5 ms·

I highly suspect these young vapers would have picked up smoking instead if products like this didn't exist. I don't know what more the industry can realistica

I highly suspect these young vapers would have picked up smoking instead if products like this didn't exist. I don't know what more the industry can realistically do. The sales of their products is already limited to adults, and I don't know why advertising flavorings is supposed to be about targeting children (why would adults not like strawberry flavoring?) so unless there is an epidemic of B&M or online stores that keep selling to minors, they're already doing what they can. Maybe I'm missing something, but as an outsider, the FDA seems dead set on killing your vaping industry by all means necessary.

hprotagonist 8y ago
>I highly suspect these young vapers would have picked up smoking instead if products like this didn't exist. personal observation, not data, but I don't think this is so. I work on a university campus, and the proportion of people on campus that smoke has cratered this decade. The only reliable smoking populations are foreign students, and they seem to taper off over their undergrad years, which I can ascribe only to peer pressure against smelling horrible -- and maybe easy access to "study aids" like adderall. edit: i should add that juul use has jumped just this year alone, and with less focused of a user group.
- uxp100 8y ago
  But doesn't that line up with the popularization of nicotine vaping? I tend to think indoor smoking bans had something to do with the decline, but I don't know the timeline for anywhere except my state.
  - hprotagonist 8y ago
    it does, loosely. However, box mods are still quite rare, so it's not super clear that the narrative of "people stopped smoking and started vaping" really holds -- or held until Juul took over, which is quite recent. It's fairer to say that an age cohort basically just stopped consuming nicotine at all, and that a new, younger generation has picked up again but switched delivery methods.
ceejayoz 8y ago
> I highly suspect these young vapers would have picked up smoking instead if products like this didn't exist. We've got plenty of data that shows a steady, large decline in number of smokers since the 1970s.
Spooky23 8y ago
> I don't know what more the industry can realistically do. Stop selling poison. > Maybe I'm missing something, but as an outsider, the FDA seems dead set on killing your vaping industry by all means necessary. Well, yeah. The FDA Mission, which is defined by statute: "The Food and Drug Administration is responsible for protecting the public health by ensuring the safety, efficacy, and security of human and veterinary drugs, biological products, and medical devices; and by ensuring the safety of our nation's food supply, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation. FDA also has responsibility for regulating the manufacturing, marketing, and distribution of tobacco products to protect the public health and to reduce tobacco use by minors. FDA is responsible for advancing the public health by helping to speed innovations that make medical products more effective, safer, and more affordable and by helping the public get the accurate, science-based information they need to use medical products and foods to maintain and improve their health. FDA also plays a significant role in the Nation's counterterrorism capability. FDA fulfills this responsibility by ensuring the security of the food supply and by fostering development of medical products to respond to deliberate and naturally emerging public health threats."
- folkrav 8y ago
  > Stop selling poison. Then what's the alternative for smokers that want to stop, then? These highly ineffective smoking cessation patches/gums they already had? If you want to be anywhere near consistent, cigarettes should be banned as well, as all the damn data points to vaping being far less dangerous that smoking. Wouldn't a less short-sighted alternative be to just damn regulate the market properly?
  - Spooky23 8y ago
    Treat it as a medical issue. Tobacco companies don’t have a right to exist.
    - folkrav 8y ago
      Still they do, and nobody goes after them. Treating it as a medical issue would be one way to regulate the market, then. Outright banning them but keeping cigarettes is just a plain double standards.
schnevets 8y ago
You know the FDA didn't handle this correctly when shares of Altira and British American rose after the announcements.
maxxxxx 8y ago
"I don't know what more the industry can realistically do" I wouldn't mind if they just went out of business and did something useful instead.
- folkrav 8y ago
  Countless smokers stopped using cigarettes because of vaping. Vaping is not about eliminating risk but risk reduction. Long-term effect research is lacking by simple lack of long-term data due to how new the market is, but the overwhelming majority of data there is for now points towards it being a far safer alternative to smoking cigarettes. Want to ban vaping? Ban goddamned cigarettes too, then, if you want to be anywhere close to consistent.
  - maxxxxx 8y ago
    I am consistent. I don't see a distinction between companies that sell cigarettes and vaping equipment. They are the same industry. And that industry should just close down. It has no useful purpose and is additionally extremely harmful.
    - folkrav 8y ago
      Outright banning cigarettes won't and never happened anywhere, as far as I know. I don't see why vaping should be treated differently, if you think they're similar industries (which I agree on). Regulate the market like cigarettes are, but damn, why outright ban it?
      - maxxxxx 8y ago
        I didn't say banning cigarettes. The question was "what else could the industry do?". And I wrote the best they could do is to shut down and do something useful.
        folkrav 8y ago
        > do something useful Well that's bad faith if I've ever seen it. Not every industry out there has to be "useful", some are there for convenience. One could also argue that allowing people to switch from vaping to smoking is a huge plus in risk reduction and potentially (for now, with the data we have, more than likely) health.
013a 8y ago
Its a combination of a few different things. The flavors make it more attractive to kids. The non-combustible method of inhalation means it can be safely/cleanly vaped indoors, say in school bathrooms, and you don't have to waste a whole cigarette just for one puff. They're also ridiculously easy to find online under 18; Juul themselves does digital age verification, but plenty of retailers don't. They're being asked to prove that the device helps adult smokers more-so than it hurts new smokers. The keyword is "more-so", because if these statistics suggest that Juul's uptake in adult users is lower than the FDA's statistics on high school usage, or if Juul can't prove that the vast majority of their users were former smokers rather than new users at any age, or if Juul can't present evidence that vape devices (especially their ultra concentrated 5% nic salt formula) are safe, they're finished. And they'll take the rest of the vape industry down with them.
- folkrav 8y ago
  Still waiting on that data, then. Super bummed about the industry going down if that happens, as it's what made it possible for me to stop smoking cigarettes. Up here in Canada, online vape stores are behind age walls, are required to ship with age verification. Quebec shops can't even sell nor advertise online.
LeifCarrotson 8y ago
Vaping is a gateway for some who would not have smoked to begin doing so. Some of them would have picked up smoking if the products did not exist. Not all; some who vape would not have smoked. And it's also a release for some who do smoke to quit. It's very difficult to measure these populations and movements, and also difficult to make statements about the magnitude and worth of their effects. Regardless, the goal is to reduce the ingress of new smokers, and if possible to increase the success rate of those who wish to quit smoking. The FDA can make progress on this by policies that reduce kids picking up vaping and using proven methods to stop them from picking up smoking.
- folkrav 8y ago
  > The FDA can make progress on this by policies that reduce kids picking up vaping and using proven methods to stop them from picking up smoking. Thing is, these "proven methods" (gums/patches) are extremely ineffective - last time I checked it was something along the lines of 20-something% success rate. Vaping has been also pretty much proven at this point to be way less damaging than smoking at short-to-medium term. I don't know about studies on effectiveness as a smoking cessation tool, but just the risk reduction alone makes it worth consideration, and would make it pretty damn dangerous and short-sighted to outright ban...
  - LeifCarrotson 8y ago
    Sorry, I wasn't referring to gums/patches or other tools to help people quit smoking. By "stop them from picking up smoking" I was referring to cigarette taxes, extreme social stigmas and heavy peer pressure against smokers, laws banning smoking within public places and private businesses, medical warnings, advertising restrictions, and so on. These do little to help the situation of current addicts - and actually make their lives miserable - but do a lot to help those who would have become smokers in the future. If the FDA can prevent people from starting smoking, then even if they do nothing to help people who are currently addicted the problem will eventually be solved. If they ineffectively help people to quit, but in so doing generate new addicts, the problem will persist. It ought to come down to a data-driven question of quality-adjusted life years and results now vs. results later, but people are bad at shutting up and doing the math. It's easer to imagine the choice between helping one member out of a group of 5 old smokers who just can't seem to give up the habit he picked up in the 70s but might be helped by vaping, and the alternative of an anonymous high school kid who might pick up vaping this school year, eventually pick up smoking and become that old man someday in the 2060s. I'd rather help the kid.

hprotagonist 8y ago

>I highly suspect these young vapers would have picked up smoking instead if products like this didn't exist. personal observation, not data, but I don't think this is so. I work on a university campus, and the proportion of people on campus that smoke has cratered this decade. The only reliable smoking populations are foreign students, and they seem to taper off over their undergrad years, which I can ascribe only to peer pressure against smelling horrible -- and maybe easy access to "study aids" like adderall. edit: i should add that juul use has jumped just this year alone, and with less focused of a user group.

uxp100 8y ago
But doesn't that line up with the popularization of nicotine vaping? I tend to think indoor smoking bans had something to do with the decline, but I don't know the timeline for anywhere except my state.
- hprotagonist 8y ago
  it does, loosely. However, box mods are still quite rare, so it's not super clear that the narrative of "people stopped smoking and started vaping" really holds -- or held until Juul took over, which is quite recent. It's fairer to say that an age cohort basically just stopped consuming nicotine at all, and that a new, younger generation has picked up again but switched delivery methods.

ceejayoz 8y ago

> I highly suspect these young vapers would have picked up smoking instead if products like this didn't exist. We've got plenty of data that shows a steady, large decline in number of smokers since the 1970s.

Spooky23 8y ago

> I don't know what more the industry can realistically do. Stop selling poison. > Maybe I'm missing something, but as an outsider, the FDA seems dead set on killing your vaping industry by all means necessary. Well, yeah. The FDA Mission, which is defined by statute: "The Food and Drug Administration is responsible for protecting the public health by ensuring the safety, efficacy, and security of human and veterinary drugs, biological products, and medical devices; and by ensuring the safety of our nation's food supply, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation. FDA also has responsibility for regulating the manufacturing, marketing, and distribution of tobacco products to protect the public health and to reduce tobacco use by minors. FDA is responsible for advancing the public health by helping to speed innovations that make medical products more effective, safer, and more affordable and by helping the public get the accurate, science-based information they need to use medical products and foods to maintain and improve their health. FDA also plays a significant role in the Nation's counterterrorism capability. FDA fulfills this responsibility by ensuring the security of the food supply and by fostering development of medical products to respond to deliberate and naturally emerging public health threats."

folkrav 8y ago
> Stop selling poison. Then what's the alternative for smokers that want to stop, then? These highly ineffective smoking cessation patches/gums they already had? If you want to be anywhere near consistent, cigarettes should be banned as well, as all the damn data points to vaping being far less dangerous that smoking. Wouldn't a less short-sighted alternative be to just damn regulate the market properly?
- Spooky23 8y ago
  Treat it as a medical issue. Tobacco companies don’t have a right to exist.
  - folkrav 8y ago
    Still they do, and nobody goes after them. Treating it as a medical issue would be one way to regulate the market, then. Outright banning them but keeping cigarettes is just a plain double standards.

schnevets 8y ago

You know the FDA didn't handle this correctly when shares of Altira and British American rose after the announcements.

maxxxxx 8y ago

"I don't know what more the industry can realistically do" I wouldn't mind if they just went out of business and did something useful instead.

folkrav 8y ago
Countless smokers stopped using cigarettes because of vaping. Vaping is not about eliminating risk but risk reduction. Long-term effect research is lacking by simple lack of long-term data due to how new the market is, but the overwhelming majority of data there is for now points towards it being a far safer alternative to smoking cigarettes. Want to ban vaping? Ban goddamned cigarettes too, then, if you want to be anywhere close to consistent.
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  I am consistent. I don't see a distinction between companies that sell cigarettes and vaping equipment. They are the same industry. And that industry should just close down. It has no useful purpose and is additionally extremely harmful.
  - folkrav 8y ago
    Outright banning cigarettes won't and never happened anywhere, as far as I know. I don't see why vaping should be treated differently, if you think they're similar industries (which I agree on). Regulate the market like cigarettes are, but damn, why outright ban it?
    - maxxxxx 8y ago
      I didn't say banning cigarettes. The question was "what else could the industry do?". And I wrote the best they could do is to shut down and do something useful.
      - folkrav 8y ago
        > do something useful Well that's bad faith if I've ever seen it. Not every industry out there has to be "useful", some are there for convenience. One could also argue that allowing people to switch from vaping to smoking is a huge plus in risk reduction and potentially (for now, with the data we have, more than likely) health.

013a 8y ago

Its a combination of a few different things. The flavors make it more attractive to kids. The non-combustible method of inhalation means it can be safely/cleanly vaped indoors, say in school bathrooms, and you don't have to waste a whole cigarette just for one puff. They're also ridiculously easy to find online under 18; Juul themselves does digital age verification, but plenty of retailers don't. They're being asked to prove that the device helps adult smokers more-so than it hurts new smokers. The keyword is "more-so", because if these statistics suggest that Juul's uptake in adult users is lower than the FDA's statistics on high school usage, or if Juul can't prove that the vast majority of their users were former smokers rather than new users at any age, or if Juul can't present evidence that vape devices (especially their ultra concentrated 5% nic salt formula) are safe, they're finished. And they'll take the rest of the vape industry down with them.

folkrav 8y ago
Still waiting on that data, then. Super bummed about the industry going down if that happens, as it's what made it possible for me to stop smoking cigarettes. Up here in Canada, online vape stores are behind age walls, are required to ship with age verification. Quebec shops can't even sell nor advertise online.

LeifCarrotson 8y ago

Vaping is a gateway for some who would not have smoked to begin doing so. Some of them would have picked up smoking if the products did not exist. Not all; some who vape would not have smoked. And it's also a release for some who do smoke to quit. It's very difficult to measure these populations and movements, and also difficult to make statements about the magnitude and worth of their effects. Regardless, the goal is to reduce the ingress of new smokers, and if possible to increase the success rate of those who wish to quit smoking. The FDA can make progress on this by policies that reduce kids picking up vaping and using proven methods to stop them from picking up smoking.

folkrav 8y ago
> The FDA can make progress on this by policies that reduce kids picking up vaping and using proven methods to stop them from picking up smoking. Thing is, these "proven methods" (gums/patches) are extremely ineffective - last time I checked it was something along the lines of 20-something% success rate. Vaping has been also pretty much proven at this point to be way less damaging than smoking at short-to-medium term. I don't know about studies on effectiveness as a smoking cessation tool, but just the risk reduction alone makes it worth consideration, and would make it pretty damn dangerous and short-sighted to outright ban...
- LeifCarrotson 8y ago
  Sorry, I wasn't referring to gums/patches or other tools to help people quit smoking. By "stop them from picking up smoking" I was referring to cigarette taxes, extreme social stigmas and heavy peer pressure against smokers, laws banning smoking within public places and private businesses, medical warnings, advertising restrictions, and so on. These do little to help the situation of current addicts - and actually make their lives miserable - but do a lot to help those who would have become smokers in the future. If the FDA can prevent people from starting smoking, then even if they do nothing to help people who are currently addicted the problem will eventually be solved. If they ineffectively help people to quit, but in so doing generate new addicts, the problem will persist. It ought to come down to a data-driven question of quality-adjusted life years and results now vs. results later, but people are bad at shutting up and doing the math. It's easer to imagine the choice between helping one member out of a group of 5 old smokers who just can't seem to give up the habit he picked up in the 70s but might be helped by vaping, and the alternative of an anonymous high school kid who might pick up vaping this school year, eventually pick up smoking and become that old man someday in the 2060s. I'd rather help the kid.