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

301–310 of 400 posts

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#301

Post by rsynnott »

leereeves wrote: post #170
smeej wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 Important distinction: I didn't say anything about banning sales , just marketing, which we've already done for both smoking and alcohol. > How much more dangerous is nicotine than alcohol? According to the CDC, "cigarette smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the United States...causes more than 480,000 deat…

> According to the CDC, "cigarette smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the United States...causes more than 480,000 deaths each year in the United States" while "excessive alcohol use is responsible for more than 95,000 deaths in the United States each year,

The question was about nicotine; it is not generally the _nicotine_ in cigarettes that kills you. That's what keeps you smoking them (to a large extent) but it's not what kills you.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#302

Post by Bayart »

lemonberry wrote: post #34

My father has COPD from over 50 years of smoking. I convinced him to switch to vaping and he's been using a Juul for a few years now. Awhile after the switch his primary care physician listened to his lungs and said they sounded a lot better. She said she because the science isn't in "I can't tell you to vape but I can tell you to keep doing what you're doing". Should non-smokers pick up vaping? Probably not. But in…

I was a smoker for 14 years and vaping is the only thing that could get me off of it. And I do feel quite a bit better.

The only issue I've had was with propylene glycol, a main ingredient of most juices, to which I've got a mild allergic reaction (it essentially gives me bronchitis). Your dad may have something similar, it's quite common.

Anyhow, all the FUD in the US about vaping, its cultural association there with irritating types, the rush here in the EU to tax it as if it was cigarette (it isn't), and the growth of corporate trash on top of it has been incredibly discouraging. It's putting a barrier in front of smokers for something that's for all intents and purposes the most effective medication.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#303

Post by pope_meat »

prepend wrote: post #295
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.

> requires a doctor's note to pick up. I don’t think this is true. I can buy Nicolette all over the place without a doctors note. In the US at least.

That's the case now, initially the product was prescription only.

Oh and it tastes like shit, to save the children.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#304

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

dntrkv wrote: post #262
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only "option" is to ban vaping outright. But then you're also banning the best smoking substitute. That's not the only option. So much of the deserved vitriol against Juul is because their marketing and everything else about their product (e.g. fruit flavors) were specifically designed to get kids hooked. Juul's marketing should be the poster child for the banality of evil.

Fruit flavors do not exist because of the need to market to kids. Go into any vape shop and watch as grown-ass men, one after another, buy vape cartridges with names like Unicorn Blueberry Smoothie. Children aren't the only ones that like tasty flavors. As far as their marketing targeting children, I haven't seen any examples of that. Using millennials in your adverts does not equate to targeting children.

I'm not denying that adult smokers can enjoy fruit flavors, but at this point not even Juul is trying to deny their early marketing was targeted to youths.

https://www.vox.com/2019/1/25/18194953/vape-juul-e-cigarette...

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#305

Post by rsynnott »

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…

> The data we have shows that it was being caused by Vitamin E acetate, which was used by off-brand THC cartridges.

That's a different, less well understood respiratory problem. Some ecigarette liquid contains (or used to contain; it's banned in Europe but maybe not in the US?) diacetyl as a flavouring; that causes popcorn lung and various other problems.

Regardless, neither of these are a concern where not present, which they generally aren't.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#306

Post by s1artibartfast »

Judgmentality wrote: post #99
replicatorblog wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ecigs are likely one of the most impactful public health interventions of the last 50 years. They provide a substitute that is less dangerous and pleasurable which keeps compliance high. Juul and their competitors were genius product managers paired with irresponsible to the point of malevolent product marketers. I would like someone to do a "Years of life saved" calculation that tallies the expected years save by sw…

> I would like someone to do a "Years of life saved" calculation that tallies the expected years save by switching smokers to vaping balanced against those who were attracted by vaping who eventually went to smoking. My guess is even with the new entrants the years of life saved would be extraordinary. My understanding is entire high schools are getting addicted to vaping, where before smoking was a relatively minor…

I suspect you are right about the age division, but would love to see some real numbers and studies about each side. Every study I have seen about the youth pushes your sentiment that "entire high schools are getting addicted", but when you look at the questions, they are typically very misleading and something along the lines of "have you ever tried a vape".

OTOH, being older, I have never met someone who vapes that didn't smoke before, and know several smokers who quit and switched over.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#307

Post by pope_meat »

OptionX wrote: post #183
Red_Leaves_Flyy wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re both incredibly expensive and laborious. Like millions of dollars per sku expensive. The fda has put all the good vape shops out of business and extortionate taxes are killing the rest as people revert back to cigarettes. The fda is actively hurting Americans by shifting these costs onto retailers which was a Coup d'état for big tobacco who had been completely blindsided by the success of startup vape compani…

Several "Citation needed" in that comment.

I'm a living citation. Was a small business owner, retail vape shop. Did fine for 5 years. Then the regulations to save the children and hit pieces in the news. All the small independent shops went under and now you can only buy the vuse, and juul, both owned by...you guessed it, the same folks who sold cigarettes.

Basically, the wrong people were making money, and the regulators fixed that. Now the money is flowing to the right people and no one gives a shit that teen smoking rates went back to higher than they were before vaping. Harm reduced, a slow clap to our regulators.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#308

Post by pope_meat »

TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #239
Red_Leaves_Flyy wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

It was rampant with teens, but then we "fixed" things.

They went back to cigarettes.

Mission accomplished I guess.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#309

Post by ehnto »

BoxOfRain wrote: post #50
lemonberry wrote: post #34

My father has COPD from over 50 years of smoking. I convinced him to switch to vaping and he's been using a Juul for a few years now. Awhile after the switch his primary care physician listened to his lungs and said they sounded a lot better. She said she because the science isn't in "I can't tell you to vape but I can tell you to keep doing what you're doing". Should non-smokers pick up vaping? Probably not. But in…

I can't speak for Juul but I credit my smoking cessation entirely to vaping. I've not had any nicotine since 2020, vaping or smoking! I think there's a real attitude among a small number of non-smokers that quitting without some form of sustained suffering is "doing it wrong" and that addicts of any kind deserve pain to atone for the sin of being an addict. This attitude is extremely unhelpful and should be condemned…

I don't think anything along those lines but I am extremely disappointed that another generation is hooked on nicotine through vaping. You hear kids bragging about how much 'nic' they go through.

I was always confused about that particular part of smoking culture, it's got this mixed message of bad-boy persona and defiance yet it's very much a corporate curated habit. Nobody should have ended up addicted to nicotine, it was entirely unnecessary, and now here we are again even after all those lessons learned.

I am glad it's not nearly as harmful as cigarettes, but people are once again being sucked into an addiction in order to buy product and that stinks.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#310

Post by pope_meat »

Juul was bought by big tobacco a few years back, and then like magic state representatives in a bunch of states all started to get lobbied for a vape tax that was very beneficial to pod based systems like Juul, and Vuse(also owned by big t) and that's how I went out of business.
Post reply on HN