161–170 of 174 posts
Meh. Even if they kill 100,000 Americans per year, that would probably be one of the greatest public health wins in history.
This is true. Our starting point isn’t zero deaths, it’s the hundreds of thousands of people in the US who die due to smoking tobacco. If you cut that in half, that’s a win. This is what harm reduction is all about.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Another vector of harm to consider — Keep in mind that “vapor” is used to disguise that, in all cases whether nicotine or pot or etc, people are heating up a substance to its smoke point and inhaling that smoke. They use “vapor” because it sounds like “water vapor” - which is harmless - but it’s definitely not that. Marijuana cartridges use marijuana oil or MCT oil as a base, for example. Nicotine uses glycol or othe…
Corrections below, thanks all! Glad this will be considered by a few people that replied, even if I fail at the precise sciences of it :(
> One exam, though, picked up something unusual — evidence of abnormal immune cells in his lungs — generally associated with a rare, potentially deadly pneumonia seen in older people who accidentally inhale droplets from oil-based laxatives like mineral oil.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/one-mans-near-death-ex...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly, I think switching from something which WILL kill you to something which might have as-yet-undiscovered long term health implications is an absolute win.
Not nearly as much of a win as not inhaling any smoke or vapor at all though. If vaping is a path to quitting altogether then that can be a win. If it's just a different vice then no. It's probably never going to be 100% safe to inhale foreign substances into your lungs
No? Even if you don't quit, it's still almost certainly a health win to switch to vaping from cigarettes. If it's a path to quitting for you that's great. Even if someone is not going to quit them, switching is still good.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is true. Our starting point isn’t zero deaths, it’s the hundreds of thousands of people in the US who die due to smoking tobacco. If you cut that in half, that’s a win. This is what harm reduction is all about.
You can easily cut them not just in half, but completely, by banning smoking.
How about putting a ban on smoking of all sorts? Seems pretty straightforward.
So I've been saying something like this for years now. HOW do we know something is not going wrong without any long term/clinical data (ESPECIALLY around these custom flavours that people sometimes roll out themselves)? I think it's completely presumptuous when people tout vaping as being much safer than cigarettes. We didn't all wake up one day knowing smoking was bad - it was a long road filled with politics, scien…
Keep in mind that the main issue with cigarettes is what is in them: Carncinogens. Not just anything gives cancer. If something doesn't have carcinogens, like vapes, it doesn't cause cancer. And, as far as I know, the cancer bit is what makes cigarettes so bad.
Not only. The cancer is the long game. The shorter game is the risk of cardiovascular disease and stroke. Nicotine is one of the culprits, not the generic 'carcinogens' which you only find in cigarettes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Smoking and vaping, unlike other vices like drinking or hard drugs, have the property of dragging in all of your entourage should they want it or not.
There's a very toxic part of our society who wants to control what millions other people do, "for their own good." This type of article is a dog whistle to those type of people.
So I've been saying something like this for years now. HOW do we know something is not going wrong without any long term/clinical data (ESPECIALLY around these custom flavours that people sometimes roll out themselves)? I think it's completely presumptuous when people tout vaping as being much safer than cigarettes. We didn't all wake up one day knowing smoking was bad - it was a long road filled with politics, scien…
We have to weight a complex set of circumstances: - smoking is an exceptionally harmful habit, so just by coming up with any other activity at random one is likely to end up healthier - this also means advising smokers to switch to vaping even without knowing the health effects of vaping makes sense - marketing vaping to non-smokers should be severely limited though - marketing vaping to kids like juul does, should b…
That is exactly my point. You're presuming it's healthier, yea? If you can link to any proper long term study saying that, I'd be more than happy to agree with this.
How about putting a ban on smoking of all sorts? Seems pretty straightforward.
Awesome, can’t wait to replicate the resounding successes of alcohol and drug prohibition. Alcohol usage dropped to zero throughout the 1920s and there were no unintended consequences right?