3 ms·

Is taking up vaping bad for youth that are under the age of 18? Is taking up vaping bad for adults over the age of 18? And I do mean, when they otherwise were n

Is taking up vaping bad for youth that are under the age of 18? Is taking up vaping bad for adults over the age of 18? And I do mean, when they otherwise were not smokers? If so, has Juul actively tried to market their products to non-smokers in any range? Have they actively tried to inform the public about the potential harms of starting to vape when you are otherwise a non-smoker? There is no doubt that Juul is safer than a pack of cigarettes. But Juul can't make it as a start up selling to only smokers who want to reduce their risk of death, as has been seen by their sales numbers. They are actively marketing to groups of people who are in zero current harm from first hand nicotine. And nicotine does harm those people. Here's a peer reviewed article just to make the point. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4363846/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4363846/

sneak 6y ago
There is no evidence whatsoever that the harmful effects of nicotine cause even 1% of the damage caused by the harmful effects of inhaling combustion byproducts. This is irrelevant, and is just emotional spillover from the decades of repetition of how bad smoking is. (In some ways it’s like people trying to ban rifles that cause ~700 deaths per year in the US while small caliber handguns cause >11k.) Salty fried foods are a bigger public health issue right now than if every nonsmoker took up vaping.
- trcollinson 6y ago
  I am not sure what the evidence is of nicotine vs inhaled combustion byproducts, but I do agree that the effects are far less. I don't find my questions irrelevant though, even though you have glossed right passed all of them. The other examples you have are a false equivalence. We can certainly say that nicotine sellers have an obligation to explain the effects of their products and also say that there are bigger public health issues right now. I certainly would not imply that nicotine is the largest public health issue right now. But we can deal with so many things at once.

sneak 6y ago

There is no evidence whatsoever that the harmful effects of nicotine cause even 1% of the damage caused by the harmful effects of inhaling combustion byproducts. This is irrelevant, and is just emotional spillover from the decades of repetition of how bad smoking is. (In some ways it’s like people trying to ban rifles that cause ~700 deaths per year in the US while small caliber handguns cause >11k.) Salty fried foods are a bigger public health issue right now than if every nonsmoker took up vaping.

trcollinson 6y ago
I am not sure what the evidence is of nicotine vs inhaled combustion byproducts, but I do agree that the effects are far less. I don't find my questions irrelevant though, even though you have glossed right passed all of them. The other examples you have are a false equivalence. We can certainly say that nicotine sellers have an obligation to explain the effects of their products and also say that there are bigger public health issues right now. I certainly would not imply that nicotine is the largest public health issue right now. But we can deal with so many things at once.