4 ms·

The issue is that tobacco cigarettes are _much_ worse for your health than e-cigarettes. This doesn't mean e-cigarettes aren't unhealthy, but between the two th

The issue is that tobacco cigarettes are _much_ worse for your health than e-cigarettes. This doesn't mean e-cigarettes aren't unhealthy, but between the two there's a clear winner in terms of health outcomes. Sure, it denies entry to the tobacco market, but it specifically denies entry to a more competitive, healthier alternative to tobacco cigarettes.

snowwrestler 10y ago
> The issue is that tobacco cigarettes are _much_ worse for your health than e-cigarettes. No one knows if that is true yet, which is one reason the regulation was created. Again, from the American Lung Association: > Absent Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulation, there is no way for the public health and medical community or consumers to know what chemicals are contained in e-cigarettes (also known as electronic nicotine delivery systems or ENDS) or what the short- and long-term health implications might be. http://www.lung.org/our-initiatives/tobacco/oversight-and-regulation/statement-on-e-cigarettes.html http://www.lung.org/our-initiatives/tobacco/oversight-and-re... In addition, e-cig vs. tobacco cig is not a zero sum. E-cig use is growing among youth who have never smoked before. If the e-cig market was all smokers switching to e-cigs, your comment would make sense, but that's not the market.
- convivialdingo 10y ago
  Here's my 2 pennies... From what I've read - evidence has been piling up that ecigs are in fact a far healthier alternative to tobacco. Example (of many): "E-cigarettes are not completely risk free but when compared to smoking, evidence shows they carry just a fraction of the harm. The problem is people increasingly think they are at least as harmful and this may be keeping millions of smokers from quitting." https://www.gov.uk/government/news/e-cigarettes-around-95-less-harmful-than-tobacco-estimates-landmark-review https://www.gov.uk/government/news/e-cigarettes-around-95-le... From my point of view, the US government has prioritized tax revenue over public health. I'm certainly NOT against reasonable laws and health regulation - but overbearing, expensive regulations will most likely kill more people by causing them to continue tobacco smoking. The vast majority of smokers are poor - and fewer of them will be able to afford ecigs under these regulations. It would be reasonable to expand and federally regulate the current system of third party lab testing to include all liquids and consumer equipment. Almost all domestically produced base liquids and nicotines are FDA approved. Most consumer equipment (coils, batteries, etc) I've seen at shops are also lab tested. But instead, the government has again aligned with tobacco companies to maintain their tax base and tobacco profits. It's a disgusting abuse of regulatory powers.
- mistermann 10y ago
  > there is no way for the public health and medical community or consumers to know what chemicals are contained in e-cigarettes Nonsense, reputable manufacturers are very straightforward about what is in their juice. Furthermore, while FDA oversight would undoubtedly increase quality standards to some degree, it doesn't guarantee purity and compliance. On certain topics some people seem determined to not use common sense.
  - snowwrestler 10y ago
    Regulation will improve purity, quality, and consistency of dosage, as well as verify what manufacturers say. For safety, there is more to it than the ingredients: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11637086 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11637086
    - mistermann 10y ago
      More detail: http://chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/14771/how-does-propylene-glycol-glycerin-form-formaldehyde-acetaldehyde-when-vaporized http://chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/14771/how-does-... Very interesting, so perhaps there is at least some theoretical risk!
    - ams6110 10y ago
      I don't know why you think that is true. Just because they are the government? Ask Flint MI how good their government-approved water is.
      - snowwrestler 10y ago
        Flint's water is NOT government approved, it is well above the legal limit for lead. I don't really know what point you're trying to make here.

snowwrestler 10y ago

> The issue is that tobacco cigarettes are _much_ worse for your health than e-cigarettes. No one knows if that is true yet, which is one reason the regulation was created. Again, from the American Lung Association: > Absent Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulation, there is no way for the public health and medical community or consumers to know what chemicals are contained in e-cigarettes (also known as electronic nicotine delivery systems or ENDS) or what the short- and long-term health implications might be. http://www.lung.org/our-initiatives/tobacco/oversight-and-regulation/statement-on-e-cigarettes.html http://www.lung.org/our-initiatives/tobacco/oversight-and-re... In addition, e-cig vs. tobacco cig is not a zero sum. E-cig use is growing among youth who have never smoked before. If the e-cig market was all smokers switching to e-cigs, your comment would make sense, but that's not the market.

convivialdingo 10y ago
Here's my 2 pennies... From what I've read - evidence has been piling up that ecigs are in fact a far healthier alternative to tobacco. Example (of many): "E-cigarettes are not completely risk free but when compared to smoking, evidence shows they carry just a fraction of the harm. The problem is people increasingly think they are at least as harmful and this may be keeping millions of smokers from quitting." https://www.gov.uk/government/news/e-cigarettes-around-95-less-harmful-than-tobacco-estimates-landmark-review https://www.gov.uk/government/news/e-cigarettes-around-95-le... From my point of view, the US government has prioritized tax revenue over public health. I'm certainly NOT against reasonable laws and health regulation - but overbearing, expensive regulations will most likely kill more people by causing them to continue tobacco smoking. The vast majority of smokers are poor - and fewer of them will be able to afford ecigs under these regulations. It would be reasonable to expand and federally regulate the current system of third party lab testing to include all liquids and consumer equipment. Almost all domestically produced base liquids and nicotines are FDA approved. Most consumer equipment (coils, batteries, etc) I've seen at shops are also lab tested. But instead, the government has again aligned with tobacco companies to maintain their tax base and tobacco profits. It's a disgusting abuse of regulatory powers.
mistermann 10y ago
> there is no way for the public health and medical community or consumers to know what chemicals are contained in e-cigarettes Nonsense, reputable manufacturers are very straightforward about what is in their juice. Furthermore, while FDA oversight would undoubtedly increase quality standards to some degree, it doesn't guarantee purity and compliance. On certain topics some people seem determined to not use common sense.
- snowwrestler 10y ago
  Regulation will improve purity, quality, and consistency of dosage, as well as verify what manufacturers say. For safety, there is more to it than the ingredients: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11637086 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11637086
  - mistermann 10y ago
    More detail: http://chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/14771/how-does-propylene-glycol-glycerin-form-formaldehyde-acetaldehyde-when-vaporized http://chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/14771/how-does-... Very interesting, so perhaps there is at least some theoretical risk!
  - ams6110 10y ago
    I don't know why you think that is true. Just because they are the government? Ask Flint MI how good their government-approved water is.
    - snowwrestler 10y ago
      Flint's water is NOT government approved, it is well above the legal limit for lead. I don't really know what point you're trying to make here.