Comment by pergadad | Hacker News Reader

Comment by pergadad | Hacker News Reader

This seems to be a rather simplistic/one-sided answer furthering a specific agenda.

* The responses that don't fit the narrative that 'legal' vaping is safe are'explained away' in this article - that's just unscientific and a matter of ignoring contrary evidence. * There are other dangers to vaping ignored in the argument (eg addiction, kids starting even earlier if there's 'bubblegum' or 'cherry' flavour rather than tobacco * No long term studies, so we really have no idea what's safe and what's not. * Overall there's no control or standards on the stuff in the vaping juice, so we still don't really know what effect which product might have. * The bans were not motivated just by the sick people but also the various other factors - so even if true that 'legal'vaping products weren't the cause there are many questions still to be answered. * ...

The world is never so black and white as this article paints it.

A) Is vaping better than cigarettes? Maybe. Is it better people switch to vaping? Maybe. Is it better we encourage/aid them to stop smoking and vaping? Absolutely.

B) Will flavoured vaping with sweet flavours, wild west unlicensed/non-regulatef ingredients and unchecked advertising get more young people and even children interested and hooked? Absolutely.

> Is vaping better than cigarettes? Maybe

There is simply no plausible way it's not.

> Will flavoured vaping (...) get more young people and even children interested and hooked? Absolutely.

What is known about cigarette and nicotine addiction makes it actually quite unlikely. Nicotine alone does not seem that addictive, in any case it's definitely much less addictive than nicotine plus the combustion products found in tobacco. Cf https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16177026

B is solved by a legal market and framework that we already have for tobacco. The problem is treating vaping as worse than cigs, which have an absolutely stunning amount of evidence against them, in particular with tar and a laundry list of additives you won't see anywhere else. You're telling people to stay out of the shed when their house is already on fire!

Harm minimization is the key to A. Is the system better or worse with regulated (sue-able!) market? Studies seem to show that we generally over-restrict relatively safe substances.

The "fun" flavors are also a key part of helping people quit cigarettes. They aren't designed to appeal to children, "fun" flavors are by far and away the most popular among adults. Somebody trying to quit tobacco products doesn't want to be reminded of tobacco flavor every time they use their vape.

It would be great if we had the time to collect all the answers around vaping, but we don't. People are dying of tobacco related health issues right now, and vaping looks to be a healthier alternative that can be extremely effective at helping addicts reduce tobacco consumption. I think you underestimate the health impacts of smoking, nearly 20% of deaths in the USA are caused by smoking according to the US government: https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/heal...

This article is a reaction to the heavy handed reaction of the US government. Rather than implementing sensible regulation like manufacturing standards, age restrictions, nicotine content limits, state & federal governments are reacting by banning flavors, or banning vaping companies from manufacturing their products as helping quit tobacco.

Indeed. Flavoured alcohol should be banned too, as cherry liquor exists only to get the kids hooked, right? All alcohol should taste like misery and fire and should be sold in plain brown packaging featuring grisly photos of people who died in alcohol related accidents. I mean, prohibition worked perfectly last time, and definitely didn’t kill more people than the alleged problem it was trying to solve, right?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com