Something to keep in mind is that the tobacco industry has a ton of money, a demonstrated willingness to play dirty if needed, and a deeply vested interest in undermining companies like Juul. I'm not saying that the The Verge or Rachel Becker have any intention of defending the tobacco industry from disruptive startups, not am I suggesting that vaping in general or Juul in specific aren't be problematic. What I am sa…
Why is Juul worth $16B? It’s more like a cigarette than you think
21–30 of 43 posts
Re: Why is Juul worth $16B? It’s more like a cigarette than you think
#22Does Juul do any advertising? One of the biggest problems I see in the historical tobacco industry was how subversive the advertising was. I wonder if Juul goes down a similar path.
Re: Why is Juul worth $16B? It’s more like a cigarette than you think
#23Spourious claims about the chemical makeup of vapor? Check. Misinformed statements about what science found about the dangers of vaping vs cigarettes? Check. Citations of studies with no peer review, that likely don't say what the article claims? Check. Wrong information about the mechanics of vaping? Check. Boogyman chemistry? Check. No indicative knowledge about how people actually use these devices? Check. What ab…
Why did your jaw hit the floor for JUUL?
Re: Why is Juul worth $16B? It’s more like a cigarette than you think
#24Spourious claims about the chemical makeup of vapor? Check. Misinformed statements about what science found about the dangers of vaping vs cigarettes? Check. Citations of studies with no peer review, that likely don't say what the article claims? Check. Wrong information about the mechanics of vaping? Check. Boogyman chemistry? Check. No indicative knowledge about how people actually use these devices? Check. What ab…
Why do you go down mil(lileter?) nicotine as you progress? pardon my ignorance i have only vaped a few times. Why did your jaw hit the floor for JUUL?
Re: Why is Juul worth $16B? It’s more like a cigarette than you think
#25It feels like there's a premeditated process, here, in terms of timing. 1. Tobacco Cigarettes emerge as public health scare in the late 1990's. 2. McDonaldsization of Coffee via Starbucks in the late 1990's. 3. Cigarettes taxed and regulated with punishing costs and counter-media-manipulation. 4. Bindings introduced to market coffee with free wi-fi, boosting high-end coffee's incidental exposure to novice internet us…
If you've ever tried nicotine you'll quickly understand why caffeine could never substitute for it. Sure, they're both stimulants. But nicotine decreases anxiety. Caffeine increases it.
decreases intensity of the anxiety and duration as well, when measured in years.
Re: Why is Juul worth $16B? It’s more like a cigarette than you think
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's steam, no combustion happens
It's not steam, it's a vapor composed of propylene glycol and vegetable glycerin (plus optional flavorings and nicotine). It's not "water vapor" as many seem to be spouting.
Re: Why is Juul worth $16B? It’s more like a cigarette than you think
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you go down mil(lileter?) nicotine as you progress? pardon my ignorance i have only vaped a few times. Why did your jaw hit the floor for JUUL?
Most vaping devices (mods) produce much denser vapor and doing 50 mg/ml nicotine with them would not be pleasant even for an experienced smoker. People who use vaping to quit smoking gradually decrease nicotine concentration to wean themselves off nicotine.
In my experience, 50mg/ml in a low power device like a July is about equal to 9mg/ml in a sub-ohm device.
Re: Why is Juul worth $16B? It’s more like a cigarette than you think
#28It feels like there's a premeditated process, here, in terms of timing. 1. Tobacco Cigarettes emerge as public health scare in the late 1990's. 2. McDonaldsization of Coffee via Starbucks in the late 1990's. 3. Cigarettes taxed and regulated with punishing costs and counter-media-manipulation. 4. Bindings introduced to market coffee with free wi-fi, boosting high-end coffee's incidental exposure to novice internet us…
If you've ever tried nicotine you'll quickly understand why caffeine could never substitute for it. Sure, they're both stimulants. But nicotine decreases anxiety. Caffeine increases it.
Which you'd know, if you ever stopped to consider how to adjust your mood with either.
Caffeine introduces anxiety and irritability on downslope, after about two half-lives, or 12-ish hours (6 hour half life). On the up slope, caffeine provides a long slowly declining period of alertness and performance. The initial buzz comes on strong and tapers off over time.
People seek caffeine to perform. But a slow sinking feeling appears near the end of the day.
Nicotine modifies mood on the other side of the bend, with it's presence evening out irritability with immediate relief. The trail off goes unnoticed until a sudden urge kicks in, to bump one's self back up onto the plateau.
Nicotine is sought to cure or cool an immediate pang, which leaves the impression of easing into relaxation, which degrades silently until suddenly noticed as an urge to re-up.
The perception of nicotine is downtime, even though the dosage process and serum curve is the usual spike and tapered downslope, people learn modify the nicotine downslope differently, by catching the drop-off before cravings become desperate.
Which is why cigarettes are designed as they are, and achieve product success the way they do. Metering doses at an almost hourly rate, with twenty dose packs marketed to afford exactly that behavior.
Coffee, as a liquid, is readily either sipped or chugged as needed, and has different preparation and consumption habits, so its marketing is different.
Caffeine's downslope is handled differently, since the withdrawal effects, are separated by longer distances of up to 48 hours, and because circadian rhythms are more drastically effected. Consuming in the late afternoon results in insomnia, so the better choice is to cure the anxious late day mood disruptions with food and alcohol, and stave off withdrawal (vasodilation migraines, etc) the next morning.
Re: Why is Juul worth $16B? It’s more like a cigarette than you think
#29Spourious claims about the chemical makeup of vapor? Check. Misinformed statements about what science found about the dangers of vaping vs cigarettes? Check. Citations of studies with no peer review, that likely don't say what the article claims? Check. Wrong information about the mechanics of vaping? Check. Boogyman chemistry? Check. No indicative knowledge about how people actually use these devices? Check. What ab…
> I was told it has 50 mil nic and my jaw hit the floor. Those that vape knows that's a crazy number
Since the earliest days of vaping, it's been easy to get liquids at varying nicotine levels, downright common to have them without nicotine at all, and it's been understood practically as a first principle that one can gradually taper down the nicotine levels as an effective means of smoking / overall nic cessation.
Along comes Juul, with patents for more effective nic delivery, a $16B valuation and >$1B capital, trying to reach people who aren't necessarily tuned into this niche at all, coming to market with exactly one nicotine option: ultra freaking high, apparently over double what for a long time was the standard 'highest' option available from most e-liquid vendors (18mg/mL). These guys seriously only plan to start selling "lower-dose pods" at some later point.
I'm not so sure that any significant portion of the market they're angling for (virgins to the product space) is likely to progress to "more advanced setups", not if Juul is their point of entry. In any case, Juul's rising will probably lead to higher median nic levels in the market at large, as competitors whose product would otherwise seem "weak" try to reach Juul's customers.
Makes sense, I guess, that the guys in this space getting funded would be those who are the most amoral - cranking nic levels up while aiming to deliver it with more punch, not even pretending to support tapering off nic entirely, keeping them on the tit for now while probably offering unspecified lower levels in the future. On one hand they talk about their noble mission to get people off the hated cigarettes and their outreach to keep everything above-board and 21+, on the other they make sure social media is carpet bombed with cool young guys + gals vapin Juuls.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not outraged or clamouring for them to be legislated to their doom or anything. I'm truly impressed by how brazen and full of shit these guys are.
Re: Why is Juul worth $16B? It’s more like a cigarette than you think
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you've ever tried nicotine you'll quickly understand why caffeine could never substitute for it. Sure, they're both stimulants. But nicotine decreases anxiety. Caffeine increases it.
Actually, they both do the same thing, but attack different sides of the mood slope. Which you'd know, if you ever stopped to consider how to adjust your mood with either. Caffeine introduces anxiety and irritability on downslope, after about two half-lives, or 12-ish hours (6 hour half life). On the up slope, caffeine provides a long slowly declining period of alertness and performance. The initial buzz comes on str…
The neurology is totally different. Caffeine primarily affects the heart rate via adenosine (A1R) antagonism. Nicotine binds to the ion channel nAChR which is expressed all over the brain and the nervous system. Full agonists of nAChR cause convulsive seizures, while antagonists are paralytic, but nicotine is a partial agonist, producing a sort of stability.
That's why nicotine is anxiolytic: it interferes with spikes and droughts of acetylcholine, smoothing the highs and lows of neural activation. The brain responds by "sensitizing", changing acetylcholine more dramatically in response to stimuli, and increasing the density of nACh receptors. That's why nicotine withdrawal is so awful: every mood is enhanced and you can't calm down.
By contrast, caffeine, which primarily affects the A1 receptors that are expressed in cardiac neurons and smooth muscle tissue, is obviously never anxiolytic. A faster heartbeat does not produce calmness. The faster heartbeat increases the availability of energy in the brain and muscle, producing wakefulness. It has some other effects in the brain, particularly the basal forebrain, where inhibiting A1 also promotes wakefulness, but the cardiac effects of A1 dominate its practical effects to the extent that A1 agonists (opposite of caffeine) have never been implemented as sedatives because of their tendency to produce life-threatening drops in heart rate and blood pressure.
You'd think, having studied this so much, I'd be more responsible, but humans are a funny animal. Anyway, there's no way a pure stimulant is going to substitute for an anxiolytic that takes effect in ten seconds. It makes sense in zero realities.