5 ms·
You can't be serious. Juul is not being villified for just having flavors, they are being villified for marketing to kids. https://www.businessinsider.com/juul
by BubRoss 6y ago
You can't be serious. Juul is not being villified for just having flavors, they are being villified for marketing to kids.
https://www.businessinsider.com/juul-congress-e-cigs-target-teens-students-testimony-2019-7 https://www.businessinsider.com/juul-congress-e-cigs-target-...
"The memo accused Juul of knowingly marketing products to teens by holding programs at schools and camps and recruiting teens as "Juul influencers.""
"The hearing's testimony included claims that a Juul representative once visited a high-school classroom and told students that Juul e-cigarettes were "totally safe," according to a memo from congressional investigators."
- t-writescode 6y agoThat’s fair, but then focus on that and not the flavors. I’ll happily continue drinking my fruity loops flavored vodka and enjoying its taste.
- cactus2093 6y agoThat doesn’t explain why cities like SF have banned all flavored vapes. Not just juul brand. It clearly is the flavors that people are taking issue with, this marketing thing is just a footnote. So much so that I almost never even hear this incident referenced.
- sneak 6y agoSF hasn’t banned cigarettes, though, which does “explain” it: the ban is not based on rational analysis of public health outcomes.
- catalogia 6y agoSF doesn't need to ban flavored cigarettes because the federal government already has. SF banned flavored vapes because the federal government hasn't (yet.)
- sneak 6y agoI didn't say flavored cigarettes, I said cigarettes. While cigarettes are legal, discussion of any vaping regulation is irrelevant.