231–240 of 247 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nicotine is itself a carcinogen. But in general, smokeless tobacco products (including vaping) are much less damaging to your health than smoking.
> Nicotine is itself a carcinogen. No, no it's not. It's a teratogen.
Why so many comments about a ban? There isn't any mention of a ban... even if prosecuted for marketing to minors and found guilty, does not mean the product will be banned... Should Juul be found guilty they will be punished via fines, just like a tobacoo company. Of course Juul knew this and decided it was worth it because if their device went viral, which it did, they would be locked in as a market leader, which th…
> Why so many comments about a ban? New York State banned flavored e-cigarettes recently, on the grounds that they encourage kids to take up vaping; that ban wasn't specifically targeted at Juul (who saw the writing on the wall and stopped selling flavors last year) but that's the brand name everyone knows, so that's why they're catching the investigative heat now.
What? Juul still sells flavors, even if you select that you live in NY or MI (also banning flavors) on the popup when you enter the site: https://www.juul.com/shop/pods
One thing that gets lost in Juul and vaping supporters is just how bad nicotine addiction is for your personal life. I recently quit nicotine a few months ago and it made a big difference for me. Nicotine withdrawal kicks in very quick which is why smokers take constant breaks. The anxiety, the grumpiness, irritability and anger you feel as a smoker when you are without nicotine will piss off your partner, make you s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, I think it should be banned. This is not draconian, that is a faulty argument. The ‘Vaping’ to which a ban would refer is not a human right, it is a commercial activity which is demonstrably harmful. The details and qualifications and counterfactuals and slippery slope arguments don’t matter. If you want to make your own inhaler and your own juice then be my guest. But making money off of it? That should be banne…
Mutually beneficial exchange, e.g. Making money through selling people things they want, is the foundation of society. If I want to give my money to someone else, in exchange for something I want and enjoy, that doesn’t hurt you - why should you care? You are not an injured party. You don’t like it, you don’t need to buy it. But outlawing something because you don’t like it is just vicious. All that said, I don’t vap…
Nicotine products cause only harm to society. That’s enough. Any other argument for individual freedom or benefit is moot. We should ban commercial enterprises based on nicotine. There is one moment when this is possible, which is now. Anyone who thinks that vaping reduces harm from cigarettes is dreaming. Why on earth do we want to spend the next 50 years studying vaping and understanding the risks and benefits of life long vaporised nicotine use, so that Juul’s founders can make a lot of money? If you enjoy moderate and sensible recreational use of nicotine - sorry.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, I think it should be banned. This is not draconian, that is a faulty argument. The ‘Vaping’ to which a ban would refer is not a human right, it is a commercial activity which is demonstrably harmful. The details and qualifications and counterfactuals and slippery slope arguments don’t matter. If you want to make your own inhaler and your own juice then be my guest. But making money off of it? That should be banne…
Should candy be banned? Demonstrably harmful commercial activity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mutually beneficial exchange, e.g. Making money through selling people things they want, is the foundation of society. If I want to give my money to someone else, in exchange for something I want and enjoy, that doesn’t hurt you - why should you care? You are not an injured party. You don’t like it, you don’t need to buy it. But outlawing something because you don’t like it is just vicious. All that said, I don’t vap…
Mutually beneficial exchange? You fail to really ask who benefits, and the answer is Juul and company. Anyway, the ‘it’s my money’ argument is untenable, society doesn’t run that way. We should never indulge any interest merely because it exists.
We absolutely should. Blocking someone from something they desire, from their "pursuit of happiness" is patently imoral. Prohibitions don't work because people want what they want.
> You fail to really ask who benefits
The customer benefits from getting what they want in nicotine, and the company benefits from getting what they want in money.
Benefit is entirely in personal perception.
Just because you don't believe the person is better off for getting nicotine products, doesn't mean they don't.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Should candy be banned? Demonstrably harmful commercial activity.
This is a bad faith argument.
It's obviously an attempt to get you to clarify your position by showing if/how you differentiate a case that fits within your previously-stated criteria but we assume is actually excluded from your judgement.
A tainted, unregulated THC product killed people. That is bad. That does not mean we should immediately ban all vaping devices. There should be long term studies done on devices and juices in order to determine health effects, and there should be audits on vape juice manufacturers to make sure they aren’t putting really bad stuff in them. I don’t understand the moral panic. Marketing nicotine products to kids may be…
Non THC vapes have at the very least put people in intensive care, if not killed people. It's far premature to try and claim the lack of any health effects from any type of vapes, they just haven't existed long enough. https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/vaping-london-1.5292161
https://komonews.com/news/local/officials-confirm-first-case...
It's all about vaping. General vaping, no THC mentioned, except right at the end: "The Health District says people that vape or use THC products" which doesn't make a lot of sense, because edibles are THC products and I'm pretty sure you won't get any lung issues from them.
It also says: "A Pierce County man is suing the makers of vape pods and vape pens claiming the products left him wheezing". Woah.. he's probably going to sue Juul right? Wrong. https://komonews.com/news/local/pierce-co-man-files-first-la...
"Puyallup Tribal Police Officer Charles Wilcoxen claims marijuana-laced pods gave him lipoid pneumonia. He was taken by ambulance to the hospital on September 11 when the wheezing became especially severe. After tests, doctors gave him the diagnosis."
This is why we can't have nice things.