Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal • Hacker News Board

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#231

Post by 34679 » Thu, Jul 08, 2021, 4:05 PM UTC

rastapasta42 wrote: post #190

johnnyApplePRNG wrote: post #176

Well whatever they're doing is working. The amount of juul pod junk under my feet in my city seems to be growing exponentially year over year. At least cigarette butts are biodegradable! They should be forced to make these things out of cellulose or a similarly biodegradable product as their consumers are going to treat them as butts and just chuck them on the ground when they're done.

It's getting worse now. Disposable vapes are gaining in popularity, and some of those disposable vapes even come with a USB charger (even though they're not designed to be refilled without fluid). This means every time someone is done with the vape, they throw away much larger piece of plastic (compared to Juul pod). When comparing the price-point of a refillable vape (or Juul), disposables are around the same price…

>When comparing the price-point of a refillable vape (or Juul), disposables are around the same price or cheaper, without the hassle of getting fluid on your hands.

That's only true of the device. JUUL pods contain 2ml and a 4 pack is ~$20, about the same price as a 30ml bottle of juice for refillables.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#232

Post by Judgmentality » Thu, Jul 08, 2021, 4:06 PM UTC

dntrkv wrote: post #227

Judgmentality wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't have as much data on vaping as we do for smoking, but this reminds me of what cigarette companies said for decades: "where is the data showing our products are harmful?" We already know vaping causes popcorn lung. I suspect 1:1 between vaping and smoking that vaping is safer, but who knows? We won't know until we have decades of data about mortality related to vaping. It seems plausible that it increases lun…

> We already know vaping causes popcorn lung. Not true. The data we have shows that it was being caused by Vitamin E acetate, which was used by off-brand THC cartridges. None of the major nicotine vapes used this chemical. Also, this attitude of "oh we don't know" could be extended to any new product anywhere, including the vaccines we are using now. All of the current data supports vaping to be significantly safer t…

> Otherwise, you are killing people in the meantime.

What? I'm arguing vaping is more dangerous than not vaping. I specifically said I believe vaping is safer than smoking.

For what it's worth, I believe all drugs should be legal. I don't care if you want to vape or not. I don't care if you want to inject fentanyl into your veins or not. It's your body.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#233

Post by m10i » Thu, Jul 08, 2021, 4:06 PM UTC

Centigonal wrote: post #224

CaveTech wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When exactly do you think we got rid of cigarettes?

1. GP said "trying to get rid of cigarettes," implying it was not a completed effort. 2. It was (and is) a fairly successful effort: https://news.gallup.com/poll/1717/tobacco-smoking.aspx https://www.statista.com/chart/20385/cigarette-sales-in-the-...

In full, he said "trying to get rid of cigarettes and it worked", implying that it was a completed effort, imo.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#234

Post by toomanybeersies » Thu, Jul 08, 2021, 4:08 PM UTC

irthomasthomas wrote: post #118

So Marlboro buys 35% of Juul and now Juul is advertising recklessly and inviting an e-cig ban or heavy regulation. Interesting Well here are some fun facts about the ingredients in tobacco, for comparison... The main* reason smoking causes cancer is the high amount of polonium 210, yeah, that same stuff they used to murder Litvenchenko. The reason for the presence of polonium 210 is flavour. Truly. It sounds far fetc…

> Another ingredient you may be surprised at is urea。 Pig Urine

This is the kind of stuff that kids get taught in school to try and shock them into not smoking. It's marginally correct at best.

If that shocks you, then I hope you don't drink beer, because urea is commonly used in the brewing industry as a yeast nutrient.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#235

Post by dntrkv » Thu, Jul 08, 2021, 4:10 PM UTC

plank_time wrote: post #197

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.

Juul is the largest player in the game and were the first ones to use nicotine salts. There are many other companies ready to take their place (and they already are).

The only "option" is to ban vaping outright. But then you're also banning the best smoking substitute.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#236

Post by toomanybeersies » Thu, Jul 08, 2021, 4:10 PM UTC

blfr wrote: post #4

Scientism has become the state religion and companies are paying for indulgences. At least they made it open access. At first I thought they bought out the entire issue so that people couldn't read it.

I thought the indulgences of the 21st century were carbon credits.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#237

Post by TedDoesntTalk » Thu, Jul 08, 2021, 4:12 PM UTC

acituan wrote: post #216

theli0nheart wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> If your product causes harm in any way—regardless of the benefits—you're going to have a difficult time getting regulatory approval Question stands, is that a bad thing? Besides not everything FDA approved becomes a prescription medication. On topic; nicotine gums and patches as smoke cessation products are widely available as OTC.

> Nicotine gums and patches as smoke cessation products are widely available as OTC.

The first nicotine gum, Nicorette, began as a prescription-only product in the US.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#238

Post by twojacobtwo » Thu, Jul 08, 2021, 4:14 PM UTC

aliasEli wrote: post #111

83457 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

But I really wonder if that happens frequently. Cigarettes really taste and smell awful. I discovered how terrible they really are only after I quit smoking. As long as e-cigarettes remain available, I doubt that many people would switch to real cigarettes.

Anecdotal evidence: My girlfriend has been smoking since she was 14. She had no motivation to quit, no matter how many times I annoyed her about it. After she switched to vaping, she can't even bring herself to smoke again because the smell and taste are much more obvious to her now, even with flavored cigarettes.

In a separate but similar case, the same thing happened to me with marijuana smoking. I never had an issue with the 'smoke' aspect of consuming cannabis, but now that I have tried cannabis vaping products (e.g. precision heating dry plant material or liquid concentrates), I nearly gag when I try smoking it again and I am immediately aware of and irritated by the awful smell that clings to me afterward.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#239

Post by TedDoesntTalk » Thu, Jul 08, 2021, 4:15 PM UTC

Red_Leaves_Flyy wrote: post #207

OptionX wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Several "Citation needed" in that comment.

Here’s a good primer. I was a bit off, it’s not millions per sku, more like hundreds of thousands, but all the combinations of products also need to be accounted for and approved at great cost. https://vaping360.com/vape-news/105656/how-will-the-pmta-dea... If that’s not enough detail let me know, I’m happy to dig up other old articles for you. This small business destroying charade by the fda has been well documente…

> fear mongering about children juuling.

Why is that fear-mongering? My anecdotal evidence is that it's rampant with teens. Do you have any stats that are not anecdotal so I can educate myself?

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#240

Post by stronglikedan » Thu, Jul 08, 2021, 4:16 PM UTC

excalibur wrote: post #114

Vaporizers are extremely useful as smoking cessation tools. Juul is not really configured correctly for this purpose. You have to give your customers control over the nicotine content, there need to low-nicotine and nicotine-free options. But yes, the hysteria over flavors is uncalled for. Flavors are useful. If you don't prefer the taste of your vape to the cigarettes, you're not going to switch.

When I switched to vaping, I specifically chose the fruity flavors to disassociate tobacco from nicotine. It seemed to work, because I quickly found myself becoming disgusted with the smell of burning tobacco. So much so that my drunken-bummed cigarettes would be extinguished after only one or two puffs, and even then I was risking physical nausea. Having access to flavors was a huge part of my success with ditching tobacco.