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

NYU professors who defended vaping didn't disclose ties to Juul

statnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 267 posts

Re: NYU professors who defended vaping didn't disclose ties to Juul

#121

Post by kibwen »

VoidWhisperer wrote: post #79
kibwen wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> then went ahead and legalized marijuana so now kids who would never have smoked cigarettes ...Except marijuana absolutely isn't legalized, so this is completely incorrect. And in the minority of states that currently ignore the illegality of marijuana, they impose the same age restrictions as cigarettes.

Based on the recent decision by the DEA to move marijuana from schedule 1 to schedule 3, that could be changing (insofar as legalization goes anyways)

The grandparent commenter was trying to blame current societal ills on the legality of marijuana and the legal availability to children, both of which are plainly incorrect, so any future legality cannot have had any bearing due to the causal nature of the universe. And even if it becomes legal someday, all current precedents involve treating marijuna like cigarettes as far as age restrictions go.

Re: NYU professors who defended vaping didn't disclose ties to Juul

#122

Post by freedomben »

dudisubekti wrote: post #59
uniqueuid wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many studies on the effect of nicotine. I would look for several meta-analyses or umbrella (meta-meta) analyses. Ideally reporting all-cause mortality. Here is one like that: ~500k individuals, vaping has an odds ratio of 1.33 (95% CI = 1.14–1.56) for heart attacks compared to non-smoker/non-vapers. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01675... [edit] To compare that to caffeine, this stud…

Thanks! Your links have convinced me I guess vaping/nicotine, while not the worst vice out there, is still a vice lol; so they have their own dangers.

Yes, this is the correct position IMHO based on the data. This is an impossibly hard subject because so many people believe it is immoral (either from religious teaching or cultural indoctrination (like D.A.R.E., etc) and many others feel defensive like they need to justify their choices. Both of these are extremely normal human reactions, so they come by it honestly.

But vaping/nicotine can be very safe if you don't do it all the time. Occassional usage is fine. Many people naturally really like the nicotine though and have a hard time regulating their intake. If you let yourself get hooked, it can turn pretty unhealthy.

Re: NYU professors who defended vaping didn't disclose ties to Juul

#124

Post by mrybczyn »

itsoktocry wrote: post #92
lenerdenator wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem came from the fact that sporadic smoking didn't serve the profits of tobacco companies in the way they would have liked. The shoving of high-fructose corn syrup and other calorie-rich ingredients into everything sold in the US to increase consumption (again, for profits) has a much greater impact on weight management, though.

> The shoving of high-fructose corn syrup and other calorie-rich ingredients into everything sold in the US to increase consumption (again, for profits) Do you have any evidence of this conspiracy? Perhaps it's just food producers adding an abundant, cheap sweetener to their crap because that's what the market demands? Read the ingredients and buy or don't buy. People need to have a bit of personal accountability in…

LOL "the market demands". Sure, and Opium was also demanded by the market, should we just add it to all food items?

Re: NYU professors who defended vaping didn't disclose ties to Juul

#125

Post by slibhb »

lenerdenator wrote: post #49
eej71 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've often wondered if our complete demonization of all smoking was a bit of a disservice to the sporadic smoke that likely helped with managing one's weight which has its own health benefits.

The problem came from the fact that sporadic smoking didn't serve the profits of tobacco companies in the way they would have liked. The shoving of high-fructose corn syrup and other calorie-rich ingredients into everything sold in the US to increase consumption (again, for profits) has a much greater impact on weight management, though.

> The shoving of high-fructose corn syrup and other calorie-rich ingredients into everything sold in the US to increase consumption (again, for profits) has a much greater impact on weight management, though.

It doesn't have to be some conspiracy to make people addicted to calories. People are (relatively) rich, food is cheap, and eating feels good.

Re: NYU professors who defended vaping didn't disclose ties to Juul

#126

Post by triceratops »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #71
VyseofArcadia wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've thankfully never had to quit cigarettes or heroin, but in my experience quitting coffee is awful . 3-5 days of migraine-level headaches and nausea. And the whole time you're thinking, "all this could go away with just one little cup of coffee, which all the studies say has health benefits even. Just one little cup"

Why quit coffee if it has health benefits?

Why quit coffee even if it's health neutral? Coffee is amazing.

Re: NYU professors who defended vaping didn't disclose ties to Juul

#127

Post by shermantanktop »

itsoktocry wrote: post #92
lenerdenator wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem came from the fact that sporadic smoking didn't serve the profits of tobacco companies in the way they would have liked. The shoving of high-fructose corn syrup and other calorie-rich ingredients into everything sold in the US to increase consumption (again, for profits) has a much greater impact on weight management, though.

> The shoving of high-fructose corn syrup and other calorie-rich ingredients into everything sold in the US to increase consumption (again, for profits) Do you have any evidence of this conspiracy? Perhaps it's just food producers adding an abundant, cheap sweetener to their crap because that's what the market demands? Read the ingredients and buy or don't buy. People need to have a bit of personal accountability in…

Better yet, buy the ingredients and make your own. Most food is not hard to make from scratch, tastes better, and is healthier because you see what goes into it and can choose to moderate elements.

But it takes a little time and a bit of care.

Re: NYU professors who defended vaping didn't disclose ties to Juul

#128

Post by slibhb »

mrybczyn wrote: post #124
itsoktocry wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The shoving of high-fructose corn syrup and other calorie-rich ingredients into everything sold in the US to increase consumption (again, for profits) Do you have any evidence of this conspiracy? Perhaps it's just food producers adding an abundant, cheap sweetener to their crap because that's what the market demands? Read the ingredients and buy or don't buy. People need to have a bit of personal accountability in…

LOL "the market demands". Sure, and Opium was also demanded by the market, should we just add it to all food items?

No we shouldn't. But we also shouldn't pretend that demand for opium is manufactured by evil people. There's high demand for opium because it makes people feel really good.

The same thing is true for junk food. People eat it because it tastes good. How much food should be regulated is up for debate but there's something irritating about this reflex to blame every problem on some shadowy cabal of rich people.

Re: NYU professors who defended vaping didn't disclose ties to Juul

#129

Post by [deleted] »

kurthr wrote: post #118
remram wrote: post #114

In what capacity did those professors push Juul? In the classroom? Scientific papers? Lobbying?

From the article: Abrams, a frequent commentator about vaping in the news media, including CBS This Morning, CNN, and The New Yorker, coordinated extensively with Juul on public messaging in 2017 and 2018, according to company emails. Abrams asked Juul officials for talking points, allowed company executives to review an academic article prior to publishing, and attended Juul scientific advisory board meetings, all w…

[deleted]

Re: NYU professors who defended vaping didn't disclose ties to Juul

#130

Post by freedomben »

zeroonetwothree wrote: post #109
gwbas1c wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nicotine is one of the most addictive substances known to man. Quitting cigarettes is about as hard as quitting heroin. In contrast, quitting coffee is much, much easier. On a more personal note, when "The King's Speech" was in theaters I kept watching people smoke cigarettes on screen, and went out and bought some Drum. (Loose tobacco that comes with rolling papers.) Within a few days I started getting a voice in my…

It must depend on the person. I used to smoke and drink coffee and it was much easier for me to quit smoking. I just stopped one day (12 years ago) and never looked back. In contrast quitting caffeine took me several tries and I had to very carefully taper over the course of months to eventually be able to do it. I also quit alcohol and that was pretty easy too. I used to drink every day and then I stopped without mu…

Definitely depends on the person. I've heard from many people very similar to you. For me, I quit dipping twenty years ago, and I still get occasional cravings for it, especially right after a meal (which is when I used to dip). It was heavenly, but damn I'm guessing my two-year light habit (one to two dips per day at most, and several days without at times) is going to leave me scarred for a lifetime. Though to be fair, it may not have been the nicotine. It's definitely psychological for me.
Post reply on HN