13 ms·
>"attacks on vaping are for the purpose of driving smokers back to cigarettes" I don't think it is intentionally on purpose, but it sure does seem this way som
by filoleg 7y ago
>"attacks on vaping are for the purpose of driving smokers back to cigarettes"
I don't think it is intentionally on purpose, but it sure does seem this way sometimes.
A specific example that comes to mind: city of San Francisco banning sale of e-cigs completely, while keeping regular cigarettes just as legal as before [0].
0. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2019/06/25/735714009/san-francisco-poised-to-ban-sales-of-e-cigarettes https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2019/06/25/7357140...
- tryitnow 7y agoGood point. I don't see any of the politicians addressing why the didn't also ban cigarettes. My guess is that banning cigarettes would go too far. It's unrealistic to expect cigarette smokers to quit over night and start using patches and lozenges. It's a little more realistic to expect that people who vape to do so.
- uberduper 7y ago> It's a little more realistic to expect that people who vape to do so. Why?
- draw_down 7y ago> I don't see any of the politicians addressing why the didn't also ban cigarettes. It's because tobacco is regulated by the FDA but ecigs aren't.
- filoleg 7y ago>It's unrealistic to expect cigarette smokers to quit over night and start using patches and lozenges. >It's a little more realistic to expect that people who vape to do so. From personal observations, what would actually happen is that those people will just switch to smoking cigarettes.