|
Herstory Begins Now posted:Vaping, by similarly providing all the associated behaviors and sensations that reinforce dependence from tobacco smoking relative to say patches or gum are more likely to be satisfying. For most people the ritual process of smoking transfers very readily into vaping anyways, funny to see them confirm that here. That's the loving point. It is effective at getting people to stop smoking and use something else. That's the basis of their recommendation to promote it! Move people to a less harmful alternative that is an easy transition so that there is less of a chance they will relapse and start smoking again. 
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2019 19:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 14:20 |
|
|
As normal, no one is disputing 'less harmful alternative' it's every other word you use that is at issue.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2019 19:15
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:As normal, no one is disputing 'less harmful alternative' it's every other word you use that is at issue. So we're back to just vaguely stating my positions are wrong? Glad we've come full circle. It's very productive.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2019 19:17
|
|
|
IMO it's loving insane that we have let almost 30% of high school kids become regular users of vapes, which as established above, are wrt addictive potential overwhelmingly functionally identical to cigarettes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2019 19:26
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:IMO it's loving insane that we have let almost 30% of high school kids become regular users of vapes, which as established above, are wrt addictive potential overwhelmingly functionally identical to cigarettes. This is a lie. I've already shown you the numbers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2019 19:29
|
|
|
 regular users of tobacco prods, only 20% of all highschoolers are vapers, my bad that's not horrifying at all
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2019 19:30
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:
That isn't regular use. That is at the time of the survey "Have you used these products in the past 30 days?". Here is an actual breakdown of who is using what: https://www.qeios.com/read/article/384 quote:The overall prevalence of past-30-days e-cigarette use among high school students in 2018 was 20.8%, an increase of 78% from the observed figure of 11.7% in 2017 (Table 1). Prevalence was strongly associated with lifetime tobacco use history in both years: among never tobacco users, 2.9% in 2017 and 8.4% in 2018 were past-30-days e-cigarette users, whilst among those who had smoked more than 100 cigarettes in their lifetime, the corresponding figures were 57.2% in 2017 and 71.0% in 2018. So among most kids vaping they have already tried smoking. quote:In both 2017 and 2018, about one quarter of past-30-days e-cigarette users reported having used them on 20 or more days (19.9%, 210/1,051 and 28.4%, 627/2207). This heavier use was strongly associated with lifetime tobacco use history: it was seen in only 0.1% of never tobacco users in 2017 and 1.0% in 2018. The observed frequency of 20+ days use increased with the extent of lifetime tobacco use, and reached 26.8% in 2017 and 37.2% in 2018 among students who had smoked more than 100 cigarettes. Among those that were using the devices regularly that never smoked only 1% of users in 2018 were using them for more than 20 days which would be considered regular use. quote:Among all students who were past-30-day-cigarette users but had never tried tobacco products, responses consistently pointed to minimal dependence with only 3.8% reporting any craving for tobacco products, and 3.1% reporting wanting to use within 30 minutes of waking. Over 60% reporting using a cigarette on 10 or fewer days in their lifetime. Only 3.4% were classified as frequent users of e-cigarettes on 20 or more days in the past month. This contrasted markedly with students who had smoked more than 100 cigarettes (so meeting the US definition for regular cigarette smoking), where 74.5% reported craving, 51.4% wanted to use within 30 minutes of waking, 52.4% used e-cigarettes on 20 or more days in the past month, and 64.0% had used e-cigs on more than 100 days in their lifetime. This group had mostly started their tobacco careers with cigarettes, and their pattern of dependence typifies that attributable to cigarette use. The reason this is important is that context matters. It influences public opinion and policy. If you don't break down the data as Cancer Research UK did in a meaningful way you get scary headlines and people like you who can't differentiate between experimentation and evidence of actual addiction. On Terra Firma fucked around with this message at 19:36 on Oct 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2019 19:33
|
|
|
Part of harm reduction is you're meant to at least pretend to give a gently caress that children are getting addicted, fyi
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2019 19:37
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:Part of harm reduction is you're meant to at least pretend to give a gently caress that children are getting addicted, fyi Which is why I brought it up multiple times in the first post as a serious issue and again throughout the thread. I've mentioned ways it could be addressed a number of times in ways that could only minimally interfere with the harm reduction benefits of these products being available for adults. All of that has been ignored by you. edit: just clarified the wording a bit. On Terra Firma fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Oct 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2019 19:39
|
|
|
On Terra Firma posted:That isn't regular use. That is at the time of the survey "Have you used these products in the past 30 days?". the 30d question is the baseline question for the population of children who are likely to become addicts. your response, in essence, is that only a quarter of the children surveyed had become so dependent they vaped nearly every day already. "but many of the regular smokers in high school are only DEVELOPING the massive addiction that leads to every day smoking" is not the compelling argument you think it is
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2019 19:49
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:the 30d question is the baseline question for the population of children who are likely to become addicts. your response, in essence, is that only a quarter of the children surveyed had become so dependent they vaped nearly every day already. That is not my position. Re-read the numbers. Of those that vaped more than 20 days 1% were never-tobacco users. 1% of 20%. That is a far cry from stating 20% or 30% of all high schoolers are regularly using e-cigarettes. It's a gross exaggeration and a misrepresentation of the data and I'm sorry but accurate data matters when you're managing public outreach and changing public policy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2019 19:57
|
|
|
On Terra Firma posted:That is not my position. Re-read the numbers. Of those that vaped more than 20 days 1% were never-tobacco users. when you are dealing with children, who are in the process of becoming addicts, trying to use the statistic of how many are already addicts as the relevant statistic is deliberately misleading at best
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2019 19:59
|
|
|
Apparently harm reduction for lifelong smokers: important keeping literal children from becoming lifelong tobacco users: well, about that, if u look at my figures
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2019 20:04
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:when you are dealing with children, who are in the process of becoming addicts, trying to use the statistic of how many are already addicts as the relevant statistic is deliberately misleading at best I'm not saying it's the only relevant statistic, but it is one that has curiously been omitted by you and everyone else bringing up teens vaping, including the FDA and CDC even though it's their own numbers. That number of never-users has remained pretty low, so the question I'm wondering is "If these have the raw addictive potential, where is the evidence that it is playing out among teens if use is up so high?" Is there really evidence of an "epidemic" or are we seeing something new that kids are experimenting with? Are our public policies and campaigns contributing to kids wanting to try Juuling? Is different messaging working better in other countries that have these products and low youth rates? What's the most effective way to cut off access without risking kids currently vaping to go back to smoking? You're not doing that though. What I want to know is what is the balance between keeping that number of teens vaping as close to non-existent as possible while giving smokers an avenue to quit using these devices. That has been my consistent goal throughout the thread and all the weird insinuations and accusations you guys have thrown at me. Herstory Begins Now posted:Apparently Yeah, helpful and accurate reflection of my position. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2019 20:08
|
|
|
When I was a teen in the late 2000s, smoking hookah was pretty much ubiquitous, especially among the stoner kids at my school. I don't remember any hookah panic even though that was way worse for us. They might have just pressured 21+ hookah bars to shut down.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2019 20:39
|
|
|
This is another number that strikes me as odd. I don't know if they are distinguishing between nicotine and THC use...? https://twitter.com/JeromeAdamsMD/status/1088427063680348160 https://twitter.com/JeromeAdamsMD/status/1089316890005123077 On Terra Firma fucked around with this message at 20:59 on Oct 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2019 20:56
|
|
|
Bullfrog posted:When I was a teen in the late 2000s, smoking hookah was pretty much ubiquitous, especially among the stoner kids at my school. Hookahs are large, impractical, expensive, and not something most people are doing regularly here. On the other hand, in places where they are culturally relevant they're a big problem and people absolutely do smoke hookah all day causing all the problems you would expect from people sitting around in smokey rooms.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2019 21:23
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:IMO it's loving insane that we have let almost 30% of high school kids become regular users of vapes, which as established above, are wrt addictive potential overwhelmingly functionally identical to cigarettes. do you think the best solution to the youth using vapes is totally banning of vapes or some kind of special restrictions not currently in the market?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 00:43
|
|
|
I was talking with my friend about the whole vaping thing and she mentioned that they actually advertise the Iqos in cigarette packages in Quebec. Jesus christ.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 06:07
|
|
|
I'm an asthmatic and I've been smoking cigarettes on and off for 10+ years. There is an extreme difference in how often I use my inhaler when I only vape. When I'm regularly smoking cigarettes, I pound through an inhaler in less than a month. When I'm only vaping, it takes me a few months. I'm hoping to quit vaping for good soon but at least right now, I can breathe.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 07:17
|
|
|
Eat The Rich posted:I'm an asthmatic and I've been smoking cigarettes on and off for 10+ years. There is an extreme difference in how often I use my inhaler when I only vape. When I'm regularly smoking cigarettes, I pound through an inhaler in less than a month. When I'm only vaping, it takes me a few months. I'm hoping to quit vaping for good soon but at least right now, I can breathe. With all the bans happening in the US it must really suck to live in constant fear that you might have to go back to smoking soon. I had been a smoker for years before switching to vaping and I actually enjoy nicotine use. I don't suffer any side-effects except for what you get from general stimulant use and don't plan to ever stop. Lucky, our political system is much less prone to moral panic and hysteria than the US one so luckily we can somehow waddle through this without bans until the soccer moms calm down in a couple of years.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 09:46
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:Apparently Prohibiting flavored vape products and heavily restricting sales makes smoking tobacco more appealing. Also, describing high schoolers who vape(largely in the 16-18 age cohort) as "literal children" completely robs them of their agency. We have seen this age cohort become leaders on social issues like global warming and gun control and we trust them to operate motor vehicles and be employed. They do not need to be protected from nicotine which, absent disastrous public policy proposals, has a safety profile similar to other mild-moderate stimulants. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 13:09
|
|
|
It's probably because they are, in fact, literal children whose bodies, notably their brains, haven't finished forming.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 14:37
|
|
|
FoolyCharged posted:It's probably because they are, in fact, literal children whose bodies, notably their brains, haven't finished forming. Are there any studies that have been done on older people who grew up when smoking as a teen was normal and socially acceptable to see if there are any differences in how their brain developed compared to those who didn't? The only studies I've seen that try tackling this are in mice.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 14:58
|
|
|
GABA ghoul posted:Lucky, our political system is much less prone to moral panic and hysteria than the US one so luckily we can somehow waddle through this without bans until the soccer moms calm down in a couple of years. I actually think a lot of the panic has stemmed from vaping being something that took off in white suburbs. When it comes to tobacco control a lot of policy is geared around that demographic rather than what products other groups use. Menthol in particular has somehow remained untouched while flavored tobacco products were banned. I'll never understand how menthol has been allowed to remain on the market all these years.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 17:33
|
|
|
vincentpricesboner posted:do you think the best solution to the youth using vapes is totally banning of vapes or some kind of special restrictions not currently in the market? Treat them a lot like cigarettes, make them a 21+ purchase with very harsh penalties to people who sell to anyone underage, heavily limit where and how they can be advertised. Apply most of the stuff limiting where tobacco products can be used to include vaping as well. As a general premise, any time someone hits the age of majority already addicted to something I think society has failed them, but that's just a basic component of sensible policy wrt addictive psychoactive compounds. Ironically I think vape shops might be a net good for this because they're easy to age gate Knifefan posted:Prohibiting flavored vape products and heavily restricting sales makes smoking tobacco more appealing. Also, describing high schoolers who vape(largely in the 16-18 age cohort) as "literal children" completely robs them of their agency. We have seen this age cohort become leaders on social issues like global warming and gun control and we trust them to operate motor vehicles and be employed. They do not need to be protected from nicotine which, absent disastrous public policy proposals, has a safety profile similar to other mild-moderate stimulants. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 17:53
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:Treat them a lot like cigarettes, make them a 21+ purchase with very harsh penalties to people who sell to anyone underage, heavily limit where and how they can be advertised. Apply most of the stuff limiting where tobacco products can be used to include vaping as well. As a general premise, any time someone hits the age of majority already addicted to something I think society has failed them, but that's just a basic component of sensible policy wrt addictive psychoactive compounds. Ironically I think vape shops might be a net good for this because they're easy to age gate Tobacco and vape products have vastly different safety profiles. It doesn't make sense to treat them equivalently because the harms are orders of magnitude apart. Dependency is not, in-and-of itself, a serious harm. 90% of western society uses caffeine on a daily basis, and about half are dependent. It makes more sense to treat nicotine like caffeine and less like tobacco products.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 18:39
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:Treat them a lot like cigarettes, make them a 21+ purchase with very harsh penalties to people who sell to anyone underage, heavily limit where and how they can be advertised. Apply most of the stuff limiting where tobacco products can be used to include vaping as well. As a general premise, any time someone hits the age of majority already addicted to something I think society has failed them, but that's just a basic component of sensible policy wrt addictive psychoactive compounds. Ironically I think vape shops might be a net good for this because they're easy to age gate Our opinion on this is in total alignment by the way except I think there should be a complete ban on advertising including within vape shops. If you go in there should be products on display (Usually in a glass case) so you know what they actually carry, but everything else should absolutely be prohibited. no signs or posters. Most people who work in a shop are knowledgeable enough to give recommendations about what someone should use especially if you're a first time visitor and trying to quit. For example some people absolutely need to start at a higher nic level so that they can overcome cravings for combustibles. I think a fair compromise would be allowing manufacturers to give shops brochures for their products to either show customers how the devices work in detail or train staff. There should also probably be some kind framework to prevent monopolies to stop the kind of consolidation that's been discussed. You can't do that unless you loosen costs to get a product to market though. I would rather have hundreds of companies competing for business and trust than 3-4 big tobacco companies cornering and dominating the market. Using past precedent would be helpful. So if you know pretty much all liquids are PG VG nic and flavoring and a handful get approved it makes no sense to force everyone to show why nearly identical products that come after have a net public health benefit through rigorous studies of each specific product. Right now I think it's set up so that if you sell one flavor each step up in nicotine has to go through it's own separate approval process. So you've got 1.5mg, 3mg, 6mg, 12mg, 18mg, 24mg and so on and each one requires it's on PMTA. It makes zero sense. This is especially true since every manufacturer pulls from the same ingredient lists and it all boils down to various recipes at this point. Devices are the same way. Set up standards so that people know their devices won't short or melt down the same way you would for cell phones or other electronic devices. If you wanted to go further you could say that all devices must utilize some type of temperature control that prohibits a coil from going beyond the point of combustion in cotton. There's a lot that can be done. We just aren't bothering to do it. I'm not super familiar with it but beer and liquor must have some type of system in place to streamline the process right...? Knifefan posted:Tobacco and vape products have vastly different safety profiles. It doesn't make sense to treat them equivalently because the harms are orders of magnitude apart. Dependency is not, in-and-of itself, a serious harm. 90% of western society uses caffeine on a daily basis, and about half are dependent. It makes more sense to treat nicotine like caffeine and less like tobacco products. Going to play devils advocate here and say I can see where the concern is since it's going to be impossible to overcome the stigma nicotine currently holds. I think you can go in a different direction though and heavily tax/regulate cigarettes in a way we aren't doing now. Just tax the everliving gently caress out of them in proportion to how harmful they are and make cost an additional hurdle in continuing dependence. If people want to save money they can vape. On Terra Firma fucked around with this message at 18:46 on Oct 5, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 18:40
|
|
|
Knifefan posted:Prohibiting flavored vape products and heavily restricting sales makes smoking tobacco more appealing. Also, describing high schoolers who vape(largely in the 16-18 age cohort) as "literal children" completely robs them of their agency. We have seen this age cohort become leaders on social issues like global warming and gun control and we trust them to operate motor vehicles and be employed. They do not need to be protected from nicotine which, absent disastrous public policy proposals, has a safety profile similar to other mild-moderate stimulants. ephebophilia, but from the perspective of a nicotine marketer
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 20:53
|
|
|
hot take: the problem isn't flavors, it's this poo poo being easily available at gas stations and grocery stores vs. having to go to a vape shop all the vape shops around me have been super anal about checking IDs for as long as I've been into it (so ~4 years ish?). meanwhile with Juul and etc, the only barrier to entry is "find the gas station with the cashiers that don't give a gently caress." take away that easy access and suddenly this poo poo will go back to Not Being A Massive Problem.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 23:16
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:hot take: the problem isn't flavors, it's this poo poo being easily available at gas stations and grocery stores vs. having to go to a vape shop This is my experience too. I was at a shop last week talking to the owner and a woman tried to come in with her son who was probably 8-9 and he pointed at them and just said "Nope. Out. He can't be here sorry." She turned around and left in a huff. He said she's a regular and she knows better. it's a case of not wanting to expose the kid and to cover his rear end. There must be shops that don't care about that kind of thing, which is why it would be worth the effort to secret shop them and give them a few legal smack downs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 14:31
|
|
|
Interesting letter from Iowa attorney general: https://www.iowaattorneygeneral.gov/media/cms/MillerOMB_follow_up__3_Oct_2019__Pu_AD6FE02B6AB9B.pdf Also holy gently caress what: quote:Youth vaping should also be placed in context with other youth risk behaviors. The Youth Risk Behavior Not trying to engage in whataboutism, but these numbers are terrifying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 15:10
|
|
|
On Terra Firma posted:There must be shops that don't care about that kind of thing, which is why it would be worth the effort to secret shop them and give them a few legal smack downs. the literal only shops I've ever been in that don't card me are ones where i've gotten to know all the employees which sucks rear end for me right now because I noticed really bad chud overtones at my main shop (they have a house flavor called "Thug Juice" that consists of, I poo poo you not, candy grape, menthol and watermelon  ) so I've been poking around at all the other shops in the area and they're either more expensive or don't do house juice at all... and they're inevitably, as mentioned, turbo anal about carding me even though i have a massive beard and my skin looks like leather
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 15:42
|
|
|
What's the actual physical problem with vaping non-counterfeit cartridges?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 21:28
|
|
|
dream9!bed!! posted:What's the actual physical problem with vaping non-counterfeit cartridges? That has more to do with the THC side of vaping than the nicotine consumption this thread is about.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 22:29
|
|
|
What are people's thoughts on banning juice sale higher than ~20mg / ml? I'm seeing some vapers suggest that solution rather than ban flavors.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2019 02:55
|
|
|
So take back everything we've ever said about vaping being safer. Turns out inhaling anything is going to give you cancer. New study that just came out. I am hoping to hear some more about who paid for the research and if there isn't something funny hear (because it doesn't make much sense to me scientifically). Its very prelimary research but should vape smoke causing a 4000% increase in the rate of lung cancer versus the control group. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/07/e-cigarettes-cause-lung-cancer-in-mice-finds-first-study-tying-vaping-to-cancer.html
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2019 03:23
|
|
|
vincentpricesboner posted:So take back everything we've ever said about vaping being safer. Turns out inhaling anything is going to give you cancer. New study that just came out. I am hoping to hear some more about who paid for the research and if there isn't something funny hear (because it doesn't make much sense to me scientifically). Its very prelimary research but should vape smoke causing a 4000% increase in the rate of lung cancer versus the control group. They used mice that apparently are pre-disposed to getting cancer to do the research which I assume is standard practice for this sort of thing. The weird part is that the mice who were exposed to PG/VG vapor without nicotine didn't get any type of cancer at all. I'm assuming this has to do with how nicotine can actually speed up the process of tumor growth once something has already appeared in the body. It doesn't seem to be a contributing cause though. Some comments from other researchers: https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-study-on-ecig-vapour-and-cancer-in-mice/ John Britton posted:“This study explores the effect of exposure to nicotine ecig vapour on mice. It shows that exposure to ecig vapour with nicotine causes more cancers than fresh air, but no more than you might reasonably expect by chance. Prof Peter Hajek posted:“The study has unclear relevance for human vapers. So I dunno what to take from this other than vaping without nicotine lowered the risk of cancer among mice who were pre-disposed to cancer.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2019 04:31
|
|
|
vincentpricesboner posted:So take back everything we've ever said about vaping being safer. Turns out inhaling anything is going to give you cancer. New study that just came out. I am hoping to hear some more about who paid for the research and if there isn't something funny hear (because it doesn't make much sense to me scientifically). Its very prelimary research but should vape smoke causing a 4000% increase in the rate of lung cancer versus the control group. jesus quote:In the NYU study, researchers found that e-cigarette vapor caused DNA damage in the lungs and bladder and “inhibits DNA repair in lung tissues.” Out of 40 mice exposed to e-cigarette vapor with nicotine over 54 weeks, 22.5% developed lung cancer and 57.5% developed precancerous lesions on the bladder.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2019 05:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 14:20 |
|
|
Interesting report related to how tobacco companies interfere or influence policy decisions. United States is pretty drat high up on the list. UK at the bottom. https://exposetobacco.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/GlobalTIIIndex_Report_2019.pdf
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2019 22:11
|
|