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

321–330 of 400 posts

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#321

Post by macspoofing »

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.

>We spent decades trying to get rid of cigarettes

We spent decades trying to get rid of carcinogens from cigarettes. What's the problem with cigarettes without carcinogens?

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#322

Post by uniqueuid »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #31
ud_0 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Scientism has become the state religion and companies are paying for indulgences. I was unfamiliar with that term and googled it: it's described as " excessive belief in the power of scientific knowledge and techniques ". I'm struggling a bit to understand how a belief in the importance of scientific knowledge and techniques equates to a religious mindset. In an ideal world, I would absolutely prefer my government…

Not all science is good. You can publish papers which literally do not allow any valid conclusions to be drawn due to methodological errors. I suspect that's most of them since academics are judged by the number of papers they've published in impactful journals. Just because science says something doesn't mean it's true. Truth must be verifiable. It's possible to easily and cheaply verify basic physical concepts like…

I want to agree here because this comment seems to be misunderstood.

In science as cumulative evidence, studies can in fact be harmful. If they are wrong or highly ambiguous, or if they make it hard to uncover errors, then they make it more difficult for future research to be correct.

The reasons include publication bias (rejecting studies with null effects and/or contradicting previous literature), p-hacking and so on.

That's why it is so important to apply rigorous standards everywhere: Transparency, data sharing, peer review, replication, pre-registration. In other words: There is no alternative to open science.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#323

Post by dude187 »

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…

Why "more regulations"? The market is just fine as is it. That feels like one of those things that people just feel obligated to say.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#324

Post by missedthecue »

macspoofing wrote: post #321
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.

>We spent decades trying to get rid of cigarettes We spent decades trying to get rid of carcinogens from cigarettes. What's the problem with cigarettes without carcinogens?

It's like the people who think smoking a cigarette or Juul is one of the seven deadly sins, but also smoke pot every day and see no problem with it.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#325

Post by cmckn »

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…

Congrats! Quitting smoking is really difficult; I feel lucky to have kicked it myself. I started in high school, like many folks (especially in the southern US); and was on-and-off through college. A Juul really helped me power through times of stress without buying a pack of cigarettes. I remember e-cigs were initially pitched to consumers as a way to quit smoking, and I think it's unfortunate that part of the message seems to have fallen off. I think it was a huge part of tapering the dependence, for me.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#326

Post by dillondoyle »

macspoofing wrote: post #321
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.

>We spent decades trying to get rid of cigarettes We spent decades trying to get rid of carcinogens from cigarettes. What's the problem with cigarettes without carcinogens?

Do those exist? Maybe can argue vapes but we don't know either way just can guess.

Also aren't there a LOT of other problems from smoking and nicotine alone, in terms of lung health and hypertension, heart stuff etc

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#327

Post by scottlamb »

The journal is: "American Journal of Health Behavior".

Why did they agree to this? Why aren't they afraid of damaging their reputation? I'm not an health researcher or medical professional, but I would think if I were one, I wouldn't want to publish in this journal afterward, take seriously articles written in it, or be associated with it. They lost three editorial board members at least. Maybe AJHB will be an example that $51,000 isn't worth trashing a reputation that took decades to build.

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#328

Post by [deleted] »

elif wrote: post #214
jasonhansel wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

See marijuana if you believe regulators will actually listen to a preponderance of evidence. FDA/pharma executives are a revolving door, and therefore concerned chiefly with the health of pharma rather than humans.

[deleted]

Re: Juul bought an entire issue of a scholarly journal

#329

Post by conductr »

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…

Something as simple as saline is highly regulated by FDA (in US), so vape probably should be just as highly regulated. Potentially more so since it's use is continuous.
Post reply on HN