Judge Gives E-Cigarette Makers 10 Months to Seek FDA Review • Hacker News Board

Re: Judge Gives E-Cigarette Makers 10 Months to Seek FDA Review

#41

Post by umvi » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 3:18 AM UTC

exolymph wrote: post #22

darkpuma wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do you think the nicotine in any of these products comes from? The whole damn thing is the tobacco industry, not merely the parts of it wearing the legacy brands on their sleeves. The reputation of the tobacco industry is well earned. Vigilant regulation is necessary to keep it on a leash.

If there's market demand for it, nicotine synthesis will probably get cheaper: https://www.wired.com/2016/06/vaping-industry-wants-go-post-... It's dubious that nicotine itself is bad for you: https://www.gwern.net/Nicotine

> It's dubious that nicotine itself is bad for you

I mean, can we agree substances that enslave you - and by extension your pocketbook - are "bad for you" regardless of if they cause you to die at a sooner age?

Re: Judge Gives E-Cigarette Makers 10 Months to Seek FDA Review

#42

Post by sokoloff » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 3:28 AM UTC

umvi wrote: post #41

exolymph wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there's market demand for it, nicotine synthesis will probably get cheaper: https://www.wired.com/2016/06/vaping-industry-wants-go-post-... It's dubious that nicotine itself is bad for you: https://www.gwern.net/Nicotine

> It's dubious that nicotine itself is bad for you I mean, can we agree substances that enslave you - and by extension your pocketbook - are "bad for you" regardless of if they cause you to die at a sooner age?

It is likely that far more people are “enslaved” (your word) by caffeine than nicotine.

I don’t see a significant problem there either and if nicotine turns out to be roughly equally damaging (not much), is it really a problem?

Refined sugar is probably more damaging than either of them.

Re: Judge Gives E-Cigarette Makers 10 Months to Seek FDA Review

#43

Post by rthomas6 » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 3:30 AM UTC

umvi wrote: post #41

exolymph wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there's market demand for it, nicotine synthesis will probably get cheaper: https://www.wired.com/2016/06/vaping-industry-wants-go-post-... It's dubious that nicotine itself is bad for you: https://www.gwern.net/Nicotine

> It's dubious that nicotine itself is bad for you I mean, can we agree substances that enslave you - and by extension your pocketbook - are "bad for you" regardless of if they cause you to die at a sooner age?

No. I like coffee and I don't see it as bad for me in moderation. Caffeine is addictive but it would be hard to convince me that it's carte blanche bad for me just because it's addictive.

Re: Judge Gives E-Cigarette Makers 10 Months to Seek FDA Review

#44

Post by yaks_hairbrush » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 3:41 AM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #9

d1zzy wrote: post #3

I hope this doesn't result in e-cigs getting banned in the US because that would be terrible. I live in the same house with someone who has been smoking since they were a teenager (quite common where we're from) and e-cigs has allowed them to stop smoking cigarettes which may or may not benefit them that much but it most certainly benefits me (no smell of smoke in the house, no second hand smoking, etc). They have tr…

The simple solution there seems to be making e-cigs available via a prescription as a smoking cessation/avoidance device.

Oh, dear god no. Nicotine inhalers exist, and I went to a doctor to get a prescription for them a few years before ecigs became prevalent. The doctor insisted that Chantix was the way to go. I reacted badly to Chantix.

I finally quit cigarettes by switching to ecigs, and eventually quit those as well. Actually, I just passed the 5 year mark nicotine-free a couple weeks ago.

Point is, doctors are happy prescribing Chantix, which is bad, and the better option may simply not be prescribed to folks for whom it would to a lot of good.

Re: Judge Gives E-Cigarette Makers 10 Months to Seek FDA Review

#45

Post by kragen » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 4:03 AM UTC

Sometimes people wonder why progress seems to be so slow nowadays. This is an example of the kind of thing that suggests that regulation is a major brake on progress; perhaps this is why the center of gravity of world progress has shifted from Europe and the US to China.

Re: Judge Gives E-Cigarette Makers 10 Months to Seek FDA Review

#46

Post by kragen » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 4:08 AM UTC

Symmetry wrote: post #18

4ntonius8lock wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> obviously nothing will be banned Tobacco: 500,000 Alcohol Deaths: 88,000 All Non Alcohol Drug Overdoses (including prescriptions): 64,000 Marijuana Deaths: 0 Yearly statistics for the USA. Seems your 'obvious' might not be so obvious for the rest of us. But then again, I think many 'obvious' things for you are not obvious to the rest of us. Like the muddled thinking related to children: 1st, it's already illegal to…

Nobody dies from Marijuana overdoses but having smoke in your lungs is having smoke in your lungs whether it comes form a cigarette or a joint or a campfire and it's pretty much equally bad each way. Users tend to spend less time smoking joints than cigarettes but I'd be very surprised if the incidence of lung cancer from marijuana was zero.

The largest studies of lung-cancer–marijuana-use association were also very surprised to find that the incidence of lung cancer from marijuana was, apparently, statistically indistinguishable from zero.

What you say is common sense. Like the earth being flat and the sun revolving around the earth, though, it just happens to be completely wrong.

Re: Judge Gives E-Cigarette Makers 10 Months to Seek FDA Review

#47

Post by kragen » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 4:10 AM UTC

funkjunky wrote: post #20

[flagged]

You cannot be a liberal and also be in favor of prohibiting e-cigarettes. It's a contradiction.

The tone of your comment — insulting, hyperbolic, and sarcastic — is not up to the standards of the quality of discourse we attempt to maintain on this site.

Re: Judge Gives E-Cigarette Makers 10 Months to Seek FDA Review

#48

Post by pessimizer » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 4:20 AM UTC

Symmetry wrote: post #18

4ntonius8lock wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> obviously nothing will be banned Tobacco: 500,000 Alcohol Deaths: 88,000 All Non Alcohol Drug Overdoses (including prescriptions): 64,000 Marijuana Deaths: 0 Yearly statistics for the USA. Seems your 'obvious' might not be so obvious for the rest of us. But then again, I think many 'obvious' things for you are not obvious to the rest of us. Like the muddled thinking related to children: 1st, it's already illegal to…

Nobody dies from Marijuana overdoses but having smoke in your lungs is having smoke in your lungs whether it comes form a cigarette or a joint or a campfire and it's pretty much equally bad each way. Users tend to spend less time smoking joints than cigarettes but I'd be very surprised if the incidence of lung cancer from marijuana was zero.

> having smoke in your lungs is having smoke in your lungs whether it comes form a cigarette or a joint

This is not a thing that's true, it's a thing you assume. Having different smokes or vapors in your lungs can have different effects, just as drinking different liquids can have different effects. Tobacco smoke causes cancers. The more elements in another smoke that are shared with tobacco (or other plants that cause disease) the more the new smoke should be suspect, and it suggests a direction for initial testing. We can't just treat all odors as cancer-causing; vaping doesn't even involve burning vegetable matter, so even if burning some chemicals common to all plants causes cancer, that wouldn't make vaping suspect.

Re: Judge Gives E-Cigarette Makers 10 Months to Seek FDA Review

#49

Post by pessimizer » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 4:22 AM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #9

d1zzy wrote: post #3

I hope this doesn't result in e-cigs getting banned in the US because that would be terrible. I live in the same house with someone who has been smoking since they were a teenager (quite common where we're from) and e-cigs has allowed them to stop smoking cigarettes which may or may not benefit them that much but it most certainly benefits me (no smell of smoke in the house, no second hand smoking, etc). They have tr…

The simple solution there seems to be making e-cigs available via a prescription as a smoking cessation/avoidance device.

Not in the US, the price would go up 10x.

Re: Judge Gives E-Cigarette Makers 10 Months to Seek FDA Review

#50

Post by Nas808 » Sat, Jul 13, 2019, 4:23 AM UTC

d1zzy wrote: post #3

I hope this doesn't result in e-cigs getting banned in the US because that would be terrible. I live in the same house with someone who has been smoking since they were a teenager (quite common where we're from) and e-cigs has allowed them to stop smoking cigarettes which may or may not benefit them that much but it most certainly benefits me (no smell of smoke in the house, no second hand smoking, etc). They have tr…

I smoked for 15 years and tried all the usual quitting aids many times. E-cigs were the only thing that worked for me, but I’m a bit concerned about the long term affects of vaping.