, btw. Those "wine tipped" cigars was the most flavored thing I saw. Those things may be to entice kids, but they make up a small part of the market. Sweeter vape juice is like 80% of the market. Banning one is not the sme as the other. 98

[Miller]

Originally Posted by CarnalK

What exactly is the difference between a fruity flavour geared at kids rather than adults? It's not like there's a cartoon rabbit on the label.

Maybe just a Stormtrooper or two.

But I actually agree with your overall point. A lot of marketing towards adults these days is functionally indistinguishable from marketing towards kids. I don't have any problem at all believing that the impetus behind putting a Star Wars character on a box of vape fluid wasn't, "Kids think Star Wars is cool," it was "I and all my adult friends think Star Wars is cool." 99

[DSeid]

SamuelA, I'll have you remember that my steed also vapes THC ... I never go anywhere without my high horse.

As to the need of the flavors ... Lamoral is claiming that the flavors and enjoying the sweetums goodness is a key part of e-cigs efficacy. Shouldn't be too hard to document that. Funny though, can't find such a study. I'd in fact posit that the flavoring makes it harder to finish the job of then weaning off the e-cigs as well. Which is as valid of a claim to make.

A complete view of the evidence is that the efficacy of e-cigs as a class in increasing cigarette quit rates is .. not so strong. A 2016 Lancet meta-analysis -

Odds of quitting cigarettes were 28% lower in those who used e-cigarettes compared with those who did not use e-cigarettes (odds ratio [OR] 0·72, 95% CI 0·57–0·91). Association of e-cigarette use with quitting did not significantly differ among studies of all smokers using e-cigarettes (irrespective of interest in quitting cigarettes) compared with studies of only smokers interested in cigarette cessation (OR 0·63, 95% CI 0·45–0·86 vs 0·86, 0·60–1·23; p=0·94). Other study characteristics (design, population, comparison group, control variables, time of exposure assessment, biochemical verification of abstinence, and definition of e-cigarette use) were also not associated with the overall effect size (p≥0·77 in all cases).

Interpretation

As currently being used, e-cigarettes are associated with significantly less quitting among smokers.

Yeah, LESS successful quitting using e-cigs than not.

Eh. Another medical conspiracy to hide the facts. So let's ignore this quality meta-analysis and for discussion's sake assume that the combination of removing the need to smoke to feed the addiction, and the continuation of the perceived social functions of smoking (in-group, having a prop, etc), help facilitate cessation of smoking cigarettes. Seriously no it makes no sense that tutti-fruity flavoring that has not been part of the cigarette smoking experience is required even if it adds pleasure to the addiction behavior. 100