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

Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

prospect.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 400 posts

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#191

Post by leereeves »

Nasrudith wrote: post #187
leereeves wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What's the lastname of this Society guy? Legislature would be its lastname, I suppose. As in [nation] legislature, [state] legislature, etc.

Yeah but that kind of defeats the consent manufacturing illusion to say the actual entity instead of the vague "society" to brainjack people with presumed social pressures.

Presumed social pressures? There's plenty of very real social pressure against marketing vaping to non-smokers.

Alarmingly there are also many people, especially young people, who believe that vaping is safe, and if educating them is "consent manufacturing" then let's manufacture some consent on this issue.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#192

Post by k__ »

83457 wrote: post #96
k__ wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My girlfriend switched to vaping 10 years ago. It saved her thousands of Euros and she is much fitter, and her breath smells delicious, haha. But she doesn't use big brands, she mixes her liquid at home and tries to lower the dose over years. But every time she can't vape, because her machine broke, or she lost it, or whatever, she get's quiet angry and smokes a few regular cigs.

Teenagers vaping then switching to regular cigarettes is one of the big concerns.

She was smoking as a teenager and switched to vaping in her twenties.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#193

Post by theli0nheart »

jasonhansel wrote: post #166
pope_meat wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fun fact, if you claim to be a smoking cessation product you get the FDA at your door going "oh, so this is a medical product" and you're now obligated to prove that your product works as a medical cessation product, and requires a doctor's note to pick up. You can't market yourself as a smoking cessation product without getting the hounds of hell being unleashed on you by the regulators.

> you're now obligated to prove that your product works And that's a bad thing?

> And that's a bad thing?

If your product causes harm in any way—regardless of the benefits—you're going to have a difficult time getting regulatory approval. It will also greatly affect access to the product, as not everyone has access to good doctors, and most items that are FDA-regulated requires prescriptions.

For a product which is a superior, healthier option to cigarettes, it's a massive regulatory burden that could kill the business. I can't imagine anyone would defend that as preferable to the status quo.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#194

Post by pietrrrek »

enkid wrote: post #92
blackbear_ wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some people believe in science. [...] This is actually the opposite of science. Adding to this, belief in science actually means believing in the _process_ of scientific discovery, i.e. believing that _eventually_ the "truth" will be discovered. As you correctly point out, questioning the current consensus is a fundamental part of the process, but not all challenges to scientific knowledge are legitimate. Many (mos…

I don't think science is about "the truth", as the scientific process shouldn't allow definitive claims. Rather, there should always be an understanding that whatever is being said comes with a probability of being true. We can make a prediction and assign a likelihood the prediction will be accurate, but we can never say "this is the truth" using the scientific method. There are going to be things that are so close…

Since is not about finding "the truth" as you put it, but it is about finding the current, most fitting truth. As circumstances change "the truth" also changes, as such science will never be able to find anything but "the current best bet".

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#195

Post by mrguyorama »

smeej wrote: post #164
leereeves wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm definitely against marketing vaping to non-smokers. But I'm fine with converting existing smokers to vaping How can a society allow marketing vaping as a healthier way to smoke without allowing marketing that makes non-smokers think vaping is a healthy way to smoke? (Especially considering that the marketers are eager to market to non-smokers.)

Related: Why is there talk about banning Juul from selling its products in the U.S. entirely, but no such conversation about banning any of the big tobacco companies from selling theirs? It's all about power. There are so many things it would be useful to quantify and compare: Does anybody know the difference between the percentage of non-nicotine users who begin smoking cigarettes and the percentage who begin vaping…

>Related: Why is there talk about banning Juul from selling its products in the U.S. entirely, but no such conversation about banning any of the big tobacco companies from selling theirs?

Juul is a product of one of those big tobacco companies.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#196

Post by rhinoceraptor »

smeej wrote: post #164
leereeves wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm definitely against marketing vaping to non-smokers. But I'm fine with converting existing smokers to vaping How can a society allow marketing vaping as a healthier way to smoke without allowing marketing that makes non-smokers think vaping is a healthy way to smoke? (Especially considering that the marketers are eager to market to non-smokers.)

Related: Why is there talk about banning Juul from selling its products in the U.S. entirely, but no such conversation about banning any of the big tobacco companies from selling theirs? It's all about power. There are so many things it would be useful to quantify and compare: Does anybody know the difference between the percentage of non-nicotine users who begin smoking cigarettes and the percentage who begin vaping…

> How much more dangerous is nicotine than alcohol?

If you divorce nicotine from its problematic delivery systems, nicotine itself is a pretty good drug (albeit very addictive). It's potentially protective against diseases like Parkinson's and Alzheimer's, it's associated with weight loss, and it improves short term memory and attention.

It's also great in combination with caffeine, and it speeds up caffeine metabolism.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#197

Post by plank_time »

We spent decades trying to get rid of cigarettes and it worked and now we let this fucking Juul through the front door. It’s as if we haven’t learned a fucking thing in decades, and the fact that this founder is celebrated in Silicon Valley sickens me. He just found another opportunity to hook kids on nicotine for another few generations and now he’s a fucking billionaire. Fuck that guy.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#198

Post by michaelt »

egeozcan wrote: post #137
TeMPOraL wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's not a smoking cessation product. It can be used effectively as such, but it's first and foremost a healthier substitute to smoking. People like to go to both extremes wrt. vaping - "but it creates new addicts" vs. "but it's effective tool for breaking addiction", forgetting about the biggest benefit vaping brings: letting smokers who don't want to quit to keep smoking, without risking lung cancer. I'm defini…

Healthier substitute to smoking practically means a smoking cessation product. Impossible meat, likewise, is a meat "cessation" product. If impossible meat makes vegans start eating burgers, you can't just argue "well, it's still better than meat". > I'm definitely against marketing vaping to non-smokers. But this is the whole point, they do attract non-smokers. They should explicitly detract them instead.

I suppose in a very literal sense, if you replace addiction A with addiction B, you could say that B is an A cessation product.

But by that logic, smoking could be called a weight loss product.

Other people have a more complex definition, which precludes cigarettes from being considered a health product, despite their appetite-suppressing properties.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#199

Post by qwerty456127 »

> Juul’s dominance dissipated around the time that over a thousand people contracted a mysterious vaping-related sickness in the fall of 2019, and state and federal regulators started to investigate the company’s blatantly obvious marketing to teenagers.

Surely as hell I support investigating marketing to teenagers but in this case it would seem to me more adequate if they would rather investigate the cases of the sickness and find out what exactly was causing it. I even doubt the sick were using Juul.

Post reply on HN