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

San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 426 posts

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#141

Post by buttcoinslol »

ladberg wrote: post #81
JamesBarney wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There has been an increase in vaping, but the health benefits of vaping instead of smoking are so large that they swamp the ill health effects from increased vaping unless you get 20 new vapers for each person who quits smoking. In this debate people really underestimate how bad smoking is for you. UK NHS estimates e-cigarettes about 95% less damaging than smoking. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/vaping-qui…

Anecdotally, I (as a college student) know more than 20x the number of people who vape than people who smoke. Smoking is bad, but vaping is becoming incredibly mainstream with young people to the point where it's a bigger health risk.

~20 years ago when I was in high school/college, 90%+ of those people you know that vape would have been cigarette smokers. I don't think you grasp just how much harm reduction there is from all those kids vaping instead of smoking cigarettes.

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#142

Post by samstave »

So this sounds super ridiculous:

1) so vaping pot is ok? Vs nicotine

2) the largest fucking evape co (JUUL) is hq in sf

3) JUUL is investing heavily into vape tech and cannabis

4) have you ever been to any place in SF without smokers

5) SF has the highest number of michelin starred resta of any city on the planet - which means that you have a bunch of stressed out industry ppl who are going to smoke cigs/vape cigs

—

Also, who the heck is “passing” this bullshit. They should have a /r/ for “stupid things sf wants to do”

I dont smoke cigs or vape or even smoke cannabis!!! Yet i build cannabis tech. But get your nimby ass out of here and stop acting progressive.

Progressive is to force the tech companies to provide data and services to help you manage city sentiment.

Because youre failing at being progressive.

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#144

Post by QuickToBan »

scarejunba wrote: post #130
QuickToBan wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a result the entire planet is in grave danger due to climate change. How do we fix this? To borrow a little from Switzerland, I think a direct democracy at every level of government is needed. But first we must have many more remote jobs so people don't feel pressured to live in cities. They can then result in the creation of new cities elsewhere with a direct democracy via cryptographically secure apps.

A direct democracy would be even worse. In California, prop 13 didn’t come from the legislature. It came through ballot proposition. And that law is the granddaddy of second and third order effects.

I totally agree that it would be worse in the absence of an app based system. The point is to be adaptive and correct the legislative mistakes that get made. Adaptability is always a key requirement for the success of any system. Right now this rate of change is IMHO too bottlenecked.

A two-thirds vote can also be minimally required for major changes, so as to stabilize the system.

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#146

Post by slg »

lozaning wrote: post #99
slg wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you support methadone being freely available over the counter? After all, it is a valuable tool in helping get people off more dangerous opioids.

As per the NPR program I heard last night, this is already the case in SF. Info for those interested here: https://harmreduction.org/issues/overdose-prevention/dope-sf...

They are providing a drug to treat overdoses which is an entirely different thing than a drug that is used to ease someone out of a chemical addiction. There are different priorities when someone is minutes from dying rather being addicted to a deadly substance that might take years to kill them.

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#147

Post by munk-a »

dvtrn wrote: post #56
munk-a wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know a bunch of people with you and e-cigs have real benefits for allowing people to ween off the addiction that patches never offered... it's just that the marketing actions of these companies have been incredibly irresponsible and the inaction from the US Surgeon General has been embarrassing. I really don't want anyone to feel shamed over their smoking habit but it's an unhealthy thing and if you get into as an…

When you talk about irresponsible marketing, do you mean from the e-cig companies specifically and do you have examples? My only experience with the e-cigarette marketing have been commercials where some guy is standing there telling you the same type of stories being shared here “I used to smoke x amount of cigarettes a day, now I use this”, followed by the usual boilerplate “nicotine is an addictive substance” disc…

I do have an example, the skytrain station I usually disembark on recently was plastered with vape ads[1][2]. I don't really see why e-cigarettes should need to advertise at all, they could simply be devices suggested to smokers by medical professionals as a cessation aid.

I think we can also look to history when it comes to the flavouring of things, it used to be that medicines would be sweetened to override the natural bitter or acidic tastes of the active ingredients but this led to more abuse of those substances.

[1] https://shawglobalnews.files.wordpress.com/2019/05/vaping-ad...

[2] https://shawglobalnews.files.wordpress.com/2019/05/web-vape-...

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#148

Post by conanbatt »

lovecg wrote: post #109
mattoxic wrote: post #34

I hate cigarettes, I hate the litter, the smell, and the smokers' belief that they have the divine right to pollute my airspace. I also hate the taxes I spend on keeping them in hospital - but. E cigarettes don't cause litter, the smoke is far less offensive. If people are going to smoke they will smoke. SF would be far better off banning actual cigarettes.

Btw, it’s counterintuitive and morbid to think about, but the healthcare and other public spending is actually less for smokers than nonsmokers on average: they tend to die right around retirement age before social security and expensive healthcare is needed. See e.g. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1210319

Hah! This is a fantastic argument I hadn't heard before.

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#150

Post by slg »

Nacraile wrote: post #76
slg wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you support methadone being freely available over the counter? After all, it is a valuable tool in helping get people off more dangerous opioids.

Would you support methadone being banned while heroin is available over the counter? Because that's the proper equivalent comparison to the e-cig policy.

It doesn't have to be an either/or situation. I would be perfectly fine if cities also wanted to make it harder to buy heroin/traditional cigarettes.
Post reply on HN