A good warning to ignore all the people on HN who keep trying to insist that "oh, vaping is safe as long as you aren't doing X".
We have no idea if vaping is safe. We still have no idea if vaping is safe, except we explicitly know it is unsafe (to the point of acutely poisoning you) if it involves this chemical.
I certainly get all the hate against Juul - it is definitely well-deserved. But I still think vaping has an actual use case for people who are addicted to cigarettes who want another way to satisfy their nicotine cravings, especially in social situations.
And I don't understand the logic that harm reduction devices/drugs should be less available than the more dangerous drugs...
But my broader point was that if your argument is that vaping is a method to quit smoking, then it should be regulated or proved as such and not sold like other tobacco products or with misleading messaging. Currently IQOS (Philip Morris International via Altria in the US market) is trying to get this signoff from the FDA I think, but just for marketing purposes (and yes, this is a different product category than vaping but still in the 'novel' tobacco replacement category)
Edit Addition: I should just mention I'm more playing devils advocate on both sides of this as frankly I'm still trying to decide on my belief in this argument. I've been researching tobacco control for the last few months as part of a project and there are lots of valid arguments that many of the major vape companies and products are now owned by tobacco companies which have a history of being disingenuous at best and actively harmful/criminal at worst and so novel products like vapes should just be not trusted or even outlawed until the effects are known. But on the other side, available data so far does show that vapes generally are less harmful than cigarettes, so if someone is using it as a device to switch and that's the only thing that's an option for them (rather than quitting cold turkey) then it's not good to limit that option. But the math starts getting really fuzzy if you think about the number of new 'users' vaping and novel products could theoretically attract to a product that while probably not as harmful as cigarettes, isn't as good as not using anything at all
But I'm actually not positive that it's proven it helps you quit. Here's an excerpt from a paper I was reading the other day "The study [21] of the effect of "real world" ENDS use on the population quit rates among 1284 U.S. adult smokers showed that the adjusted odds of quitting smoking were lower for those that used ENDS at baseline (9.4%) compared to smokers who did not use ENDS (18.9%). Smokers who used ENDS daily at some point during the study period were also less likely to quit smoking than nonusers (AOR = 0.17)."
My notes are kind of messy but I think it's from this meta analysis http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/356561555100066200...
I actually am a bit confused on the NHS' stance actually - they came out strong on this but many other agencies like the WHO seem to be taking much more of a wait and see approach
I also don't understand why if something helps you quit smoking we should make it less available? If it help people quit smoking we should make it more available, and if it doesn't then make it less.
The UK royal academy of physicians and equivalent of nih think vaping probably has 5% of the risks of smoking. That means to break even we would need ~20 new vapers for every smoker who switches to vaping. And I don't think there is any way to look at the data and conclude there are 20 times as many new vapers as smokers who switched.
The market has come up with a solution, vaping and e-cigarettes that are safer already and do not damage the environment as much.
I am strongly anti-prohibition and anti-banning as that leads to more problems in the black market and provides regulatory capture for big fish, cigarettes are fine as people choose to do with their body what they choose as it is their Right to Body. But if there is a better solution with vaping, and people are going to do it no matter what, banning and prohibitions will only lead to more involvement of mafias/cartels on the black market and give markets to big fish.
This is a blue ocean market and about to open up massively when prohibition on marijuana ends, lots of big fish and mafias/cartels fighting to win it. Prohibitionists/authoritarians with agendas are just their pawns in this effort.
The President looks to be doing an Executive Order soon to limit vaping, just like all the Republican governors that did it. [2][3] Same play different day, big fish win, "think of the children" authoritarianism and big fish disaster capitalist raiding of the blue ocean that will be immense when marijuana is fully legalized and vaping is suddenly "safe" when the bigs run the show.
This is America.
People not thinking it is about market power and money are naive as hell.
You think this is for health reasons? laughable.
Same with all bans and prohibitions, makes it more unsafe and more lucrative for mafias/cartels because there is decreased supply and increased demand, price goes up, in comes the underground and more danger.
[1] https://www.sciencealert.com/cigarette-butts-are-our-most-co...
[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/11/health/trump-vaping.html
[3] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-08/senior-wh...
Not trying to be pedantic, but I don't think we have data yet to compare % of smokers who get cancer and die, vs % of vapers who get the above lung problem and die, and other such metrics.
In other words both are bad, saying vaping is ok because smoking is bad is doing everyone a disservice.
I certainly don’t get it. Saw the news on a TV in a bar last night, talking about the Vitamin E oil. The video clip to go along was someone using a Juul! Juul is getting conflated to be synonymous with vaping, and that is patently wrong. I guess they should be sorry for creating the best product, that so happens to be discreet enough for teenagers to hide.
There is NO verifiable evidence that consumer nicotine ecigs have caused any deaths.
Of course, the harm reduction qualities make it interesting, but I heard a tobacco control researcher explain it like this (not exact quote) - Imagine that smoking tobacco is like jumping out of a building on the 100th story, most likely vaping is not as bad, but there's no consensus on whether you're jumping out of the 99th story or the 2nd
The best thing to do for your health (if that's what you're optimizing for) is to just quit and not replace with a new device. The CDC has a bunch of resources as do most Western Nations in the local languages. Below is a link to the tobacco cessation mobile app from the CDC
https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/campaign/tips/quit-smoking/quits...
We also know how bad polyethylene glycol is for you, and it's not that bad(it's used in medical devices).
So most of the unknown risk is concentrated around device and flavorings.
Vaping simply means non combusted smoke which since it is under 450 degrees it reduces and removes 20+ carcinogens.
Noone thinks smoking is purely healthy, but comparing vaping to cigarettes it is a no brainer safer. Oils probably a little less safe than dry.
Also, cigarette butts are next to plastics as the most environmental damage. e-cigs and vaping is mostly re-usable and there are no butts about it.
10 years and there was no issues, suddenly a bunch of them. If you ask me that is blue ocean market sabotage. The big fish are moving in.
Altria bought Juul in December 2018, suddenly in 2019 all these issues and a big "think of the children" offensive that is typical in authoritarian and big fish take overs of markets or to keep something at the underground black market mafia level like drugs.
Prohibition doesn't work, banning and outrage create danger, it only makes it more unsafe in production when people go to the black market when a legal market was progressing and becoming more and more safe. Dispensaries had they own safety state/independent organizations. If they truly want to make it more safe, they will decriminalize and legalize marijuana, end prohibition and make the production safer while taking out the black market competitors that caused this issue.
This is America.
People not thinking it is about market power and money are naive as hell.
You think this is for health reasons? laughable.
Same with all bans and prohibitions, makes it more unsafe and more lucrative for mafias/cartels because there is decreased supply and increased demand, price goes up, in comes the underground and more danger.
And if vaping were only done as a way to quit smoking cigarettes, that would be a relevant fact. When more teenagers have vaped than have smoked[1], this is clearly not the case. It is being treated as something entirely new and distinct from cigarettes, and should therefore be compared against not vaping.
Yes, regulate it and make sure that it is safe. That includes taking products off the market while investigating unknown health issues. Regulate it and control the allowed marketing for it. That includes not allowing the advertising of addictive substances to minors.
[1] https://www.drugabuse.gov/related-topics/trends-statistics/i...
> That includes taking products off the market while investigating unknown health issues.
When you shut down a market or product it does not go away. It comes back in force on the black market. Shutting down the market that is legal and had safety processes, in favor of an issue from the black market, it really is backwards thinking but I'd expect that from an authoritarian prohibitionist.
You are helping the mafias/cartels of the black market and the big fish over a legal market that was working. Own it.
Again, so many bots and propaganda out about this downvoting on topic points.
This is just build up to the Executive Order coming from Trump based on how it plays with their base. [1][2]
I wonder if moderation at HN will stop these new bot brigades or not... These are not HN users but propagandists in HN and it is slowly getting worse, it will probably kill HN into the election.
The startups and small/medium businesses that run the legal market, and do have safety measures, should not be the target and banning or prohibition only helps the bigs and the mafias/cartels.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/11/health/trump-vaping.html
[2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-08/senior-wh...
If vaping were as harmful but less addictive or more addictive but not harmful, then it might fill the role more safely. If it is neither addictive nor harmful and a new generation of teenagers knows that, then vaping can't replace cigarettes any more than carrots can.
Sure. In other news: don't vape bleach. It's bad for you.
I mean really. No nicotine vaping liquid has vitamin E in it as there's no reason to put it in there.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/30/health/juul-pods-contamin...
Whatever problems vape brings to the table will be much nicer problems to have when compared to cigarettes.
9 total have died from vaping. 22,000 die every day from cigarette smoking.
Vaping hasn't been around long enough for us to see any long term effects similar to the ones caused by cigarettes.
I'm not sure where to find numbers about the increase in lung cancer after smoking for only 15 years, but I know most studies look at people who have been smoking for more like 30 or 50 years...
Another problem they're dealing with is that we talk about vaping being one thing - in reality there are hundreds of companies with their own solutions. Of course there are some similarities in products and in the last few years Juul has come to dominate the US market, but other products (both the devices and the liquids) are of murky origin and quality. I was recently reading a study of a scientist looking into some devices and they found some contaminants that they didn't expect to be present at all that had no reason being there other than a use of cheap/incorrect/mistaken materials
Source: various, I've been researching tobacco control broadly for the last ~5 months as part of a project, if anyone is interested I can pull together some of the more interesting reports I've read
All early evidence is showing vaping is far safer... even 2nd-hand smoke with vaping is way safer (no evidence of transfer via 2nd-hand smoke during vaping tests meanwhile cigarette smoke lingers around and hurts people).
There was a reason this was a big deal because it was the first time showing a direct connection to being dangerous and now its again pointing back to a small subset of THC pens and those in the business of hysteria are trying to cover their bases.
Nicotine poisoning from cigarettes is a thing, toddlers that eat them can be affected.
And at least the webmd article on nicotine poisoning identifiers vaping as riskier (with respect to it) than smoking: https://www.webmd.com/smoking-cessation/nicotine-poisoning-c...