361–370 of 426 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed; Facebook, Coca-Cola, McDonalds, Lays, Twitter, CNN, Fox, Disney, and Purdue are all examples of companies that are taking advantage of people's reward path in a basically addictive way. Maybe 95% in terms of aggregate profit.
Why not Google? There are a lot of kids (including my son) addicted to YouTube. Why not Amazon? There are a lot people addicted to buying stuff they don't need.
Its very sad to see personal liberty treated with such contempt in cities like San Francisco. I have a friend who's 80 year old grandmother was addicted to cigarettes. He wanted to buy her an ecigarette for christmas to help her quit, even though he subtly felt like it may be for naught given her age and how long she had been addicted. I suggested a Juul just because of how easy it is to operate and the high nicotine…
We shouldn't penalize addiction. But we absolutely should penalize corporations who take advantage of addicts for a profit.
Often we end up doing things to make sure they have more profit. I wouldn't be surprised if this e-cigarettes ban is coming from cigarette manufacturers lobbying for it.
I'll never understand why lawmakers think that fruit and other flavorings for tobacco are aimed at getting kids hooked. It's almost like they think no adult has ever enjoyed fruit or candy, and that making teens smoke plain cigarettes will keep them from being rebellious. I've tried almost every variation of ecigarette mod out there except mechanical mods, because I'm not an idiot enough to know I'm too much of an id…
I can think of a dozen people off the top of my head that regularly smoke but say "it's not smoking, it's just hookah, it's a social thing". I guarantee you, if there weren't hookah bars and instead were "cheap-cigarette bars" exactly none of them would smoke.
Then with 'e-cigarettes' you have flavours like 'blueberry pie' 'brownies' 'waffles' pretty much anything you could ever want. You're going to sit there and tell me you don't think if a minor gets their hands on one will be like "oh man, this grape jolly rancher flavor is awesome, but I think there is nicotine in it so I must never ever ever touch it again"?
I was watching something on Hulu or Netflix this weekend that was high school aged characters and there were kids puffing away on liquid nicotine rigs in the background of multiple scenes.
Its very sad to see personal liberty treated with such contempt in cities like San Francisco. I have a friend who's 80 year old grandmother was addicted to cigarettes. He wanted to buy her an ecigarette for christmas to help her quit, even though he subtly felt like it may be for naught given her age and how long she had been addicted. I suggested a Juul just because of how easy it is to operate and the high nicotine…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It looks like one of the California anti- vaping ads, those feature tons of kids vaping everywhere.
I remember a concern from some decades ago of whether anti-drug ads were received by certain audiences as an encouragement to use drugs (though every kind of advertising could have impacts that its creator didn't intend).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right, because intentionally designing a harmful product to appeal towards kids and get them hooked on nicotine is perfectly fine, just as long as we eventually crack down on the ads.
You know what's less conspicuous than a vape pen hooked into your computer in class? A pack of smokes and a lighter in your pocket. I dont see the allure to children... College kids, maybe. Also, when did non-college-age children get allowed laptops in class? We werent even allowed to have a cell phone on our person during school hours, let alone a laptop.
Except the smell of having smoked cigarettes lingers on your person and when you waltz back into the room with that bathroom pass the teacher goes "How was your smoke break, I mean, bathroom trip". and your green apple jolly rancher vape smells like, a green apple jolly rancher.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It actually isn't, if their vape is mis-tuned and producing ash you're inhaling it the same as you would second hand smoke - additionally the health dangers of vape fluid aren't fully understood, a lot of the chemicals that contribute to the carcinogenous natural of tobacco smoking are still present in e-cigs but at generally lower levels. The misinformation that's going around is basically "No one has had time to co…
> if their vape is mis-tuned and producing ash That's not a thing. Are you thinking of heated vaporization of tobacco leaf? Because what "vaping" is today is a liquid that's atomized by a heating element, not solid matter. There can't be ash from glycerin and propelyne glycol
It should be noted that many vapes, including Juul, use temperature regulation and it's highly unlikely that they would produce a burnt wick.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a difference between banning and criminalizing weed. You can support one without the other.
1. What is the difference between banning and criminalizing? You are going to use the power of the state to punish someone that does not obey your ban, right? Is it about fines versus jail time? 2. Do you support SF treating weed the same as e-cigs?
I would assume banning the sale of via business located inside San Francisco vs police throwing you against a wall and patting you down when they see you vaping something.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anecdotally, I (as a college student) know more than 20x the number of people who vape than people who smoke. Smoking is bad, but vaping is becoming incredibly mainstream with young people to the point where it's a bigger health risk.
I really don't think that this is a accurate statement at all. There are a few dangers to vaping. The biggest one is having a vaporizer that is malfunctioning and is burning things instead of heating them up. The complex chemical reactions are difficult to predict. But it has the side effect of tasting like shit. The second biggest danger is the flavorings. However the community has been very good at self-policing an…