17 ms·
NYU professors who defended vaping didn't disclose ties to Juul
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- dpwarfield 2y ago“Show me the incentive and I’ll show you the outcome”
- swores 2y agoNobody would have been confused in that direction, the problem is that only the outcome was visible until now and you can't easily go outcome -> incentive because "does believe this" and "paid, therefore pretending to believe this" are equally plausible motivations.
- skibidi_rizz 2y ago[flagged]
- skibidi_rizz 2y ago[flagged]
- swores 2y ago[flagged]
- skibidi_rizz 2y ago[flagged]
- skibidi_rizz 2y ago[flagged]
- swores 2y ago[flagged]
- skibidi_rizz 2y ago[flagged]
- skibidi_rizz 2y ago[flagged]
- Am4TIfIsER0ppos 2y ago"4 out of 5 doctors recommend [cigarette brand]"
- eltondegeneres 2y agoRay Niaura was on the PBS Newshour recently and I was surprised to see a public health researcher seemingly downplay teen use of ecigarettes and nicotine pouches, referring to them as "clean."
- sparc24 2y agoThese 2 clowns are psychologists.
- WarOnPrivacy 2y agoThey are professionals dedicated to their cause - which seems to be supporting and defending Juul's tobacco interests. ref:https://publichealth.nyu.edu/faculty/david-b-abrams https://publichealth.nyu.edu/faculty/david-b-abrams
- r0ckarong 2y agoJuul is the perfect example that our systems just don't work for the people or the common good by default. Any device that delivers such a highly addictive compound should have to been blocked by default until it was allowed. It was done the other way around.
- bayindirh 2y agoBut the freedom to kill oneself! /s
- nojvek 2y agoNot sure why you got downvoted with /s tag. Is it really freedom of a drug hacks into your brain biology to make you desire something over and over again?
- bayindirh 2y agoWhile in theory it is, most (if not all) people start using these things without knowing the risks and harms of these substances. So, I also support "deny by default" policies for addictive substances. The problem is "deny by default" has a side effect of creating unregulated black markets. So it's a really hard problem, at least from my perspective. I don't think about the downvote. The comment might be considered as shallow, or some people might really want the freedom, I don't know, and frankly, I don't care.
- mardifoufs 2y agoBut it replaced cigarettes, which are much worse by every metric.
- billfruit 2y agoThen why did the court upturn the FDAs Juul ban? And why don't FDA try to ban cigarettes? There is a case to be made that vaping is safer than smoking, since it is free of ingesting the harmful products of combustion like tar and carbon compounds.
- paxys 2y agoIf there are no consequences then why do people think stuff like this will stop happening? Corporations have always paid for "expert" opinions and will always continue to do so.
- lenerdenator 2y agoIt really is amazing. We were thiiiiiiis close to having a generation that wasn't addicted to nicotine for the first time in hundreds of years (like, since trade between North America and Europe really became a thing) and these guys pulled this thumb drive that tastes like cotton candy out of nowhere and every young person is just jonesing. And the regulatory/public opinion environment isn't what it was in the 80s and 90s when we decided to take on cigarettes. Imagine a company being told today that they now have to stop advertising on billboards, can't advertise to kids, and have to pay a fifth of a trillion dollars over 25 years for the harms they caused to Medicaid. Can't, can you?
- ndsipa_pomu 2y ago> Imagine a company being told today that they now have to stop advertising on billboards, can't advertise to kids, and have to pay a fifth of a trillion dollars over 25 years for the harms they caused to Medicaid. Can't, can you? I'd welcome those kinds of regulations to be applied to oil and car companies. Arguably they've caused a lot more harm.
- jgalt212 2y agoexcept now everyone who isn't on Ozempic, is obese.
- sevagh 2y ago[flagged]
- dudisubekti 2y agoBut what’s so bad about nicotine? Is it any worse than caffeine? I’m genuinely curious, because isn’t tar and carbon monoxide the dangerous byproduct of smoking, not the nicotine?
- bayindirh 2y agoNicotine addiction is chronic and very hard to break. You can reset caffeine tolerance and dependence in 10 days.
- chelmzy 2y agoI'm sure there are negative impacts of vaping and it should definitely be more heavily regulated. But the neutering of Juul only to allow dozens of Chinese clones to take their place was such a huge blunder.
- spicyusername 2y agoNot sure why you're being down voted, this is definitely true.
- beepbooptheory 2y agoIts not really that they are from China that is the issue here, its that all the replacements it seems are the single use type vapes which just seem so wasteful. So many perfectly good batteries and components being thrown away...
- ajsnigrutin 2y agoLet's be fair, if you take an old smoker (eg. two packs a day), and switch him to a vape, it's (most probably) a lot better for him than staying with the classic cigarettes. The problem here is/was the advertising... clouds of smokes, bubblegum flavour and targeting the kids... so you have people who never would have started smoking in the first place, staring to vape, sometimes inhaling even more harmful substances than the old-former-smoker.
- ImPleadThe5th 2y agoAgreed. Congress Pating themselves on the back for taking down juul while allowing the rise of these e-waste single use vapes with notably more flavours than Juul ever had. I think it was a political move and not at all about the health of people.
- npc12345 2y ago[dead]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- SkyBelow 2y agoIs the scientific method, or more generally modern science and how it is distributed to those outside the field, so poorly designed that not disclosing ties invalidates what was communicated? If so, sounds like we shouldn't be relying on such a method as a source of truth for policy making, or at least treating it with much more skepticism. Are we perhaps using science to inform policy makers before there are multiple independent replications which would make an instance of ethical disregard less likely to influence the outcome? Hiding things, even by omission, is not acceptable. But think of it like a CI/CD system where a junior dev takes down prod. No matter what mistake they made, no matter why they made the mistake, the system shouldn't be so weak that their mistake caused any significant issues. (Please ignore for a moment the junior dev isn't acting with a level of ethnical disregard such as seen by not disclosing ties; the comparison isn't perfect.)
- A_D_E_P_T 2y ago> Is the scientific method, or more generally modern science and how it is distributed to those outside the field, so poorly designed that not disclosing ties invalidates what was communicated? Basically, yeah. There's the famous replication crisis, and of course p-hacking. There's also the forking garden problem, e.g. in: http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/unpublished/p_hacking.pdf http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/unpublished/p_... Put it like this: If you're motivated to reach a certain conclusion in the soft sciences, odds are that you're going to find it. (But not that other researchers who come after you will find the same thing.)
- WarOnPrivacy 2y agoIn 2019, a list of Juul's sockpuppets was released. It was part of a large document release, tied to a NC AG lawsuit & settlement. It includes David Abrams and Ray Niaura, along with a string of professors and health professionals. Among Juul's supporters are a well-placed UK health official. ref:https://tobaccowatch.seatca.org/index.php/2024/04/11/industry-allies-and-opponents-according-to-juul/ https://tobaccowatch.seatca.org/index.php/2024/04/11/industr...
- downrightmike 2y agoThe netflix documentary is pretty amazing. You get to see people start of with ideals of making smoking safe and as time goes on and they make deals for money, that they justify the increasingly evil things they are doing because they are making more money.
- prox 2y agoWhat documentary is that?
- cheeseomlit 2y agoI just want my mango pods back... Seems really arbitrary to ban things on a flavor by flavor basis. I don't see anybody banning fruity flavored vodka.
- anonymoose33282 2y agoIt's definitely a double-standard that is especially prevalent in the US. In a gas station you can buy alcohol that will kill you, nicotine products that will kill you, processed food that will kill you. I don't understand why only 1 of those seems to ruffle feathers.
- cheeseomlit 2y agoIn this case its particularly aggravating because, at least where I live, gas stations still sell flavored disposable vapes. The difference is that now they're cheap knockoff brands, and they only come in high potency unlike juul where you could get 3% pods. The mango pod ban didn't make anything safer for consumers by any measure and I want them back god dammit
- samatman 2y agoI just get the tobacco flavored pods, use them up, and refill with various nicotine salt liquids. I get ten to twenty refills out of a cartridge. Haven't found a juice that matches the OG mango pods but I have a few in rotation that I like. I do miss the brief Cambrian explosion in third-party pods, before the FDA decided that "the youf" should switch to disposables, but at this point I'm just grateful that Juul is still in business, it's pretty much in a class of its own.
- cheeseomlit 2y agoIt never occurred to me that you could refill spent pods, thats awesome I'll have to check that out. Any specific recommendations for scratching the OG mango itch? I've been wanting to switch to an even lower potency too, like 1% I'm also grateful juul is still around at all, I haven't found any other device with such a nice small and flat form factor. Everything else bulges out of my pockets
- jjice 2y agoI'm blown away by how vaping took over. I was a senior in high school once Juul started to get popular. We'd joke about our peers that willingly took on an addiction when our generation was mostly in the clear from being addicted to cigarettes. Then some of my friends who'd joke about it started vaping. I don't even know how they started, but they did. Let me be clear - it's not nearly as annoying or destructive for passer-bys as cigarettes. It's been eight-ish years and they still vape. They've tried to stop at points, but it never stuck. Juul is gone, but now there are these $15-25 disposable vapes. I'm not sure if there's a specific term for theses, but they don't even have pods of nicotine that you swap out. You just toss the entire thing. So now an incredible amount of my peers are addicted to nicotine while also producing an incredible amount of e-waste. Juul really helped push this into the mainstream for Gen Z, but the torch is being carried more consistently than ever. I don't even know if some of them are technically legal to sell in my state. The thing that gets me is that we were so close to not having any casual nicotine in my generation. Now there's also a company called "Zyn" that is essentially tobacco-less dip. Whatever. I'll go back to complaining about the sports betting phenomenon now.
- sevagh 2y ago[flagged]
- jjice 2y ago> Why do you think you speak for your generation to bar them from casual nicotine use? I think you're digging to deep into my phrasing. The majority of people I know that vape would prefer if they didn't. They always talk about trying to quit, but how it's very hard for them. Maybe that doesn't apply to the people you know. They don't like that they have an addiction now. Nicotine has some benefits, but it doesn't seem worth the cost for the majority of ways it's delivered. At no point do I think that we should "bar" nicotine use, but I think it's a safe bet to say that most people who have this addiction now would rather not have the addiction. I had a similar response to a comment I made about sports betting and how my peers have gotten very into it and are losing money and forming compulsions. They are free individuals and can do what they want, but I still think it's a generally bad thing to introduce dangerous addictions to more people. I also think that alcohol is generally bad for you too. I don't think that should be banned either, but, generally speaking, most people would live healthier lives without it. That doesn't mean I think it shouldn't be legal and accessible.
- remram 2y agoIn what capacity did those professors push Juul? In the classroom? Scientific papers? Lobbying?
- kurthr 2y agoFrom the article: Abrams, a frequent commentator about vaping in the news media, including CBS This Morning, CNN, and The New Yorker, coordinated extensively with Juul on public messaging in 2017 and 2018, according to company emails. Abrams asked Juul officials for talking points, allowed company executives to review an academic article prior to publishing, and attended Juul scientific advisory board meetings, all without disclosing those connections to journal publishers...
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- lifestyleguru 2y agoUntil today it blows my mind that western culture managed to virtually ban smoking in closed and indoor spaces. With unbelievable bribes and lobbying by tobacco companies. Watch any movie, music clip produced until 2010 - EVERYONE SMOKES, it additionally exploits the fact that video doesn't transmit smell.
- remram 2y agoAny way around the paywall? How is anybody reading this without paying $30?
- tmaly 2y agoHow is this any different than influencers being required to disclose a paid promotion by the FTC?
- vibhas777 2y agoIt's because the scientific community has much more influence over the society than the so called influencers. Scientific community's pride is the peer review system, thus if anyone is found to be corrupt they need to be quicking on calling them out. People in general know that influencers can be selling bullshit, but do not expect licensed doctors or scientists to be selling them too.
- CodeWriter23 2y agoYou all are so cute when you think this kind of corruption is limited to Vape. Or just commercial interests in general.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- cess11 2y agoThis thread reminds me that it's funny how some people react strongly towards tobacco smoke, but not ICE exhausts, the dominating smell of late modern cities.
- __lbracket__ 2y agoProfessors are the worst scum. These are the same people who'd become expert witnesses for the tobacco industry in the 60's, advocating risky financial instruments in 2000s, requiring DEI statements in 2010s, and generally fighting like dogs over morsels of defense funding.
- dogman144 2y agoadding just to counteract some very odd takes in here from I presume currently vapors or wildly uneducated non-nicotine addicts. Nicotine addiction owned my life for years. Nothing like it. I still have dreams about relapsing dip and then saying “f-it” and spending a day in my dreams going wild with Cope. Quitting meant trying to taper, trying the gum, trying pouches vs loose dip, and if vapes were around I’d prob have tried those too. All that adds up to is you’re still addicted, just to a different form, and your day shifts when leaving the house from “keys, wallet, tin of dip, spitter bottle” to “keys, wallet, nicotine gum/vape/we.” You’re still owned by the chemical haha. Only thing that worked for me and others I knew who quit for good was cold turkey and an awful 90 days, at which point the habit and the chemicals are basically broken. Which brings me to my point: The amount of free marketing Juul and co is getting in this thread from nicotine addicts and their supporters over how Juul is fine and much much different from the good ol’ American diet cigs and dip is disappointing and not surprising. The 10-20 y/o brand new chemical that is extremely addictive and associated with centuries of health problems is now totally fine? Where have I heard that one before……? At least make Philip Morris’s job hard, please.
- billfruit 2y agoAtleast vaping doesn't make people ingest the very harmful products of combustion, tars and other nasty products of the burning that happens inside normal cigarettes. Don't you think that is an important reduction of harm from smoking cigarettes?
- dogman144 2y agoNo I don’t, I think that perspective is an incredible amount of rationalization of marketing and data out an industry that continually proves itself to be public health crisis 101 and repeatedly and litigiouslg deceptive in its discussion about it. In other words, you’re basically taking the talking points from Corporate Voldemort and saying ”but isn’t that nice?”
- billfruit 2y agoI think scientifically there are very good reasons to assume that ingesting carcinogenic products of combustion into respiratory tract is injurious to health. Normal cigarettes does that, and vaping does not. Thus vaping is a significant reduction in harm as compared to cigarettes. While I don't deny that vaping companies and their corporate cheer leaders may have made the same argument, what exactly is the problem with this argument on merit?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- tremorman 2y agoI have been smoking UNC (an off brand of it) for about 9 months, then I transitioned to the no nicotine version for 3 months. It's like I'm addicted to whatever is inside the disposable vaporizer besides the nicotine. It definitely has made my throat burn at month 6 and it's been on going. It definitely gave me tremors and friends and family have told me I have like this shaking, that's why I transitioned to the no nicotine, but it's no use. I also have a pins and needles feeling on my hands and feet at times. I don't know if it's interacting with my meds or not but I think it's because solely of the vaporizer. I tend to vape almost all day. I use cough drops to ease the throat pain. It's definitely not good for you but they say its the formaldehyde (in the anti-vape commercials) but I think it's something not even known yet.
- starwin1159 2y agoHow about IQOS?