7 ms·
> ... on healthy non-smokers ... That’s unlikely to be surprising. Would really love to know what the impact is in smokers versus an actual cigarette. Isn’t n
by bobwaycott 7y ago
> ... on healthy non-smokers ...
That’s unlikely to be surprising. Would really love to know what the impact is in smokers versus an actual cigarette.
Isn’t nicotine already known to have this effect?
- ceejayoz 7y agoIt seems clear that e-cigs are better than smoking. It also seems clear that e-cig manufacturers are hoping to hook young non-smokers to expand their market. Both are valuable bits of info, but "e-cigs do confirmed damage" is extremely important info from a public health perspective.
- d1zzy 7y agoThat's correct but I worry that all this will result in banning e-cigs (in my state at least), based on the idea that cigarettes (and many other things) wouldn't have been legal/popular if they appeared today but we tolerate them because they are already a thing. The last thing I want is for my SO to go back to smoking real cigs because e-cigs become unavailable here :(
- ceejayoz 7y agoI'd like to see them made available via a prescription for smoking cessation.
- dennisnedry 7y agoI don't understand why making them available via a prescription would solve anything. I do not smoke or vape, but I have a friend who stopped smoking because vaping was accessible without going to a doctor. He just tried it because he wanted to see if it would work, and it did. He no longer vapes or smokes.
- ceejayoz 7y agoThe stated concern is e-cigs becoming unavailable to smokers looking to quit. Making it available via a prescription permits that use, while limiting access for recreational uptake by kids.
- bobwaycott 7y agoNo, it means every smoker has to go to a doctor just to try to use vaping to quit! Fuck that. That’s insane. No adult should have to go to a doctor for permission to use an e-cig. It’s not medicine. Let the state go after the businesses promoting and selling e-cigs to kids—and levy astronomical fines against them. Sponsor PSAs that scare kids away from doing it. Educate everyone on the potential risks. If these “kids” are 18, they’re adults, so let them do as they please. Cigarettes don’t require a prescription to get hooked on them. Adults should be free to recreationally use e-cigs just as much as cigarettes, weed, alcohol, and plenty of other substances. It’s their body. Increase taxes on them to try and discourage it and pay for PSAs against vaping. Whatever. But let’s dispense with the think-of-the-children crap, and let adults be adults.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- EpicEng 7y agoSure. While you're at it, please ban red meat. I eat far too much of it and need to be protected.
- ceejayoz 7y agoIf someone starts selling nicotine-laced steaks, I'll be the first to advocate for an FDA crackdown on it.
- EpicEng 7y agoNicotine is in the same drug class as caffiene. Want to ban coffee as well?
- ceejayoz 7y agoPlenty of drugs are in the same class with substantially differing impacts - take heroin vs. morphine vs. fentanyl vs. oxycodone as an example, or ask someone taking antipsychotic psych meds if they're all the same. Or try taking some strychnine because it's an alkaloid like nicotine and caffeine and see how well that works out. Since you picked coffee as an example, most of the studies I've seen indicate probably health benefits from it. Nicotine it's not.
- EpicEng 7y agoI guess I shouldn't have used the word "class" as you're not the only person to come back with that. I mean that it's generally recognized as safe (GRAS) by the FDA. I think you know that comparing heroin to nicotine is just silly and, as far as I'm aware, there's no data that shows that nicotine is any more or substantially more harmful than caffeine. So back in reality where we're talking about banning e-cigs; why should they be subject to a prescription?
- ceejayoz 7y ago"So back in reality" GRAS does not mean what you think it means. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5664775/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5664775/ > Despite scientific uncertainty regarding the safety of inhaling aerosol and flavorant substances from electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) relative to inhaling smoke from traditional cigarettes, some consumers and vape shop employees suggest that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) “generally recognized as safe” (GRAS) designation of constituents provides clear evidence of overall e-cigarette safety. > Although the Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association (FEMA) has clarified that the GRAS program only assesses product safety for ingestion in food, not inhalation, public confusion appears to continue. Nicotine isn't even on the GRAS list at all. Some of the additives (like glycerol) and flavorants are. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/fdcc/index.cfm?set=GRASNotices&sort=GRN_No&order=DESC&startrow=1&type=basic&search=nicotine https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/fdcc/index.cfm?set=GR...
- sawjet 7y agoThere are tons of resources for building your own DIY e-cigarette. it might not be as slim and sleek as a Juul, but it will perform better, be cheaper to maintain and produce much less waste.
- tinus_hn 7y agoIt should also be clear that not using electronic cigarettes is better than using them.
- ceejayoz 7y agoThe industry is going to fight that conclusion tooth and nail, though, so solid evidence of it is valuable.
- throwaway5752 7y agoYounger users might not have context like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Berkshire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Berkshire or the acrimony leading up to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_Master_Settlement_Agreement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_Master_Settlement_Agre....
- oarabbus_ 7y agoI've never seen anyone argue they are harmless, just that they are less harmful than actual cigarettes. The problem is that places are banning e-cigs, which presumably drives people back to smoking. Which is worse for everyone.
- redisman 7y agoLess harmful than tobacco is a very low bar. Especially for non-smokers. If it was treated like methadone then cool, but seems like these days most of the vapers are young, new users. Not recovering cigarette addicts.
- aketchum 7y agoAnecdotally, I hear many friends say they are harmless. Surprisingly a nurse friend of mine vapes Juuls and isn't worried about the health impacts. I think plenty of people actually take it that since they are not cigarettes and are "just nicotine" they don't worry about their safety.
- 7y ago
- jforman 7y agoIt seems clear that e-cigs are better than smoking. How can this be clear without long-term usage data?
- ceejayoz 7y agoWell, that's the seems part. It certainly stands to reason that inhaling vaporized nicotine will be better than inhaling vaporized nicotine plus ash and tar and pesticides and whatnot.
- jforman 7y agoFair enough. Although I think a researcher would say our bags of meat often surprise us.
- bobwaycott 7y ago> It also seems clear that e-cig manufacturers are hoping to hook young non-smokers to expand their market. This is mentioned a lot, but I find it questionable. I’ve never seen an ad that made me feel like Joe Camel or the Marlboro Man did when I was a kid. My teenagers haven’t ever thought vaping was cool based on ads or plenty of people doing it. This sounds too much like a general truism of capitalist enterprise—always find ways to expand your markets—while combining it with a direct accusation that it’s being done perniciously to “hook” them. Everyone who is selling anything is trying to hook people on their product, if that’s the terminology we’re using—new clothes, new cars, new TVs, the latest deals ... every company is using advertising to hook people on their products. People go into financial ruin for cars and homes and stupid stuff. Maybe we should just ban advertising to people so no company can try to hook young people on their products to expand their markets.
- ceejayoz 7y agoDo you think Juul’s school curriculum - which they paid schools to accept - was genuinely well-intentioned? https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/25/health/juul-teens-vaping.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/25/health/juul-teens-vaping.... > In April 2017, a Juul representative visited the Dwight School in New York City to meet with students — with no teachers present — and told them the company’s e-cigarettes were “totally safe.”
- bobwaycott 7y agoDo you really think I would argue that is well-intentioned—no matter what company it is? Did my comment really leave the impression I’d give that a thumbs up? Companies shouldn’t be permitted to do that, regardless of their product—so fine them exorbitantly, and let’s do the same to the morons who accepted such a proposal while we’re at it. What I’m pointing out is this is standard behavior for corporations, and nobody does a thing to go after them or their profits when they behave badly—instead, people use this for lame think-of-the-children arguments against the products, calling for public bans, suggesting we force adults to get prescriptions for an e-cig, when what we ought to do is aggressively go after the bad corporate behavior—or make it illegal to manufacture and sell things if we don’t like them. But in the case of e-cigs, let’s start with cigarettes first, or admit we aren’t going to ever do that, move onto more productive conversations, and stop acting like e-cigs and actual tobacco products are at all equivalent—aside from the very narrow category of nicotine-delivery device.
- mzs 7y agoThe vascular effects are very similar to prior research on cigarette smoke. It's precisely the same initial effects thought to lead to heart disease in smokers. edit: You my have edited your comment while I was relying. The second of two sentences under Background (first section) mentions that this was a nicotine free study unlike earlier ones.
- refurb 7y agoYes, nicotine itself is known to have this impact on the vascular system. Not surprising you see it with nicotine vaping.