Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 269 posts

Re: Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace

#31

Post by josho »

jrockway wrote: post #20
stinos wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I also highly recommend e-cigarettes, your story is of course the ideal picture of how it should go. But it might not go that easy for everyone: even with the use of it I'm having a hard time to quit the actual cigarretes completely and it's not due to the nicotine (in fact I do not know what exactly still makes me crave for those hand-rolled cigarettes). Also nicotine can be a pleasant drug to use. Which is li…

I'm not sure why the goal is quitting. Nicotine itself isn't the problem with cigarettes, it's just a stimulant and has the usual stimulant effects. If you have high blood pressure or trouble sleeping, probably not a great drug to use. But the same can be said of coffee, which is perfectly legal. https://www.gwern.net/Nicotine is interesting reading. Of course, e-cigarette liquid is not only nicotine, so who knows wh…

> Nicotine itself isn't the problem with cigarettes, it's just a stimulant and has the usual stimulant effects

Agreed, it's tobacco that is the primary issue.

I've been curious to adopt the e-cig for the stimulant aspect. I likely won't, but will admit to being curious if it would be a productivity boost. I'd bet the e-cig companies could gain a whole new market if they published some quasi-scientific material on the productivity benefits of nicotine.

Re: Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace

#32

Post by josho »

linkregister wrote: post #26
taneq wrote: post #23

Do e-cigarettes really have a reputation as a 'menace'? I've never heard anyone express any significant concern about them on an individual level (certainly nowhere near as much as about traditional cigarettes), and yet I've read countless news articles decrying them. It seems odd.

Only in U.S. cities will I see scare-tactic advertisements against e-cigarettes. What's strange to me is that the Truth campaign is sponsoring some of them. The Truth campaign is a result of a liability suit of several states vs the cigarette companies, and it is intended to pay for anti-smoking advertisements and smoking cessation programs. It appears to be a blatant violation of the terms of the judgement.

Wow, that's a dirty tactic. Especially when you consider that what's bad about smoking is tobacco and e-cigs don't necessarily have tobacco.

Re: Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace

#33

Post by LeifCarrotson »

syshum wrote: post #7
saurik wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I realize this often isn't the case, but the pursuit of taxing specific behaviors is supposed to only be used to fund things caused by that behavior: that way if some people are costing the government money, they pay the price rather than all of society, making everyone's incentives align. If those people stop doing the thing, then the cost is gone and the government should not care that they aren't collecting the mo…

>>I realize this often isn't the case, but the pursuit of taxing specific behaviors is supposed to only be used to fund things caused by that behavior: That is only for the press release.. It is never actually that way. Almost all taxation applied to a general fund, meaning all taxes are simply put in a large pool, then various programs are funded from that pool. There are almost never any actual legal rules that req…

> all taxes are simply put in a large pool

> I never support using taxation for social control

Yes, money is fungible, and so gas tax, alcohol tax, and cigarette taxes collected may not be applied to covering the costs of that activity. Even putting it in a specific fund doesn't completely fix the problem, it only establishes a minimum support for that fund's target. Make gas tax specifically fund road surface repairs, and then the DOT can use part of the general fund that is freed up for other purposes.

However, it seems very reasonable to use taxation as a sort of softer hammer to create an incentive or disincentive for various activities. In a way, the government's only power is in its monopoly on legal violence. It can do nothing but kill or imprison you by force. Sure, it can issue fines, or garnish your wages (effectively the same thing), or remove your drivers license, - but the fine has teeth only because they'll imprison you if you fail to pay. And if you try to fight your way out of captivity you'll either be pathetically overpowered or shot. Furthermore, criminal punishments require prosecution in a court, which is expensive and slow.

It would be unreasonable to try to reduce alcoholism by arresting people, charging them with drinking, and sentencing them with a $0.25 fine. It would also be unreasonable to pass a law requiring everyone to buy a house, get married and have 2.54 children, or be arrested and jailed.

Instead, taxation offers a much gentler stick, and sometimes even a carrot. Increase taxation on behavior that society finds to be objectionable or harmful - smoking, drinking, gambling, etc. Offer tax rebates for behaviors that society finds to be valuable: donating to charity, helping the environment, raising a family, owning a home. Taxation is definitely an effective tool for social control. Do you have an alternative? Or do you suggest that government should not be involved in social control?

Re: Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace

#34

Post by awinder »

tankenmate wrote: post #30
elorant wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a former smoker I believe that the best way to quit smoking is cold turkey. Sure, the withdrawal phase is a hell but in my case that helped me realize just how addictive that shit was. Before I’d never imagine that quitting would cause me depression or sleeping problems. All that, and a lot more, helped me understand how much my body was reliant on cigarettes. From my experience most smokers don’t realize how addi…

And yet the numbers say that people who go through phased withdrawal using e-cigarettes are more likely to give up...

If I remember correctly, cold turkey has worse rates for initial quitting but the lowest rates of people returning to smoking for those who "made it"

Re: Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace

#35

Post by LeifCarrotson »

inimino wrote: post #28
Synaesthesia wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no problem with taxes on harmful products like tobacco and alcohol since they are a harm to society and a burden on society.

How about sugar?

Sugar does cause some harm (obesity and associated health costs). Its tax should be commensurate with this harm. However, it is used in both healthy and unhealthy foods, so perhaps the tax should be on unhealthy foods rather than on the sugar itself.

Re: Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace

#36

Post by awinder »

jrockway wrote: post #20
stinos wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I also highly recommend e-cigarettes, your story is of course the ideal picture of how it should go. But it might not go that easy for everyone: even with the use of it I'm having a hard time to quit the actual cigarretes completely and it's not due to the nicotine (in fact I do not know what exactly still makes me crave for those hand-rolled cigarettes). Also nicotine can be a pleasant drug to use. Which is li…

I'm not sure why the goal is quitting. Nicotine itself isn't the problem with cigarettes, it's just a stimulant and has the usual stimulant effects. If you have high blood pressure or trouble sleeping, probably not a great drug to use. But the same can be said of coffee, which is perfectly legal. https://www.gwern.net/Nicotine is interesting reading. Of course, e-cigarette liquid is not only nicotine, so who knows wh…

Nicotine has stimulative and depressant effects, depending on environment/ mood of the user. It's actually one of the more interesting facets of the drug

Re: Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace

#37

Post by gr3yh47 »

awinder wrote: post #34
tankenmate wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet the numbers say that people who go through phased withdrawal using e-cigarettes are more likely to give up...

If I remember correctly, cold turkey has worse rates for initial quitting but the lowest rates of people returning to smoking for those who "made it"

IIRC it has to do with the anguish of quitting - if you went through the difficulty and pain of quitting cold turkey you probably don't want that to be for nothing

Re: Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace

#39

Post by bbarn »

thirdsun wrote: post #14

For anyone looking to quit smoking I can't recommend e-cigarettes enough. As a very passionate former smoker I got off the habit pretty much accidentally and without even trying in a timeframe of about half a year. And it actually started with the intend to find a cheaper alternative to expensive cigarettes without any desire to quit. The key is to steadily reduce the amount of nicotine in the liquid you're using. On…

Yep. 20 years of smoking, failing at every cessation method that I've heard of, was finally beaten with 3 months of e-cig tapering for me too. I was actually content just keep using it, but my machine broke on an out of town trip, and I realized after a few days I didn't miss it like I did when I'd try to quit smoking.

These anti-vape ads infuriate me. I don't even use one anymore, haven't for over a year, and every time I see one of those ads I think there might go another person who had a real chance to quit smoking cigarettes.

Re: Safer to Puff, E-Cigarettes Can’t Shake Their Reputation as a Menace

#40

Post by koyote »

jrockway wrote: post #2

The reality is that tobacco taxes fund a lot of the government, and there is no replacement for that income source if people stop smoking cigarettes. Thus the tobacco companies are happy to lobby against e-cigarettes to protect their revenue stream and the government is happy to support them because it's their revenue stream too. It's unfortunate, because it's largely a tax on the poor. The rich can afford prescripti…

Could that be a reason states are slowly legalising Marijuana?
Post reply on HN