Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul • Hacker News Board

Re: Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul

#241

Post by uoaei » Tue, Sep 24, 2019, 4:57 PM UTC

onetimemanytime wrote: post #228

uoaei wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shutting down an opportunity for whistleblowing against a company that knowingly preys on minors using the addictive properties of tobacco products -- because of potentially identifiable information -- seems ludicrous.

Ummm...no. He is telling information gained while hanging with his friends. Breach of etiquette and norms to say the least.

There is no identifying information. Could be any actors' sons, could be any of maybe 400 clubs in Hollywood, and anyway that behavior isn't a breach of contract for something like an investment prospectus unless they also had to sign an NDA.

Re: Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul

#242

Post by behringer » Tue, Sep 24, 2019, 5:41 PM UTC

cwkoss wrote: post #218

behringer wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

*that we know about. There's a lot of people worried about long term effects and possibly even brain damage.

Via what mechanism would vaping nicotine cause brain damage that isn't caused by cigarettes? The glycol?

That's what further research would provide.

Re: Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul

#243

Post by JetSpiegel » Tue, Sep 24, 2019, 11:30 PM UTC

Fjolsvith wrote: post #186

zelly wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want the movie rights to your post

Call the movie "Up in Smoke". No, wait, that name's taken.

> No, wait, that name's taken.

Like that ever stopped anyone. :)

Re: Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul

#244

Post by JetSpiegel » Tue, Sep 24, 2019, 11:36 PM UTC

WaxProlix wrote: post #100

colechristensen wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It comes down to personality and biochemistry, not everyone is that hooked on the stuff. If you ban everything that is addictive you end up doing a disservice to people who can handle the substance or item in question. Banning addictive substances because some people can't handle them goes against my philosophy of the purpose of government. Do we need some kind of super-citizen test where you have to prove your knowl…

What's to stop research into super-heroin as a product in that world? Just come up with the most psyche-abusive substance possible and enjoy an army of essentially slaves. People with the notion that free will is some sort of absolute confuse the heck out of me. I guess sibling post is right, it's just an issue of fundamental worldview being different.

> What's to stop research into super-heroin as a product in that world? Just come up with the most psyche-abusive substance possible and enjoy an army of essentially slaves.

Way ahead of you...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/sep/11/purdue-pharm...

$12B to make the cops go away. The adult version of Carlos the Jackal.

Re: Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul

#245

Post by Enginerrrd » Thu, Sep 26, 2019, 1:32 AM UTC

kube-system wrote: post #83

Enginerrrd wrote: post #67

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.

I don't think nicotine has been shown to be carcinogenic in humans, although there's plenty of other bad things it does.

I'm almost positive it's been linked to bladder cancer.

Re: Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul

#246

Post by thewileyone » Thu, Sep 26, 2019, 4:23 AM UTC

Gatsky wrote: post #213

didericis wrote: post #70

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…

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…

How about all alcohol, except for your backyard moonshine?

Re: Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul

#247

Post by codr7 » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 7:28 PM UTC

girvo wrote: post #209

codr7 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've smoked tobacco for 30-ish years. Organic, additive-free tobacco is definitely less problematic for me. Lately I've been growing my own Nicotiana Rustica [0], which contains plenty more nicotine than regular tobacco but is nowhere near as addictive. I know what I would do if I was selling drugs and didn't give a crap about anything but profits, I would make them as addictive as possible. [0] https://en.wikipedia.…

How do you find the Rustica? I wanted to have a crack at growing it in my entheogen garden

Before I started growing rustica; I ordered a roll of real mapacho from south america, which was very nice.

I've only tried sun-dried leaves from my own garden yet, which isn't quite as exciting. The nicotine boost is still the same though.

The idea is to grow enough to make my own mapacho paste and ferment a roll for a while.

By itself it's pretty harsh, and trippy because of the nicotine. I prefer it mixed with Cannabis and/or regular tobacco.

They need nutrients, lots of nutrients (epsom salt works like magic). And loose, sandy soil or the initial roots won't go anywhere.