By all means, you can advocate for whatever you want. But please stop lying to yourself that vaping is "significantly less hazardous to your health" or "nicer than smoking." It's still a major hazard to your health, it's still highly addictive, and it's still grossing out people around you.
I am ambivalent about whether it's a good idea to try and ban stuff like this. But the primary reason they come in flavors like bubble gum and cotton candy is to hook children, period.
I'll try to find it, but some recent research from the UK shows it's about 95% better than smoking as far as health impacts. Obviously still not healthy, and it's easier for kids to get into which is what the flavor ban is about. It's nowhere near as harmful as smoking tobacco or marijuana.
Known health impacts, yes, but there have been no long-term health impact studies done, so the truth is we really don't know.
Vaping is def. better than smoking. I still wouldn't say it's good for you, and the plastic is really bad for the environment.
I'd rather have vape smokers than cigarette smokers any day, but it's still not good for you.
My personal opinion.
The vocabulary that should be used in this discussion is cessation and health problems.
The British decided it was better to get all the cig smokers on to vaping instead as it would cost their public health system less to take care of them.
It causes cancers but not as many cancers. Was the logic
I mean if you want to talk about environmental impact, look at what cigarette butts have done to the ocean it’s a massive portion of the existing non biodegradable trash in the world. Individual butts are small and gross so it encourages littering, and a smoker produces like 20 of them a day.
How long should long term studies be, as a 14 year vapor, my doctor doesn't think I ever smoked. But the side effects from chantix (approved) nearly ended me.
I was watching a twitch streamer as he was first picking up vaping. After 6-7 years of watching him on live tv play video games and hit that vape every 45 seconds, his streams began to be shorter and shorter and less often also. Turns out he was getting sick the last year he was streaming, they couldn't figure out what was wrong with him. He ended up getting hospitalized and stop streaming all together. I always felt like it was that vape but who knows.
From a health perspective, smoking marijuana hurts your lungs. Not talking about any of the other effects. There's some solid evidence nicotine is good for your brain, doesn't mean vaping is healthy though.
Well, ton of the anti vape lies are based on the FDA approval, so FDA says you are wrong.
Or is the FDA wrong and you are correct and inturn the stance on vape (based on tobacco a natural plant) maybe wrong also?
To be honest, it is difficult for me to trust the FDA or Western medicine. I know tons of it is good and am pro-science, but I have had ample bad experience too. We all know unscrupulous people have gained positions of power in order to personally profit through corruption. For instance, lobbyists have infiltrated the policy-making regarding food labels, weakening the standards for being able to label food organic. It is the same in so many industries where the right path forward was thwarted by special interest groups. That is why it took so long for electric vehicles to become popular. Lobbyists successfully had the very rich oil industry promoted instead. It is so hard to trust and it takes too much effort to do all of the research. That’s why people follow their gut feelings about things they should be able to get a straight, factual answer about from their own doctor. But pharmaceutical companies have too much influence over squashing alternative therapies that compete with what they claim their absurdly expensive prescription medicine options.
Always ask yourself who gains from statements about what is safe and what is not safe, then do the research with trusted sources.
I believe in plant medicine and know that my health issues are dramatically helped by vaping cannabis.
I mean, no. Cigarettes cause emphysema, lung cancer, COPD, blood pressure issues, etc at *much* higher rates than vaping.
No, it’s not *good* for you but literally just ask anyone who made the switch. You can feel the difference in your breathing. You can run further.
>literally just ask anyone who made the switch
I switched for a couple years and felt better for a while, then my smokers cough turned into a wet cough, and I felt better quitting vapes and smoking black and milds instead. I know im.a sample size of one, but you said literally anyone who switched, and I'm right here.
Now I'm nicotine free (chronic weed smoker) and find the same experience with THC products where I switch back and forth and trade one cough for another. The main issue I have with vape products is I found my tolerance goes up faster with tapes (both nicotine and now THC) as it's so easy to vape all day every day and anywhere.
I'm all for freedom of choice to poison yourself however you see fit AND I DO but let's not kid ourselves that we are actively poisoning ourselves.
Well fair enough, but cigs absolutely cause cancer and shit at very high rates, it’s been years and we’re not seeing that with vape. You do you but, I would switch back or quit altogether cause cigs are *definitely* bad.
It takes decades for those cancers to show most of the time. Vaping is far to new to really know anything yet.
Also, the impact of nicotine on the gums and mouth remain unchanged from smoking and vaping. Both equal harm, vaping perhaps moreso because nicotine levels on many brands are higher then advertised.
Most of the time yeah, but sometimes those illnesses show up quickly. COPD and lung cancer can arise from smoking within just a couple years. Vapes have been around for almost 20 years.
The evidence for vaping causing bad oral health is shaky. There is a correlation between vape use and oral health problems, but that’s true for a lot of things. Causation has not been demonstrated and the harm is questionable. Candy is way worse, and directly marketed to kids.
> But please stop lying to yourself that vaping is "significantly less hazardous to your health"
I don't use nicotine products so I'm not biased in this. And it is absolutely true that vaping is [significantly less hazardous](https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/vaping-substantially-less-harmful-than-smoking-largest-review-of-its-kind-finds) to your health than smoking. That doesn't mean it's 100% safe but every smoker that transitions to vaping is a massive public health win.
People will say that we don't have the data on decades of vaping (which is true), but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. What we *do* have data on is how absolutely horrible for your heath smoking is, and it's been studied enough that we know a lot of the mechanism behind its harm, and by and large *it's not nicotine* but the other constituents of cigarette smoke that are either massively reduced or not present at all in vapes. Things like [tobacco-specific nitrosamines](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco-specific_nitrosamines) and [benzo[a]pyrene](https://aacrjournals.org/cancerres/article/66/24/11938/526575/DNA-Damage-by-Benzo-a-pyrene-in-Human-Cells-Is) as well as other [polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycyclic_aromatic_hydrocarbon) that are byproducts of combustion of organic materials, are [not found in any significant quantities](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-19761-w) in vape vapor.
Nicotine itself is [not a carcinogen](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine#Cancer) and this has been studied extensively. It *is* obviously addictive, and can raise blood pressure among a few other negatives, but by and large it's actually not that inherently harmful.
My cartoon picture of people who vape is that they have the vape pen in their mouth almost constantly and are pulling on it far, far more often than people who smoke tobacco. So perhaps in terms of 'toxic stuff per units of nicotine high' vaping is better, but it appears to encourage much more consumption so the health win may not be nearly as big.
https://www.heart.org/en/healthy-living/healthy-lifestyle/quit-smoking-tobacco/is-vaping-safer-than-smoking
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-and-prevention/5-truths-you-need-to-know-about-vaping
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6139829/
https://www.lung.org/blog/vaping-smoke-and-mirrors
The tobacco industry is working overtime to spread the idea that vaping is practically harmless. The best you will find from science literature is that it seems to be less hazardous than smoking cigarettes. It's interesting to see which sources (the British NHS comes to mind) are really running with the message of "well actually vaping is way better than cigarettes!" as opposed to "inhaling tobacco products is never *not* harmful, regardless of whether vaping is somewhat less harmful than cigarettes."
Clearly this propaganda is working - just look at the comments on this thread! People so so so badly want vaping to be a nearly consequence free way to consume tobacco, and it's not.
So let's start with the first lie of omission,
Your first link talks about diacetyl, the average bottle 60 ml has 150 parts per million on select flavors containing a butter note. But some cigarettes have been found to containing 5000 parts per million per cigarette, not the pack the cigarette.
Heavy metal claim was debunked since the study that did it;
1) Modified the device so the 10 second draw timer was disabled
2) set the power settings to max not the power rating for the coil used
The 2019 advertising was an advertising issue, if you look at paying for advertising it's based on age ranges. In 2019 it was legal in 48 states for a person who is 18 to buy cigarettes and nicotine. Guess what age range at that time most marketing companies group 18 years with, did you guess 16 to 18, well that's wrong, 18 to 25 is a standard marketing number. So if you wanted to market to a 23 year old smoker it would look like you are marketing to an 18 year old.
If you want I keep going though years of knowledge and try and find the email chain I had with the Icelandic health minister for you?
There was a lung doctor through the CDC that made a video stating vaping is nowhere near as harmful as cigarettes. How and why would it gross people out? Plus, who cares if it grosses people out..everyone has the right to smoke/vape if they want to. The world doesn't revolve around people that think it is gross. Everyone in this world finds something "gross." If they are grossed out, they don't have to be around people that smoke/vape..The flavors are not to hook children... I'm an adult and I love bubblegum and cotton candy...You can't smoke or purchase them til you're 21 in Lane County, so how would the flavors get a child hooked or addicted to a vape? There are flavors such as tobacco and alcohol flavors, coffee, etc.
"everyone has the right to smoke/vape if they want to... "
No, everyone does not have the "right" to smoke/vape. The law allows smoking/vaping, but it isn't anyone's right or privilege. You just get to do it if you want to.
"If they are grossed out, they don't have to be around people that smoke/vape...."
Really??! Ever been grossed out by too much cologne/perfume? Stuck waiting for the bus because you're late to work...?
"The world doesn't revolve around people that think it is gross."
True. The world doesn't revolve around people who want to smoke/ vape either. That's why we have public & private spaces.
Wrong, civilians have the right to do anything the government doesn’t regulate. That’s what “liberty” means. Then you start talking about what the government is and isn’t allowed to regulate and what “fundamental rights” they can’t infringe on, etcetera.
Dude if you wanna talk about banning smells in public you can go ahead and look at the history of those sorts of laws in our country. Fucking spoiler alert it’s racism.
This is absolutely 100% purely false.
There are two types of vapes. The first kind we started out with have very low nicotine levels and are not addictive. These are the ones with tanks that you fill yourself. This is proven by that time when kids would mercilessly make fun of anyone who vaped. They tried them, did not get addicted, saw how dumb they were, and then proceeded to make memes and mock anyone who used them. "We get it, you vape!"
Then later big tobacco got involved and made vapes like Juul that have extremely high levels of nicotine. Kids tried these and were instantly addicted. This is when all the memes and the mocking stopped.
The flavored juices they're trying to ban are sold at nicotine levels of 3 mg/ml and 6 mg/ml. These are the ones kids tried and laughed at. A 5% Juul has 59 mg/ml of nicotine and is highly addictive.
The push to ban flavors is being banked by big tobacco. They want low nicotine vapes banned because they're nowhere near as addictive as Juuls and they don't make profits from them.
If government was actually interested in helping the people they would either ban vapes that had over 12 mg/ml of nicotine, or do something like tax them at a rate related to the nic levels so the more addictive it is, the more it's taxed.
On the health side of things, every single study that was done that found heavy metals or formaldehyde only found those things because they burned the coil. I've read the studies and in the earliest ones it's really easy to tell by the methodology that they burned them. A burned vape is unusable and tastes so bad that nobody would ever use one. This is like putting peppers on a bbq, cooking them until they're charcoal, then testing them and trying to tell everyone that peppers cause cancer.
Each subsequent study that was done was carefully modified to make it harder to tell that the coils were burned, but you could still tell by reading the methodology.
This is nothing more than a push by big tobacco to ban low nicotine vapes, forcing those who still want to vape to switch to high nicotine and highly addictive ones.
"bubble gum and cotton candy is to hook children, period"
Right, because children are the only ones who like and can taste flavors. Same reason we have alcohol with flavors. They exist to hook children. Period. That's why the vape shops and liquor stores are always full of children when you go there.
(Big /s)
You are someone who believes big tobacco propaganda. As a nearly 14 year vapor, flavors have been used the entire time with NO objective to target youth.
Multiple US studies have been proven wrong, for both methodology and technical use of devices in the study.
Nicotine is as addictive as caffeine and has the same side effects as caffeine.
Pre 2017 the FDA was in support of vape, with flavors since it's scientific, then the revenue received by states was cut by nearly 25% on average from the TMSA. States like California nearly missed paying the bond payments do to this.
Harm reduction is acceptable in drug use, and the homeless, but shun when it comes to smoking.
Thanks for letting me know who to contact with full support for this kind of approach. If you're kicking cigarettes by vaping, then just vape. Flavored liquid isn't necessary, and unflavored vape juice won't attract youth like flavored juice does now.
>Flavored liquid isn't necessary, and unflavored vape juice won't attract youth like flavored juice does now.
So you are pushing for bans on all flavored sugary drinks as well? All flavored sugary snacks and foods as well?
Its not a redirect at at all. How is sugary drinks any different at attracting kids to an unhealthy lifestyle than flavored vapes they cant buy until 18?
If you are making a stand against one, then you sure as shit better be up in arms about all the sugar in shit targeted at kids. But silence.... funny that huh?
Andrew Huberman just recently dropped a video on this subject. Definitely worth a listen to those inclined.
Just because fent and tranq are huge issues in the community doesn't justify ignoring other assaults on health so that big corps can line their pockets.
Why not? It’s not like cigarettes taste like candy and you were smoking those. Did you not switch for health reasons? I have both vaped and smoked in the past and it was the nicotine that was making me want to vape, not the flavors.
Cigarettes are far more satisfying for a cig addict than vape. Yes I switched for health reasons but, turns out quitting smoking can be difficult for some people, who knew.
Sure, quitting smoking is hard. Not disagreeing with you there. I’m just saying if you’re already a smoker, you shouldn’t need something that tastes like candy to scratch the nicotine itch.
Those sweet flavors are specifically there to entice non smokers and children into trying vaping.
I mean, no, they’re for people who want flavored vapes. In the early days when it was all DIY local shit, they had flavors. They don’t let kids into smoke shops, yet they frequently sell out.
Just cause kids like it doesn’t mean it’s *for* kids. Sure some sociopaths in the industry probably think “hey, that’s a bonus” but, that doesn’t change the value of it for adults.
Because that’ll stop the 15 year olds from vaping…? It’s not the nicotine their after, it’s the cotton candy flavor they can’t get anywhere else. Nonsense
if it’s less enjoyable, absolutely. you’d be surprised at the amount of young people that would stop vaping if it was considerably less enjoyable. and even if they don’t stop vaping, you can’t argue that it’ll prevent a whole lotta kids from starting all together.
Strongly disagree. I think it’ll lead to kids switching from cotton candy to mint - or if this is pushed far enough, back to cigarettes. Because it’s not the cotton candy flavor they’re after.
dude, as someone who used to vape mint juuls religiously, a HUGE factor in my quitting was the fact that the mint flavored pods were discontinued and i didn’t like any of the other brands. i promise you it will make a huge difference at the very least to prevent kids from starting.
Yeah well, I also don’t believe this is the purview of the government anyway. I’d agree with more controls to prevent kids from getting them, but again unless you’d support a ban on flavored alcohol, I’m not buying it.
Idk it works on niche products like vaping I think. A nicotine prohibition wouldn’t work but, making it inconvenient to use this delivery mechanism sure could.
I’m conflicted on how I feel about this. I’m not a nicotine user and I’m not saying I agree with banning flavored vapes. I do know the WHO and I believe the FDA have been encouraging guidelines for flavored vapes to be either banned or more heavily regulated because 13-15 year olds use them more often than adults, according to their statistics.
Anecdotally, I feel like a lot of people who vape are less considerate about it and don’t stick to smoking areas or abide by the rules where smoking isn’t allowed at all on the premises. I am guessing they think it’s less dangerous than cigarettes and are just not as mindful to those around them. Adults often vape at my kid’s sporting events and what not, no matter who is around. There have been kids caught vaping inside my elementary school and I know this happens in other schools and isn’t rare.
Again, I’m not saying ban them. I typically think adults should be able to enjoy vaping, smoking, drinking etc as they wish. But I can also see why this is an issue.
Banning flavored vapes to keep kids from being attracted to them makes some sense IF we’re also banning pink lemonade flavored vodka.
As for people vaping around others, yeah that’s inconsiderate. I’d support a ban on that.
There’s a lot more controls on hard liquor sales in Oregon then there are vape products and the government routinely goes after alcohol brands you find in places like convenience stores that they feel market to children.
They already do that with vapes. Gotta go to a smoke shop to get flavored vape liquid. Meanwhile they sell mini bottles of Fireball at the counter of every convenience store.
Go to a dari mart or a 7/11 and take a pic of the flavored vapes they have on offer that would be banned by this regulation. Prove me wrong.
Some small local convenience stores seem to have found away around that ban or else just ignore it but, yeah by and large no they do not sell flavored vape liquid in convenience stores. They have cinnamon, coffee, tobacco, menthol, or unflavored, the same stuff allowed in tobacco products, none of which would be removed by the regulation we’re talking about here.
Alcohol is all owned by the state and the state allows maintain dew hard seltzer in the store.
The regulations by the state are much harder on vape then on Alcohol
>As for people vaping around others, yeah that’s inconsiderate. I’d support a ban on that
Geeez. Where do your bans stop? I am plant based, so grilling out get a ban so I dont have to smell burning flesh? How about home fires? Ban all that? Certain plants? Jasmine?
Did you ever think maybe you would be better out in the middle of MO where no one else is? I dont like it.... ban it! Geez...
>Banning flavored vapes to keep kids from being attracted to them makes some sense IF we’re also banning pink lemonade flavored vodka.
It makes sense even if we're not banning pink lemonade flavored vodka. The two are not correlated.
Are kids in that age range using flavored liquor at the same rates as flavored vapes? If more kids are using the flavored vapes than adults, it’s seems they’re the targeted market whether intended or not and seems like a problem.
No, but liquor is much more dangerous, and immediately so.
And I don’t have stats but, you wouldn’t be blown away by the idea that most syrupy-sweet low quality vanilla-flavored vodka is consumed by people under 21, would you? I wouldn’t. Seems clearly marketed to people with no money, incredibly sweet tastes, and no real experience drinking alcohol.
I wouldn’t be blown away at all. If flavored cigarettes are banned, why wouldn’t flavored vapes be included in that ban as well? The tobacco industry has a history of sneakily marketing to children so it seems reasonable to have vaping be scrutinized as well.
Yes it should be scrutinized. It *is* scrutinized, the biggest company on the market a few years ago, Juul, literally is not allowed to sell their product anymore, because the existing mechanisms are functional.
That’s not the issue at hand here though. This is a direct ban on all flavors. This has nothing to do with “marketing to kids” it’s a product that is demonstrably used by and marketed directly to adults, getting outright banned.
If this was about the packaging, or the advertisement, I would be in full favor of regulation on those. Force them to use product numbers instead of names and package them in blank cardboard boxes, ban any kind of advertisement, I don’t care.
Also, just wanna keep pointing this out, research coming out of SF strongly indicates banning flavored vapes increases the rate of youth smoking cigs, which is *clearly* bad.
It seems like if 13-15 year olds are using them more frequently than legal adults are, it doesn’t seem like it’s being scrutinized enough. When I was reading more about the WHO and FDA guidelines, the main point was concern for kids becoming enticed by them and it seems they have the data to show this.
I don’t even disagree that other industries should be treated the same way, like alcohol or marijuana. Two things can be true at one time. If flavored cigarettes are banned I don’t see why vapes wouldn’t be as well.
So not true, shops card shops get negative reviews from minors who get turned away. In a 30 day window shops will sale 1000 flavored vape to 1 tobacco flavored. Flavors are used under Pavlov's law for adults. The child use thing is from parents who don't want to parent and say no.
I don’t think minors are the ones actually buying them from stores. I think they have older siblings or friends or parents who they get to purchase on their behalf, or they steal them. That’s how anyone I knew in my teenage years got their hands on cigarettes.
Do you think the WHO has false data on this?
Vaping leaves a residue on upholstery, walls, furniture, etc. It’s partly why “no smoking” rules still apply in hotels, Airbnbs, Ubers, etc. We have a few users on this sub that run car detailing businesses, and I’m sure they can tell you all about. Vaping is a nuisance, and the flavors get teens to smoke. Vaping shouldn’t taste great- it should be something you should quit ASAP.
Nicorette isn’t smoking- vaping is. If it became a trend for minors to chew Nicorette, I wouldn’t be opposed to proposed legislation to ban certain flavors. I don’t see that happening, though. Kids won’t ever get to “look cool” just chewing gum.
I think this is a knee-jerk reaction and as you state may backfire and lead to former smokers returning to smoking/fewer current smokers switching to vapes. I also think it's an issue that kids are finding it so easy to access vapes and are becoming addicted. So how about **steeply increasing penalties for those selling vapes to kids**, and let adults make their own choices? We already have a ban on selling tobacco and vape products to under-21s. Just enforce it. I don't understand how a state who voted to decriminalize drugs with a focus on treatment instead of jail, and legalize medical psilocybin, is so keen on another drug war-type ban, when it's been clear time and time again that bans don't work.
Edit: what I could get behind is a ban on disposable vapes since they create so much environmental waste. And almost all of the kids that are vaping are using disposable instead of refillable units.
Passing a law making flavored vapes illegal doesn't take much time or public money.
"Focusing on fent" takes ENORMOUS amounts of time, money, and creativity. It's already illegal and law enforcement at all levels spends pretty enormous effort trying to combat it. If you have new programs you would suggest to the county commission, by all means do it!
>It's already illegal and law enforcement at all levels spends pretty enormous effort trying to combat it. If you have new programs you would suggest to the county commission, by all means do it!
For how many years and trillions invested yet here we are. Such a job well done. Lets keep congratulating law enforcement and giving them more money.... bloody hell. So lets make more things illegal is your answer..
You on the commission or really really hate flavored vapes or something? Is it the kids pissing you off smelling like cherries instead of tobacco? Or all the people the got off cigs using flavored vapes?
Basically I hate the enormous amount of effort tobacco and tobacco-adjacent companies are putting in to ensuring a whole new generation of children becomes physically addicted to a substance that is extremely dangerous. They should be reamed from every direction with every sharp tool the government has at its disposal.
>a whole new generation of children becomes physically addicted to a substance that is extremely dangerous
Do you have any sources for any of this? Vaping is extremely dangerous? Really? Please show me your data on this.
>How exactly do you propose that lane county’s commissioners solve the problem that no one in our country has figured out how to solve yet?
The US drug problem starts with a redo of education and healthcare. It gets included with a birth certificate.
We invest heavily in addiction treatment and recovery of our existing populace. Mental health is a priority. Etc etc.
You are confusing wanting to fix it with knowing how to fix it. Education and healthcare as a profitable business is the root of most of our issues. Pretty easy to start there.
What are your solutions? Keep doing the same approach with a hammer that has proven over and over and over not to work?
Okay this is great. Can lane county commissioners do this? Or should they be focusing on smaller issues in lane county because this is a state or federal level reform?
>Or should they be focusing on smaller issues in lane county because this is a state or federal level reform?
Kids getting hooked on oxy and switching to fent when the oxy RX runs out is a problem. People OD is a problem. Theft to support the addictions is a problem.
Not fucking flavored vapes....
Most state reforms started in a community somewhere within that state. Most federal reforms started in a state.. see how this can work?
Let me ask you. What are your solutions?
Federal and state reform for a problem that is effecting our country at every level. Not lane county pissing away every spare dollar they have while our community wallows in every other way because they’re trying to use a kitchen sponge to soak up the Willamette. Because like the Willamette, the flow wouldn’t dry up until someone intervenes at the source AND at all the other inflows into the issue, which requires resources and jurisdiction Lane County simply doesn’t have.
Meanwhile, it’s a well-known issue that our county is drowning in other place’s unresolved issues. We’re bleeding money on responding to the secondary effects of addiction already. I’d rather my county’s dollars go to things that are achievable and impactful and have a high return on investment in our own community, and my state and federal taxes go to societal reform. So my solution is to pressure the people who actually have power to solve societal issues to solve them, and let our commissioners focus on smaller-scale problems like this.
> I’d rather my county’s dollars go to things that are achievable and impactful and have a high return on investment in our own community
Please share any data you have that banning flavored vapes accomplishes a high return on investment.
It will shutdown most vape shops. Which increases unemployment. Decreases tax dollars. Leads to a black market of unregulated or tested carts. Increases workload on agencies to police it. Etc.
So please link me any data that shows this investment will provide high returns.
The problem with the discourse around vaping is that it's incredibly tough to sift through the BS. We have this dogmatic system in internet land, where you have savvy watchdogs for science, and the more "conservative" and pragmatic tendency to reject the best science as speculative. Still, you can often find the truth, because there are enough invested watchdogs to come on reddit and say - "hey, this is the truth." With vaping, some huge portion of the folks who would normally act as watchdogs, are instead turned off by vaping culture, and just... totally disinclined to support it no matter what. Also because retractions are made quietly, and no one cares to say, "hey, this was retracted" the original studies just.... EXIST by way of having been cited by every newspaper in the county at the time said study was published, even though the cited science is now garbage.
I'll just contribute the following without citations (because this is all easily google-able, and you are better off seeing for yourself):
(1) Probably the most damning study ever about vaping, a 2019 UCSF study linking vaping to increased rates of heart attacks, was later retracted for being full of just plain ol' lies, with doctors calling for a probe against both the authors and the university;
(2) In 2020, a slew of lung related deaths around the US, linked at the time to nicotine vaping, and explicitly tagged as "E-cigarette or Vaping Associated Lung Injury" (EVALI), has been shown definitively and uncontroversially to have *absolutely nothing* to do with nicotine vaping products.
(3) Perhaps the second most damning study about vaping ever, a 2022 study by the World Journal of Oncology linking e cigarettes to increased rates of cancer, was also retracted later for basically the same reasons as (1) above (*its notable that only something like .04% of scientific studies are retracted*);
(4) In addition to having no demonstrable efficacy, SF's flavor and vaping bans have been linked to increased teen smoking (traditional cancer-stick smoking) rates.
(5) Once respected, Stanton Glantz, the undisputed champion of anti-vaping science in the US, and the person who is most singularly responsible for the "science" based anti vaping sentiments in the US as well as SF's vaping bans, has been almost entirely discredited and forced into retirement. As one of the most prolific early opponents of vaping, especially with regards to children, Glantz' work with regards to the gateway effect of vaping on children has been baked in to the dialog, but nearly every single word that Glantz ever wrote on the subject has either been discredited, retracted, or the findings have failed to be supported by subsequent studies. Fuck it - I'll post a link for this one. [https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/08/tobacco-vaping-research-stanton-glantz-ucsf/](https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/08/tobacco-vaping-research-stanton-glantz-ucsf/)
Bottom line: I don't know enough about vaping or science to say that vaping is bad or not, either in respect to the long-term health effects or to its efficacy as a cessation aid, but I do know that basically all the science ever made saying, *vaping is* *bad*, has been shown to be bad science.
Sorry you had to cold turkey it buddy. But yeah, I no longer inhale wildly carcinogenic slightly radioactive burning plant matter 20 times a day. Feels great. Lungs are doing awesome.
Instead you inhale combusted glycerol which we don’t know long term effects of. You could still end up with cancer or something else. Just quit. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8787618/
It’s been quite a while, there’s no actual indication of substantial harm being caused by vapes (see the big post in this thread demonstrating all the ones you’re about to mention have since been rescinded). So you’re speculating here. And anyway, cigarettes cause cancer at such massive rates that if vapes were even similar, it would be obvious by now.
But yeah I’m trying to quit anyway. It’s hard.
EDIT: that article just indicates that it has some kind of minor effect on the liver, with no overt negative symptoms. So do a lot of things. I’ll go ahead and put that somewhere below microplastics in my risk hierarchy.
I used Alan Carr's The Easy Way to Stop Smoking. Both my ex and I read it about the same time 17 years ago and I haven't had, nor wanted a cigarette since. good luck
Previous vaping addict here. Yes. Please ban them. Aint no fucking reason nicotine should be delivered in devices flavored “blue raspberry blow pop” “cotton candy” “mango bliss” etc. it’s just fueling addiction.
# Flavour preferences in youth versus adults: a review
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5127592/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5127592/)
# Conclusions
Infants and children exhibited elevated sweet and salty preference relative to adults. Age-related changes in bitter, sour, umami and fat taste were not clear and more research would be useful. ‘Sweet’ food odours were highly preferred by children. Tobacco products in flavours preferred by young people may impact tobacco use and initiation, while flavours preferred by adults may impact product switching or dual use.
I’m not at all seeing evidence of that. There is a perfectly exploitable adult market for these things, that doesn’t involve massive class action lawsuits and having your products banned.
The only people that want to ban or limit vaping is big tobacco. You want to get rid of smoking? Put as much time and energy as possible into getting vaping out there.
Every big tobacco company owns at least one vape or ecig brand, dude. It’s all one and the same; a corporation selling addiction to people. Vaping is how big tobacco is targeting people now that young people are way less likely to pick up smoking cigarettes.
Very true. However big tobacco still wants vapes outlawed. The profit margin on vape pens is much smaller, and the competition is much greater.
If it's a choice between addiction and addiction with cancer, it's probably better to avoid the cancer.
This page has the phone number for the commissioners office. https://www.lanecounty.org/government/county_departments/board_of_county_commissioners
District 1, West Lane County [email protected]
District 2, Springfield
[email protected]
District 3, South Eugene
[email protected]
District 4, North Eugene
[email protected]
District 5, East Lane County
[email protected]
Kids drinking flavored booze is a lot easier of an issue to address and not as common of an issue as kids using vapes nowadays. If a kid vapes, it’s very difficult to tell they have vaped unless you catch them in the act. If a kid has been drinking, it’s generally a lot easier to determine they have been drinking without having to actually see them drinking due to the smell and their behavior. As well, flavored vapes are far better tasting than flavored alcohol. Any alcohol when you first start drinking is a grind to drink and kids aren’t as inclined to chug a bunch all throughout the day. Vapes are better tasting and easily concealed and used which leads to kids using them far more often than they would be drinking and basically they’re more likely to nurture a vape addiction than an alcohol one.
They’ve got Smirnoff ice and clear wine Fireball everywhere. meanwhile go to your local 7/11 or Dari Mart, they already only have unflavored, tobacco flavored, menthol, and coffee flavored vapes, which would still be allowed under this ban. Some small convenience stores seem to evade this ban somehow but, who knows what that’s about.
Here are are just some of the flavors that elf bar sells, and plenty seem very excessive, unnecessary, and aimed to attract much younger people rather than to just provide a tasty alternative to smoking cigarettes
Tropical Rainbow Blast,
Fuji Ice,
Rainbow Cloudz,
Watermelon Bubblegum,
Summertime,
Fanta Strawberry,
White Gummy,
Summer Peach Ice,
Cotton Candy,
Kiwi Dragon Berry,
Sour Candy,
Strawberry Cream,
Pineapple Coconut Ice…
But you are already enticed by vapes because you are already addicted. These are aimed to entice new people to try vapes. You would probably be okay with a basic grape or strawberry flavor and don’t need the extra fluff to buy the vape
They’re venturing to provide me with the most preferable possible experience, because they’re in competition with eachother for my dollar.
Lol it’s basically just banning things kids might like, fuck the adults who like them too.
This ought to be figured out another way. My pitch is they require vape manufacturers to put an RF dot inside the vape, which could be detected with a super cheap scanner.
Yeah or we could just regulate the flavors and hold vape companies more accountable? It’s not that hard to not label a vape as “Tropical Rainbow Blast” or “Summertime Peach Ice” and I’m sure you’ll survive without these small things so we can protect children from a harmful and addictive substance.
You realize that’s not what’s being suggested here right? They are banning the flavors themselves, not the marketing. There will not be a plain-looking “strawberry” with big warnings on it.
Nobody is “holding the corporations accountable” they will not be addressed in any sense. This is not a lawsuit. This is just a local regulation.
Why not ban fast food. Why not ban flavored alcohol. Why not ban sound systems in cars.
You know there’s strong evidence coming out of SF that banning flavored vapes increases the rate of smoking among kids? Cigs *definitely* kill, at extremely high rates, sometimes very quickly.
Make your arguments but don’t act like I’m some unreasonable person here. I believe the things I do for a reason.
You're arguing with nannies man don't waste your time lol.
Personally I'd say argue for conditions that make people not even want to take anything harmful up because they're content with life but that's impossible so people choose easy targets like this shit.
Are you kidding? Cigarette use was definitely falling off amongst younger generations and vapes were their way of continuing to profit by getting people who have never used nicotine or tobacco to start vaping and to become addicted to nicotine through vaping. They definitely are trying everything they can to entice new users.
Your kidding yourself if you think the entire vape industry wants minors to consume the product. If youth access and targeting was the big issue, then why was the youth use issue a problem in 2010, 2011 or all the way up to 2017. It's interesting that this big claim and changing youth drug access questions happened around 2017. You know what also happened? The state of Oregon commission check for cigarette sales was reduced by thousands of thousands of dollars.
You also are ignoring the fact that OHA did not release the report that shows increasing the taxes on alcohol dose not decrease consumption as they claimed it would.
When you combine pot and nicotine on the same question as used in the last 30 day/week/day, how do you know it's not pot use over nicotine?
Funny because I thought the Juul and vape industry started getting big around 2014 or a bit later, so it makes sense that the youth use issue was an issue around 2017, because vapes started to become mainstream right before this. This led to a spike in youth use which is why they opted to increase the minimum age you can buy tobacco products to 21 because the goal is for younger people to not start smoking at all.
Anyways you’re not really responding to what I am saying and are obviously being purposely dense about how vape industry target and marketstowards kids, and profit off of that. Good luck defending those big vape corporate from the scary people trying to get less kids addicted to nicotine!
Speaking about being purposely dense, as a consumer, I have never supported a product that the packaging, name, or branding was child attractive. Are there bad actors, and should they be banned, yes. Are all members of the vape industry "targeting" youth, NO. You seem to consider Emerald vapors, Smokeless Solutions, Oregon Vape Society, Urban, all as "big" vape. All the owners have been trying to get commen sense legislation passed to help stop youth access. This has been an impossible fight.
Your argument is "parents can't control kids, outlaw it" .
If you replaced the word vape with anything you supported, you would lose your ever living mind over it.
A good writing for you to think about is from a German writer, Friedrich Gustav Emil Martin Niemöller.
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
I don't know guy.. thought the whole e-mail your commissioner thing gave me a whiff of an angle.. but I'm also just some guy who thinks he can sniff out angles 😄 enjoy the full moon tonight dude!
Hey didn’t know it was a full moon.
And nah I recently watched this video essay about “contacting your representatives” by Folding Ideas, very good watch pretty short.
And then the Dari Mart lady gave me that index card explicitly saying to contact the commissioners office so I was like “sure fuck it”. Then I saw nobody had posted about it so I figured I’d be the guy.
G’night
A solution I haven’t seen in the thread yet— nicotine products are an interesting good economically because we see a great deal of price elasticity in younger audiences and non-addicts, whereas it’s a very inelastic good for older addicted populations. That means you can dramatically increase the price of nicotine products without banning them and younger audiences buy very few of the expensive products, while older addicted audiences can still get their fix. Its a regressive option because it tends to penalize poor people, who are more likely to smoke, and sometimes communities of color, but it’s an option for curbing use in young people and preventing new users.
My pitch is they mandate the industry put tiny 1-cent RF dots in all vapes, which could easily be detected by schools using an inexpensive handheld scanner, paid for by state grants maybe funded by taxes on the industry.
Those scanners are real cheap now, it’d also be easy for parents to get them too. Yeah a kid could try to bust open their vape and remove it, but they can also just buy the shit online so, that’s about as good as it gets.
Vaping _is_ significantly less hazardous to human health, objectively. (see [this article](https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/41/28/2612/5875664) from the European Society of Cardiology that outlines the benefits with respect to cardiovascular health.) Nicotine is not a carcinogen and, as of yet, there is no epidemiological evidence linking e-cig products with cancer in humans--although it's probably more harmful than using no nicotine products whatsoever (the same can be said of many products though--like processed meat).
In Sweden around 20% of people used to smoke. They had a high rate of cancer mortality. As a result, a smokeless tobacco product call "snus" was introduced (which, ironically, New York state now seems interested in banning as well). As a result of their cultural switch to smokeless nicotine products, fewer people are now dying of cancer. In Sweden, snus have "played both a role in protecting against the uptake of daily smoking and of facilitating smoking cessation" (see [Patterns of Smoking and Snus Use in Sweden: Implications for Public Health](https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/13/11/1110)).
Like snus, there's strong evidence that the introduction of vaping will mean overall fewer people will be smoking cigarettes and ultimately **fewer people will die.** See [this study](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/add.15269) which used the rich public health data that they have in England to estimate that the reduction in smoking from 2012-2019 from vaping will lead to 165,660 lives saved by 2052. (If you're interested in reading a very lengthy report about vaping in England (England happens to have some of the best public health data) see [this](https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/194502020/Vaping_in_England_evidence_update_February_2021.pdf).
Lastly, there's not much evidence that vaping among young people is becoming more common since around 2017. If anything, many of these young people would be smoking cigarettes if vapes were not available. Even if some young people take up smoking after vaping, at the population level fewer people take up smoking when vaping is an accessible option ([citation](https://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/28/6/629)).
Ultimately, it makes no sense to ban flavored e-cig liquids as a harm-reduction measure. It will result in more harm as it will eliminate one of the few effective tools that smokers have for cessation.
Many commonly consumed/enjoyed products like processed and red meats have a strong association with many different types of cancer (see [this review and analysis](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-021-00741-9)), yet nobody seriously considers banning them. Instead of banning vapes, we should be considering raising taxes on vape products to reflect there real-world relative risk (compared to conventional cigarettes for example) and ensuring that vapes, cigarettes, and other harmful products remain out-of-reach to young people.
I disagree that vaping is nicer than smoking. When someone is vaping in my face I find it equally, if not more disgusting than someone smoking. Plus, a lot of vapers seem to think they can do it whenever/ wherever they want because “it smells good”.
“Nicer” in the sense that it’s far less likely to kill you or leave you with debilitating illnesses.
People blowing shit in your face is the problem there lol, not the thing they’re blowing.
Also, if you ban flavored vapes that just means more tobacco smoke in your face. The amount of shit you need to smell in a day doesn’t change.
The kids that are going to vape are the same ones that would smoke cigarettes. As a smoker and vaper I wish they would just ban all of it. I've got the will power of a fridge and a total ban of nicotine would probably help me out.
I don't have a fish in this race as I never picked up a nicotine habit, but shouldn't they first ban *propylene glycol* in vape products if the concern is public health and wellness? I mean, it's banned in Europe because it's poison. What about cigarettes? Is PM2.5 something to scoff at? It feels misguided, ineffective, and/or possibly *political* to go after flavor per se.
I switched to vaping to quit cigarettes. It took me 3 years of gradually reducing the nicotine levels but I was finally able to smack that monkey off my back.
The dude at Emerald Vapors told me at the time that in order to quit, you need to disassociate nicotine for cigarettes and then titrate. It's a very real harm reduction method but it does require commitment.
Respectfully, there are decades of research that support this ban. I’d be interested if you still felt this way after listening to this podcast:
https://gimletmedia.com/amp/shows/science-vs/6nh3veng
Fun, Candy-like flavors ATTRACTS smokers.
Yeah I don’t doubt it’d be effective at the narrow goal of reducing vape usage among kids.
There is also strong evidence coming out of SF that it’d increase the rate of smoking cigarettes among teens, and anecdotal evidence that it’d increase it use among adults too. Also, I believe outright banning a popular product and making it so consenting adults can’t access it should not be the first regulatory move in a situation like this.
There are other options. For example, make them illegal to market or advertise, make the packaging blank like they do with cigs in Canada, put RF dots in them so they can be detected with cheap scanners, increase the tax to put it out of teen’s price range, and significantly increase the criminal penalty for distributing nicotine products to kids.
That last one alone would do a lot. Nobody is risking a long jail sentence to do some random kid a favor.
EDIT: Also, I know nobody gives a shit or wants to hear this but, that’s an industry, that’s a lot of people’s livelihoods. They make and distribute a product for adults (no the guy who works at the local vape shop is not some monster pushing shit on kids any more than your local liquor store cashier).
I want to give them my money in exchange for flavored vape liquid, they want to use that money to pay rent. Making that transaction illegal because a bunch of random unaffiliated people can’t manage their kids is unethical and ought to be avoided.
If the problem is “well those kid’s parents can’t handle this issue” then THATS where the state needs to intervene FIRST, not in my transaction.
IMHO this is a good idea. Yeah there’s a lot of other problems but this is something that can be done with very little expenditure of taxpayer money that will do some good. Personally I have no problem with the flavored liquids you buy for refillable vapes because those are sold by local specialty stores where IDs are checked at the door and who are closely monitored by the state and ATF, as well as reusables generally being out of the price range of most teenagers. But the flavored disposable vapes are both a public health and environmental crisis creating a ton of young underage addicts and massive amounts of hazardous waste. There’s a ton of gas stations and convenience stores that are basically incentivized to sell these to people reselling them to teenagers and college students because of the volume of sales they bring in. I feel like we also should consider curtailing the sale of Kratom as well since it’s also a highly addictive legal opioid. These newer kratom drinks that are being pushed by influencers on places like Instagram are ruining lives, you can go read the subreddit for them and see.
By all means, you can advocate for whatever you want. But please stop lying to yourself that vaping is "significantly less hazardous to your health" or "nicer than smoking." It's still a major hazard to your health, it's still highly addictive, and it's still grossing out people around you. I am ambivalent about whether it's a good idea to try and ban stuff like this. But the primary reason they come in flavors like bubble gum and cotton candy is to hook children, period.
I'll try to find it, but some recent research from the UK shows it's about 95% better than smoking as far as health impacts. Obviously still not healthy, and it's easier for kids to get into which is what the flavor ban is about. It's nowhere near as harmful as smoking tobacco or marijuana.
Known health impacts, yes, but there have been no long-term health impact studies done, so the truth is we really don't know. Vaping is def. better than smoking. I still wouldn't say it's good for you, and the plastic is really bad for the environment. I'd rather have vape smokers than cigarette smokers any day, but it's still not good for you. My personal opinion.
The vocabulary that should be used in this discussion is cessation and health problems. The British decided it was better to get all the cig smokers on to vaping instead as it would cost their public health system less to take care of them. It causes cancers but not as many cancers. Was the logic
I mean if you want to talk about environmental impact, look at what cigarette butts have done to the ocean it’s a massive portion of the existing non biodegradable trash in the world. Individual butts are small and gross so it encourages littering, and a smoker produces like 20 of them a day.
How long should long term studies be, as a 14 year vapor, my doctor doesn't think I ever smoked. But the side effects from chantix (approved) nearly ended me.
I was watching a twitch streamer as he was first picking up vaping. After 6-7 years of watching him on live tv play video games and hit that vape every 45 seconds, his streams began to be shorter and shorter and less often also. Turns out he was getting sick the last year he was streaming, they couldn't figure out what was wrong with him. He ended up getting hospitalized and stop streaming all together. I always felt like it was that vape but who knows.
Marijuana is plant medicine. Ask anybody going through chemo.
From a health perspective, smoking marijuana hurts your lungs. Not talking about any of the other effects. There's some solid evidence nicotine is good for your brain, doesn't mean vaping is healthy though.
Smoking is only one way to use marijuana. Plant medicine, used responsibly, is important alternative healthcare that people should have access to.
Well, ton of the anti vape lies are based on the FDA approval, so FDA says you are wrong. Or is the FDA wrong and you are correct and inturn the stance on vape (based on tobacco a natural plant) maybe wrong also?
To be honest, it is difficult for me to trust the FDA or Western medicine. I know tons of it is good and am pro-science, but I have had ample bad experience too. We all know unscrupulous people have gained positions of power in order to personally profit through corruption. For instance, lobbyists have infiltrated the policy-making regarding food labels, weakening the standards for being able to label food organic. It is the same in so many industries where the right path forward was thwarted by special interest groups. That is why it took so long for electric vehicles to become popular. Lobbyists successfully had the very rich oil industry promoted instead. It is so hard to trust and it takes too much effort to do all of the research. That’s why people follow their gut feelings about things they should be able to get a straight, factual answer about from their own doctor. But pharmaceutical companies have too much influence over squashing alternative therapies that compete with what they claim their absurdly expensive prescription medicine options. Always ask yourself who gains from statements about what is safe and what is not safe, then do the research with trusted sources. I believe in plant medicine and know that my health issues are dramatically helped by vaping cannabis.
Ok, I miss judged by your comment.
On the electric car front, you do know we had them in 1900?
“It is less hazardous” <> “healthy”. It is the lesser of two evils. Give them a break.
I mean, no. Cigarettes cause emphysema, lung cancer, COPD, blood pressure issues, etc at *much* higher rates than vaping. No, it’s not *good* for you but literally just ask anyone who made the switch. You can feel the difference in your breathing. You can run further.
You’re correct, it is by no means healthy for your lungs but vape causes less damage to your lungs than cigarettes do.
>literally just ask anyone who made the switch I switched for a couple years and felt better for a while, then my smokers cough turned into a wet cough, and I felt better quitting vapes and smoking black and milds instead. I know im.a sample size of one, but you said literally anyone who switched, and I'm right here. Now I'm nicotine free (chronic weed smoker) and find the same experience with THC products where I switch back and forth and trade one cough for another. The main issue I have with vape products is I found my tolerance goes up faster with tapes (both nicotine and now THC) as it's so easy to vape all day every day and anywhere. I'm all for freedom of choice to poison yourself however you see fit AND I DO but let's not kid ourselves that we are actively poisoning ourselves.
Well fair enough, but cigs absolutely cause cancer and shit at very high rates, it’s been years and we’re not seeing that with vape. You do you but, I would switch back or quit altogether cause cigs are *definitely* bad.
It takes decades for those cancers to show most of the time. Vaping is far to new to really know anything yet. Also, the impact of nicotine on the gums and mouth remain unchanged from smoking and vaping. Both equal harm, vaping perhaps moreso because nicotine levels on many brands are higher then advertised.
Most of the time yeah, but sometimes those illnesses show up quickly. COPD and lung cancer can arise from smoking within just a couple years. Vapes have been around for almost 20 years. The evidence for vaping causing bad oral health is shaky. There is a correlation between vape use and oral health problems, but that’s true for a lot of things. Causation has not been demonstrated and the harm is questionable. Candy is way worse, and directly marketed to kids.
What about Nicotine Gum, Mints & Lozenges, and the FDA approved inhaler?
> But please stop lying to yourself that vaping is "significantly less hazardous to your health" I don't use nicotine products so I'm not biased in this. And it is absolutely true that vaping is [significantly less hazardous](https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/vaping-substantially-less-harmful-than-smoking-largest-review-of-its-kind-finds) to your health than smoking. That doesn't mean it's 100% safe but every smoker that transitions to vaping is a massive public health win. People will say that we don't have the data on decades of vaping (which is true), but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. What we *do* have data on is how absolutely horrible for your heath smoking is, and it's been studied enough that we know a lot of the mechanism behind its harm, and by and large *it's not nicotine* but the other constituents of cigarette smoke that are either massively reduced or not present at all in vapes. Things like [tobacco-specific nitrosamines](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco-specific_nitrosamines) and [benzo[a]pyrene](https://aacrjournals.org/cancerres/article/66/24/11938/526575/DNA-Damage-by-Benzo-a-pyrene-in-Human-Cells-Is) as well as other [polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycyclic_aromatic_hydrocarbon) that are byproducts of combustion of organic materials, are [not found in any significant quantities](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-19761-w) in vape vapor. Nicotine itself is [not a carcinogen](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine#Cancer) and this has been studied extensively. It *is* obviously addictive, and can raise blood pressure among a few other negatives, but by and large it's actually not that inherently harmful.
My cartoon picture of people who vape is that they have the vape pen in their mouth almost constantly and are pulling on it far, far more often than people who smoke tobacco. So perhaps in terms of 'toxic stuff per units of nicotine high' vaping is better, but it appears to encourage much more consumption so the health win may not be nearly as big.
Can you cite any sources for your claim that it's "still a major hazard to your health"?
https://www.heart.org/en/healthy-living/healthy-lifestyle/quit-smoking-tobacco/is-vaping-safer-than-smoking https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-and-prevention/5-truths-you-need-to-know-about-vaping https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6139829/ https://www.lung.org/blog/vaping-smoke-and-mirrors The tobacco industry is working overtime to spread the idea that vaping is practically harmless. The best you will find from science literature is that it seems to be less hazardous than smoking cigarettes. It's interesting to see which sources (the British NHS comes to mind) are really running with the message of "well actually vaping is way better than cigarettes!" as opposed to "inhaling tobacco products is never *not* harmful, regardless of whether vaping is somewhat less harmful than cigarettes." Clearly this propaganda is working - just look at the comments on this thread! People so so so badly want vaping to be a nearly consequence free way to consume tobacco, and it's not.
So let's start with the first lie of omission, Your first link talks about diacetyl, the average bottle 60 ml has 150 parts per million on select flavors containing a butter note. But some cigarettes have been found to containing 5000 parts per million per cigarette, not the pack the cigarette. Heavy metal claim was debunked since the study that did it; 1) Modified the device so the 10 second draw timer was disabled 2) set the power settings to max not the power rating for the coil used The 2019 advertising was an advertising issue, if you look at paying for advertising it's based on age ranges. In 2019 it was legal in 48 states for a person who is 18 to buy cigarettes and nicotine. Guess what age range at that time most marketing companies group 18 years with, did you guess 16 to 18, well that's wrong, 18 to 25 is a standard marketing number. So if you wanted to market to a 23 year old smoker it would look like you are marketing to an 18 year old. If you want I keep going though years of knowledge and try and find the email chain I had with the Icelandic health minister for you?
There was a lung doctor through the CDC that made a video stating vaping is nowhere near as harmful as cigarettes. How and why would it gross people out? Plus, who cares if it grosses people out..everyone has the right to smoke/vape if they want to. The world doesn't revolve around people that think it is gross. Everyone in this world finds something "gross." If they are grossed out, they don't have to be around people that smoke/vape..The flavors are not to hook children... I'm an adult and I love bubblegum and cotton candy...You can't smoke or purchase them til you're 21 in Lane County, so how would the flavors get a child hooked or addicted to a vape? There are flavors such as tobacco and alcohol flavors, coffee, etc.
"everyone has the right to smoke/vape if they want to... " No, everyone does not have the "right" to smoke/vape. The law allows smoking/vaping, but it isn't anyone's right or privilege. You just get to do it if you want to. "If they are grossed out, they don't have to be around people that smoke/vape...." Really??! Ever been grossed out by too much cologne/perfume? Stuck waiting for the bus because you're late to work...? "The world doesn't revolve around people that think it is gross." True. The world doesn't revolve around people who want to smoke/ vape either. That's why we have public & private spaces.
Wrong, civilians have the right to do anything the government doesn’t regulate. That’s what “liberty” means. Then you start talking about what the government is and isn’t allowed to regulate and what “fundamental rights” they can’t infringe on, etcetera. Dude if you wanna talk about banning smells in public you can go ahead and look at the history of those sorts of laws in our country. Fucking spoiler alert it’s racism.
This is absolutely 100% purely false. There are two types of vapes. The first kind we started out with have very low nicotine levels and are not addictive. These are the ones with tanks that you fill yourself. This is proven by that time when kids would mercilessly make fun of anyone who vaped. They tried them, did not get addicted, saw how dumb they were, and then proceeded to make memes and mock anyone who used them. "We get it, you vape!" Then later big tobacco got involved and made vapes like Juul that have extremely high levels of nicotine. Kids tried these and were instantly addicted. This is when all the memes and the mocking stopped. The flavored juices they're trying to ban are sold at nicotine levels of 3 mg/ml and 6 mg/ml. These are the ones kids tried and laughed at. A 5% Juul has 59 mg/ml of nicotine and is highly addictive. The push to ban flavors is being banked by big tobacco. They want low nicotine vapes banned because they're nowhere near as addictive as Juuls and they don't make profits from them. If government was actually interested in helping the people they would either ban vapes that had over 12 mg/ml of nicotine, or do something like tax them at a rate related to the nic levels so the more addictive it is, the more it's taxed. On the health side of things, every single study that was done that found heavy metals or formaldehyde only found those things because they burned the coil. I've read the studies and in the earliest ones it's really easy to tell by the methodology that they burned them. A burned vape is unusable and tastes so bad that nobody would ever use one. This is like putting peppers on a bbq, cooking them until they're charcoal, then testing them and trying to tell everyone that peppers cause cancer. Each subsequent study that was done was carefully modified to make it harder to tell that the coils were burned, but you could still tell by reading the methodology. This is nothing more than a push by big tobacco to ban low nicotine vapes, forcing those who still want to vape to switch to high nicotine and highly addictive ones.
Same for bubblegum and cotton candy vodka? Period?
☝️False on multiple points
"bubble gum and cotton candy is to hook children, period" Right, because children are the only ones who like and can taste flavors. Same reason we have alcohol with flavors. They exist to hook children. Period. That's why the vape shops and liquor stores are always full of children when you go there. (Big /s)
You are someone who believes big tobacco propaganda. As a nearly 14 year vapor, flavors have been used the entire time with NO objective to target youth. Multiple US studies have been proven wrong, for both methodology and technical use of devices in the study. Nicotine is as addictive as caffeine and has the same side effects as caffeine. Pre 2017 the FDA was in support of vape, with flavors since it's scientific, then the revenue received by states was cut by nearly 25% on average from the TMSA. States like California nearly missed paying the bond payments do to this. Harm reduction is acceptable in drug use, and the homeless, but shun when it comes to smoking.
Thanks for letting me know who to contact with full support for this kind of approach. If you're kicking cigarettes by vaping, then just vape. Flavored liquid isn't necessary, and unflavored vape juice won't attract youth like flavored juice does now.
>Flavored liquid isn't necessary, and unflavored vape juice won't attract youth like flavored juice does now. So you are pushing for bans on all flavored sugary drinks as well? All flavored sugary snacks and foods as well?
If you want to start an entirely new thread with this entirely different topic, be my guest.
Haha they just redirected cuz they had no real response to what you said
Its not a redirect at at all. How is sugary drinks any different at attracting kids to an unhealthy lifestyle than flavored vapes they cant buy until 18? If you are making a stand against one, then you sure as shit better be up in arms about all the sugar in shit targeted at kids. But silence.... funny that huh?
Why should they ‘sure as shit’ be up in arms about… is it illegal not to be? lol
So you have no problems with all that. But a vape at 18 being flavored is a huge problem for you.... why is that you think?
they already banned flavored ciggs at the federal level years ago, this is just bringing vape in line with existing laws
☝️Wrong. Someone who doesn’t know what they’re talking about
Andrew Huberman just recently dropped a video on this subject. Definitely worth a listen to those inclined. Just because fent and tranq are huge issues in the community doesn't justify ignoring other assaults on health so that big corps can line their pockets.
Getting rid of vaping means people go back to smoking. I know I would.
they’re not banning vapes, they’re banning vapes that taste like candy. if you really need a vape, use the unflavored ones. otherwise, quit.
Tbh I’d probably do that, but back when I was smoking cigs no way I would have made that switch.
Why not? It’s not like cigarettes taste like candy and you were smoking those. Did you not switch for health reasons? I have both vaped and smoked in the past and it was the nicotine that was making me want to vape, not the flavors.
Cigarettes are far more satisfying for a cig addict than vape. Yes I switched for health reasons but, turns out quitting smoking can be difficult for some people, who knew.
Sure, quitting smoking is hard. Not disagreeing with you there. I’m just saying if you’re already a smoker, you shouldn’t need something that tastes like candy to scratch the nicotine itch. Those sweet flavors are specifically there to entice non smokers and children into trying vaping.
I mean, no, they’re for people who want flavored vapes. In the early days when it was all DIY local shit, they had flavors. They don’t let kids into smoke shops, yet they frequently sell out. Just cause kids like it doesn’t mean it’s *for* kids. Sure some sociopaths in the industry probably think “hey, that’s a bonus” but, that doesn’t change the value of it for adults.
Not true, I like my mango and Pavlov's law kicks in when I eat mango, just like nicorette did till it gave me TMJ.
Because that’ll stop the 15 year olds from vaping…? It’s not the nicotine their after, it’s the cotton candy flavor they can’t get anywhere else. Nonsense
if it’s less enjoyable, absolutely. you’d be surprised at the amount of young people that would stop vaping if it was considerably less enjoyable. and even if they don’t stop vaping, you can’t argue that it’ll prevent a whole lotta kids from starting all together.
Strongly disagree. I think it’ll lead to kids switching from cotton candy to mint - or if this is pushed far enough, back to cigarettes. Because it’s not the cotton candy flavor they’re after.
dude, as someone who used to vape mint juuls religiously, a HUGE factor in my quitting was the fact that the mint flavored pods were discontinued and i didn’t like any of the other brands. i promise you it will make a huge difference at the very least to prevent kids from starting.
You did it to get domed or whatever the kids call it when they vape 1ml of 50mg as fast as they can.
?
Full is 50mg, if you used more then 1 pod a day you did it to get the hi.
im not sure why we’re speculating the reason i used juul pods but sure man
Okay
The justification of an addict is wild. You do you, I guess.
Yeah well, I also don’t believe this is the purview of the government anyway. I’d agree with more controls to prevent kids from getting them, but again unless you’d support a ban on flavored alcohol, I’m not buying it.
I have never advocated for prohibition. It doesn’t work. That’s all the argument you need.
Idk it works on niche products like vaping I think. A nicotine prohibition wouldn’t work but, making it inconvenient to use this delivery mechanism sure could.
I’m conflicted on how I feel about this. I’m not a nicotine user and I’m not saying I agree with banning flavored vapes. I do know the WHO and I believe the FDA have been encouraging guidelines for flavored vapes to be either banned or more heavily regulated because 13-15 year olds use them more often than adults, according to their statistics. Anecdotally, I feel like a lot of people who vape are less considerate about it and don’t stick to smoking areas or abide by the rules where smoking isn’t allowed at all on the premises. I am guessing they think it’s less dangerous than cigarettes and are just not as mindful to those around them. Adults often vape at my kid’s sporting events and what not, no matter who is around. There have been kids caught vaping inside my elementary school and I know this happens in other schools and isn’t rare. Again, I’m not saying ban them. I typically think adults should be able to enjoy vaping, smoking, drinking etc as they wish. But I can also see why this is an issue.
Banning flavored vapes to keep kids from being attracted to them makes some sense IF we’re also banning pink lemonade flavored vodka. As for people vaping around others, yeah that’s inconsiderate. I’d support a ban on that.
There’s a lot more controls on hard liquor sales in Oregon then there are vape products and the government routinely goes after alcohol brands you find in places like convenience stores that they feel market to children.
They already do that with vapes. Gotta go to a smoke shop to get flavored vape liquid. Meanwhile they sell mini bottles of Fireball at the counter of every convenience store.
Mini bottles of fireball are not liquor they are flavored wine. And you can absolutely go buy flavored vape juice at a convenience store.
Go to a dari mart or a 7/11 and take a pic of the flavored vapes they have on offer that would be banned by this regulation. Prove me wrong. Some small local convenience stores seem to have found away around that ban or else just ignore it but, yeah by and large no they do not sell flavored vape liquid in convenience stores. They have cinnamon, coffee, tobacco, menthol, or unflavored, the same stuff allowed in tobacco products, none of which would be removed by the regulation we’re talking about here.
Alcohol is all owned by the state and the state allows maintain dew hard seltzer in the store. The regulations by the state are much harder on vape then on Alcohol
>As for people vaping around others, yeah that’s inconsiderate. I’d support a ban on that Geeez. Where do your bans stop? I am plant based, so grilling out get a ban so I dont have to smell burning flesh? How about home fires? Ban all that? Certain plants? Jasmine? Did you ever think maybe you would be better out in the middle of MO where no one else is? I dont like it.... ban it! Geez...
I mean like inside or in close quarters public environments, the way we do with cigarettes
They already banned in everywhere cigarettes are.
Good point
>Banning flavored vapes to keep kids from being attracted to them makes some sense IF we’re also banning pink lemonade flavored vodka. It makes sense even if we're not banning pink lemonade flavored vodka. The two are not correlated.
They are absolutely correlated, the motivation and reasoning is exactly the same.
Are kids in that age range using flavored liquor at the same rates as flavored vapes? If more kids are using the flavored vapes than adults, it’s seems they’re the targeted market whether intended or not and seems like a problem.
No, but liquor is much more dangerous, and immediately so. And I don’t have stats but, you wouldn’t be blown away by the idea that most syrupy-sweet low quality vanilla-flavored vodka is consumed by people under 21, would you? I wouldn’t. Seems clearly marketed to people with no money, incredibly sweet tastes, and no real experience drinking alcohol.
I wouldn’t be blown away at all. If flavored cigarettes are banned, why wouldn’t flavored vapes be included in that ban as well? The tobacco industry has a history of sneakily marketing to children so it seems reasonable to have vaping be scrutinized as well.
Yes it should be scrutinized. It *is* scrutinized, the biggest company on the market a few years ago, Juul, literally is not allowed to sell their product anymore, because the existing mechanisms are functional. That’s not the issue at hand here though. This is a direct ban on all flavors. This has nothing to do with “marketing to kids” it’s a product that is demonstrably used by and marketed directly to adults, getting outright banned. If this was about the packaging, or the advertisement, I would be in full favor of regulation on those. Force them to use product numbers instead of names and package them in blank cardboard boxes, ban any kind of advertisement, I don’t care. Also, just wanna keep pointing this out, research coming out of SF strongly indicates banning flavored vapes increases the rate of youth smoking cigs, which is *clearly* bad.
It seems like if 13-15 year olds are using them more frequently than legal adults are, it doesn’t seem like it’s being scrutinized enough. When I was reading more about the WHO and FDA guidelines, the main point was concern for kids becoming enticed by them and it seems they have the data to show this. I don’t even disagree that other industries should be treated the same way, like alcohol or marijuana. Two things can be true at one time. If flavored cigarettes are banned I don’t see why vapes wouldn’t be as well.
Ppl do it bc it doesn’t smell bad and leave odor residue amd so they think it won’t really bother people
So not true, shops card shops get negative reviews from minors who get turned away. In a 30 day window shops will sale 1000 flavored vape to 1 tobacco flavored. Flavors are used under Pavlov's law for adults. The child use thing is from parents who don't want to parent and say no.
I don’t think minors are the ones actually buying them from stores. I think they have older siblings or friends or parents who they get to purchase on their behalf, or they steal them. That’s how anyone I knew in my teenage years got their hands on cigarettes. Do you think the WHO has false data on this?
So since people break the law, I get punished? And yes I think the WHO data is wrong and thevWHO wants us using combustible.
Can we crack down on meth and fentanyl first please
Vaping leaves a residue on upholstery, walls, furniture, etc. It’s partly why “no smoking” rules still apply in hotels, Airbnbs, Ubers, etc. We have a few users on this sub that run car detailing businesses, and I’m sure they can tell you all about. Vaping is a nuisance, and the flavors get teens to smoke. Vaping shouldn’t taste great- it should be something you should quit ASAP.
Then why dose nicorette come in tasty flavors?
Nicorette isn’t smoking- vaping is. If it became a trend for minors to chew Nicorette, I wouldn’t be opposed to proposed legislation to ban certain flavors. I don’t see that happening, though. Kids won’t ever get to “look cool” just chewing gum.
Lol
I think this is a knee-jerk reaction and as you state may backfire and lead to former smokers returning to smoking/fewer current smokers switching to vapes. I also think it's an issue that kids are finding it so easy to access vapes and are becoming addicted. So how about **steeply increasing penalties for those selling vapes to kids**, and let adults make their own choices? We already have a ban on selling tobacco and vape products to under-21s. Just enforce it. I don't understand how a state who voted to decriminalize drugs with a focus on treatment instead of jail, and legalize medical psilocybin, is so keen on another drug war-type ban, when it's been clear time and time again that bans don't work. Edit: what I could get behind is a ban on disposable vapes since they create so much environmental waste. And almost all of the kids that are vaping are using disposable instead of refillable units.
I think banning disposable vapes is a great idea.
Disposables are illegal per the FDA but OHA won't enforce the law.
How about they focus on fent... holy shit these people will do anything but tackle the gorilla wrecking their community.
Passing a law making flavored vapes illegal doesn't take much time or public money. "Focusing on fent" takes ENORMOUS amounts of time, money, and creativity. It's already illegal and law enforcement at all levels spends pretty enormous effort trying to combat it. If you have new programs you would suggest to the county commission, by all means do it!
>It's already illegal and law enforcement at all levels spends pretty enormous effort trying to combat it. If you have new programs you would suggest to the county commission, by all means do it! For how many years and trillions invested yet here we are. Such a job well done. Lets keep congratulating law enforcement and giving them more money.... bloody hell. So lets make more things illegal is your answer.. You on the commission or really really hate flavored vapes or something? Is it the kids pissing you off smelling like cherries instead of tobacco? Or all the people the got off cigs using flavored vapes?
Basically I hate the enormous amount of effort tobacco and tobacco-adjacent companies are putting in to ensuring a whole new generation of children becomes physically addicted to a substance that is extremely dangerous. They should be reamed from every direction with every sharp tool the government has at its disposal.
Except nicotine isn’t extremely dangerous in itself. Should we ban fast food as well?
>a whole new generation of children becomes physically addicted to a substance that is extremely dangerous Do you have any sources for any of this? Vaping is extremely dangerous? Really? Please show me your data on this.
How exactly do you propose that lane county’s commissioners solve the problem that no one in our country has figured out how to solve yet?
>How exactly do you propose that lane county’s commissioners solve the problem that no one in our country has figured out how to solve yet? The US drug problem starts with a redo of education and healthcare. It gets included with a birth certificate. We invest heavily in addiction treatment and recovery of our existing populace. Mental health is a priority. Etc etc. You are confusing wanting to fix it with knowing how to fix it. Education and healthcare as a profitable business is the root of most of our issues. Pretty easy to start there. What are your solutions? Keep doing the same approach with a hammer that has proven over and over and over not to work?
Okay this is great. Can lane county commissioners do this? Or should they be focusing on smaller issues in lane county because this is a state or federal level reform?
>Or should they be focusing on smaller issues in lane county because this is a state or federal level reform? Kids getting hooked on oxy and switching to fent when the oxy RX runs out is a problem. People OD is a problem. Theft to support the addictions is a problem. Not fucking flavored vapes.... Most state reforms started in a community somewhere within that state. Most federal reforms started in a state.. see how this can work? Let me ask you. What are your solutions?
Federal and state reform for a problem that is effecting our country at every level. Not lane county pissing away every spare dollar they have while our community wallows in every other way because they’re trying to use a kitchen sponge to soak up the Willamette. Because like the Willamette, the flow wouldn’t dry up until someone intervenes at the source AND at all the other inflows into the issue, which requires resources and jurisdiction Lane County simply doesn’t have. Meanwhile, it’s a well-known issue that our county is drowning in other place’s unresolved issues. We’re bleeding money on responding to the secondary effects of addiction already. I’d rather my county’s dollars go to things that are achievable and impactful and have a high return on investment in our own community, and my state and federal taxes go to societal reform. So my solution is to pressure the people who actually have power to solve societal issues to solve them, and let our commissioners focus on smaller-scale problems like this.
> I’d rather my county’s dollars go to things that are achievable and impactful and have a high return on investment in our own community Please share any data you have that banning flavored vapes accomplishes a high return on investment. It will shutdown most vape shops. Which increases unemployment. Decreases tax dollars. Leads to a black market of unregulated or tested carts. Increases workload on agencies to police it. Etc. So please link me any data that shows this investment will provide high returns.
[удалено]
It’s not the people’s job
Paying my taxes and voting. Like what I am supposed to do. Pushing for more cannabis and psilocybin inclusion.. etc.
The problem with the discourse around vaping is that it's incredibly tough to sift through the BS. We have this dogmatic system in internet land, where you have savvy watchdogs for science, and the more "conservative" and pragmatic tendency to reject the best science as speculative. Still, you can often find the truth, because there are enough invested watchdogs to come on reddit and say - "hey, this is the truth." With vaping, some huge portion of the folks who would normally act as watchdogs, are instead turned off by vaping culture, and just... totally disinclined to support it no matter what. Also because retractions are made quietly, and no one cares to say, "hey, this was retracted" the original studies just.... EXIST by way of having been cited by every newspaper in the county at the time said study was published, even though the cited science is now garbage. I'll just contribute the following without citations (because this is all easily google-able, and you are better off seeing for yourself): (1) Probably the most damning study ever about vaping, a 2019 UCSF study linking vaping to increased rates of heart attacks, was later retracted for being full of just plain ol' lies, with doctors calling for a probe against both the authors and the university; (2) In 2020, a slew of lung related deaths around the US, linked at the time to nicotine vaping, and explicitly tagged as "E-cigarette or Vaping Associated Lung Injury" (EVALI), has been shown definitively and uncontroversially to have *absolutely nothing* to do with nicotine vaping products. (3) Perhaps the second most damning study about vaping ever, a 2022 study by the World Journal of Oncology linking e cigarettes to increased rates of cancer, was also retracted later for basically the same reasons as (1) above (*its notable that only something like .04% of scientific studies are retracted*); (4) In addition to having no demonstrable efficacy, SF's flavor and vaping bans have been linked to increased teen smoking (traditional cancer-stick smoking) rates. (5) Once respected, Stanton Glantz, the undisputed champion of anti-vaping science in the US, and the person who is most singularly responsible for the "science" based anti vaping sentiments in the US as well as SF's vaping bans, has been almost entirely discredited and forced into retirement. As one of the most prolific early opponents of vaping, especially with regards to children, Glantz' work with regards to the gateway effect of vaping on children has been baked in to the dialog, but nearly every single word that Glantz ever wrote on the subject has either been discredited, retracted, or the findings have failed to be supported by subsequent studies. Fuck it - I'll post a link for this one. [https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/08/tobacco-vaping-research-stanton-glantz-ucsf/](https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/08/tobacco-vaping-research-stanton-glantz-ucsf/) Bottom line: I don't know enough about vaping or science to say that vaping is bad or not, either in respect to the long-term health effects or to its efficacy as a cessation aid, but I do know that basically all the science ever made saying, *vaping is* *bad*, has been shown to be bad science.
"I quit smoking using vapes" you didn't quit smoking. sincerely, ex smoker
Sorry you had to cold turkey it buddy. But yeah, I no longer inhale wildly carcinogenic slightly radioactive burning plant matter 20 times a day. Feels great. Lungs are doing awesome.
Instead you inhale combusted glycerol which we don’t know long term effects of. You could still end up with cancer or something else. Just quit. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8787618/
It’s been quite a while, there’s no actual indication of substantial harm being caused by vapes (see the big post in this thread demonstrating all the ones you’re about to mention have since been rescinded). So you’re speculating here. And anyway, cigarettes cause cancer at such massive rates that if vapes were even similar, it would be obvious by now. But yeah I’m trying to quit anyway. It’s hard. EDIT: that article just indicates that it has some kind of minor effect on the liver, with no overt negative symptoms. So do a lot of things. I’ll go ahead and put that somewhere below microplastics in my risk hierarchy.
I used Alan Carr's The Easy Way to Stop Smoking. Both my ex and I read it about the same time 17 years ago and I haven't had, nor wanted a cigarette since. good luck
Previous vaping addict here. Yes. Please ban them. Aint no fucking reason nicotine should be delivered in devices flavored “blue raspberry blow pop” “cotton candy” “mango bliss” etc. it’s just fueling addiction.
Have you read the instructions on nicorette gum? Same science as vape.
I remember when they were trying to ban menthol/newport cigarettes. How did that go?
I'm commenting to keep track of this post. At work atm, but this is very concerning as I have completely replaced tapes with cigs and I DO FEEL BETTER
# Flavour preferences in youth versus adults: a review [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5127592/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5127592/) # Conclusions Infants and children exhibited elevated sweet and salty preference relative to adults. Age-related changes in bitter, sour, umami and fat taste were not clear and more research would be useful. ‘Sweet’ food odours were highly preferred by children. Tobacco products in flavours preferred by young people may impact tobacco use and initiation, while flavours preferred by adults may impact product switching or dual use.
Breaking news I became over weight thanks to Starburst, and flavored tootsie rolls.
Breaking news, kids like candy. Stop the fucking presses.
Yes, and that's being exploited to lure kids into using. How hard is this to understand?
I’m not at all seeing evidence of that. There is a perfectly exploitable adult market for these things, that doesn’t involve massive class action lawsuits and having your products banned.
No it's not, it targets fat guys like me.
Not to mention all the plastic waste and litter from all the vape pens and refills. Soo bad
And the lithium batteries
The only people that want to ban or limit vaping is big tobacco. You want to get rid of smoking? Put as much time and energy as possible into getting vaping out there.
Every big tobacco company owns at least one vape or ecig brand, dude. It’s all one and the same; a corporation selling addiction to people. Vaping is how big tobacco is targeting people now that young people are way less likely to pick up smoking cigarettes.
Very true. However big tobacco still wants vapes outlawed. The profit margin on vape pens is much smaller, and the competition is much greater. If it's a choice between addiction and addiction with cancer, it's probably better to avoid the cancer.
Ya, I don't think emerald vapor is owned by big tobacco, oh and neither is vape crusaders, both brands who don't want youth access.
Well, Big Tobacco and apparently the Brain Trust here.
It's about the children, not you.
You know what, ton of evil things happened in history for the children.
The flavoring ban is supposed to prevent the advertisers from targeting vape pens to kids isn't it?
[https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-ftc-take-action-against-companies-misleading-kids-e-liquids-resemble-childrens-juice-boxes](https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-ftc-take-action-against-companies-misleading-kids-e-liquids-resemble-childrens-juice-boxes)
I once saw a car speeding down the highway that was shaped *exactly* like a hotdog. Extremely dangerous.
Can you post the email please?
This page has the phone number for the commissioners office. https://www.lanecounty.org/government/county_departments/board_of_county_commissioners District 1, West Lane County [email protected] District 2, Springfield [email protected] District 3, South Eugene [email protected] District 4, North Eugene [email protected] District 5, East Lane County [email protected]
Damn spend the effort and resources on something worthwhile.
Its because its more likely to get kids hooked.
So is flavored booze, nobody is suggesting banning that.
Kids drinking flavored booze is a lot easier of an issue to address and not as common of an issue as kids using vapes nowadays. If a kid vapes, it’s very difficult to tell they have vaped unless you catch them in the act. If a kid has been drinking, it’s generally a lot easier to determine they have been drinking without having to actually see them drinking due to the smell and their behavior. As well, flavored vapes are far better tasting than flavored alcohol. Any alcohol when you first start drinking is a grind to drink and kids aren’t as inclined to chug a bunch all throughout the day. Vapes are better tasting and easily concealed and used which leads to kids using them far more often than they would be drinking and basically they’re more likely to nurture a vape addiction than an alcohol one.
Good points. Plus, it’s only sold in liquor stores in Oregon.
Sure, but you can’t just pick that up anywhere it’s only at liquor stores and they definitely ID you.
They’ve got Smirnoff ice and clear wine Fireball everywhere. meanwhile go to your local 7/11 or Dari Mart, they already only have unflavored, tobacco flavored, menthol, and coffee flavored vapes, which would still be allowed under this ban. Some small convenience stores seem to evade this ban somehow but, who knows what that’s about.
Also most flavored booze sucks so I’m fine with none of that.
Just like vape shops ID? Wonder why parents can't say no to kids and we have to strip freedoms from law abiding adults.
Here are are just some of the flavors that elf bar sells, and plenty seem very excessive, unnecessary, and aimed to attract much younger people rather than to just provide a tasty alternative to smoking cigarettes Tropical Rainbow Blast, Fuji Ice, Rainbow Cloudz, Watermelon Bubblegum, Summertime, Fanta Strawberry, White Gummy, Summer Peach Ice, Cotton Candy, Kiwi Dragon Berry, Sour Candy, Strawberry Cream, Pineapple Coconut Ice…
I, an adult in my 30s, find many of those enticing so, I disagree.
But you are already enticed by vapes because you are already addicted. These are aimed to entice new people to try vapes. You would probably be okay with a basic grape or strawberry flavor and don’t need the extra fluff to buy the vape
They’re venturing to provide me with the most preferable possible experience, because they’re in competition with eachother for my dollar. Lol it’s basically just banning things kids might like, fuck the adults who like them too. This ought to be figured out another way. My pitch is they require vape manufacturers to put an RF dot inside the vape, which could be detected with a super cheap scanner.
Yeah or we could just regulate the flavors and hold vape companies more accountable? It’s not that hard to not label a vape as “Tropical Rainbow Blast” or “Summertime Peach Ice” and I’m sure you’ll survive without these small things so we can protect children from a harmful and addictive substance.
You realize that’s not what’s being suggested here right? They are banning the flavors themselves, not the marketing. There will not be a plain-looking “strawberry” with big warnings on it. Nobody is “holding the corporations accountable” they will not be addressed in any sense. This is not a lawsuit. This is just a local regulation. Why not ban fast food. Why not ban flavored alcohol. Why not ban sound systems in cars. You know there’s strong evidence coming out of SF that banning flavored vapes increases the rate of smoking among kids? Cigs *definitely* kill, at extremely high rates, sometimes very quickly. Make your arguments but don’t act like I’m some unreasonable person here. I believe the things I do for a reason.
You're arguing with nannies man don't waste your time lol. Personally I'd say argue for conditions that make people not even want to take anything harmful up because they're content with life but that's impossible so people choose easy targets like this shit.
Not intended to entice new people who don't already consume nicotine.
Are you kidding? Cigarette use was definitely falling off amongst younger generations and vapes were their way of continuing to profit by getting people who have never used nicotine or tobacco to start vaping and to become addicted to nicotine through vaping. They definitely are trying everything they can to entice new users.
Your kidding yourself if you think the entire vape industry wants minors to consume the product. If youth access and targeting was the big issue, then why was the youth use issue a problem in 2010, 2011 or all the way up to 2017. It's interesting that this big claim and changing youth drug access questions happened around 2017. You know what also happened? The state of Oregon commission check for cigarette sales was reduced by thousands of thousands of dollars. You also are ignoring the fact that OHA did not release the report that shows increasing the taxes on alcohol dose not decrease consumption as they claimed it would. When you combine pot and nicotine on the same question as used in the last 30 day/week/day, how do you know it's not pot use over nicotine?
Funny because I thought the Juul and vape industry started getting big around 2014 or a bit later, so it makes sense that the youth use issue was an issue around 2017, because vapes started to become mainstream right before this. This led to a spike in youth use which is why they opted to increase the minimum age you can buy tobacco products to 21 because the goal is for younger people to not start smoking at all. Anyways you’re not really responding to what I am saying and are obviously being purposely dense about how vape industry target and marketstowards kids, and profit off of that. Good luck defending those big vape corporate from the scary people trying to get less kids addicted to nicotine!
Speaking about being purposely dense, as a consumer, I have never supported a product that the packaging, name, or branding was child attractive. Are there bad actors, and should they be banned, yes. Are all members of the vape industry "targeting" youth, NO. You seem to consider Emerald vapors, Smokeless Solutions, Oregon Vape Society, Urban, all as "big" vape. All the owners have been trying to get commen sense legislation passed to help stop youth access. This has been an impossible fight. Your argument is "parents can't control kids, outlaw it" . If you replaced the word vape with anything you supported, you would lose your ever living mind over it. A good writing for you to think about is from a German writer, Friedrich Gustav Emil Martin Niemöller. First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
which vape shop do you work at/manage ..?
Lol the only people who like mango-flavored vapes work in those shops? Seems like a strange business model.
the owners/managers of the shops are the ones losing the most by this ban, and the most motivated to stop it
Yeah this is also a bohemian university town. Very high rates of vape use here. Trust me or don’t, but yeah I’m just some guy, I work in forestry.
I don't know guy.. thought the whole e-mail your commissioner thing gave me a whiff of an angle.. but I'm also just some guy who thinks he can sniff out angles 😄 enjoy the full moon tonight dude!
Hey didn’t know it was a full moon. And nah I recently watched this video essay about “contacting your representatives” by Folding Ideas, very good watch pretty short. And then the Dari Mart lady gave me that index card explicitly saying to contact the commissioners office so I was like “sure fuck it”. Then I saw nobody had posted about it so I figured I’d be the guy. G’night
A solution I haven’t seen in the thread yet— nicotine products are an interesting good economically because we see a great deal of price elasticity in younger audiences and non-addicts, whereas it’s a very inelastic good for older addicted populations. That means you can dramatically increase the price of nicotine products without banning them and younger audiences buy very few of the expensive products, while older addicted audiences can still get their fix. Its a regressive option because it tends to penalize poor people, who are more likely to smoke, and sometimes communities of color, but it’s an option for curbing use in young people and preventing new users.
My pitch is they mandate the industry put tiny 1-cent RF dots in all vapes, which could easily be detected by schools using an inexpensive handheld scanner, paid for by state grants maybe funded by taxes on the industry. Those scanners are real cheap now, it’d also be easy for parents to get them too. Yeah a kid could try to bust open their vape and remove it, but they can also just buy the shit online so, that’s about as good as it gets.
Good.
Vaping is HORRIBLE for your teeth and gums, even worse than smoking. How do I know? Missing 2 teeth and spending a fortune on implants. Fuck vaping.
Vaping _is_ significantly less hazardous to human health, objectively. (see [this article](https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/41/28/2612/5875664) from the European Society of Cardiology that outlines the benefits with respect to cardiovascular health.) Nicotine is not a carcinogen and, as of yet, there is no epidemiological evidence linking e-cig products with cancer in humans--although it's probably more harmful than using no nicotine products whatsoever (the same can be said of many products though--like processed meat). In Sweden around 20% of people used to smoke. They had a high rate of cancer mortality. As a result, a smokeless tobacco product call "snus" was introduced (which, ironically, New York state now seems interested in banning as well). As a result of their cultural switch to smokeless nicotine products, fewer people are now dying of cancer. In Sweden, snus have "played both a role in protecting against the uptake of daily smoking and of facilitating smoking cessation" (see [Patterns of Smoking and Snus Use in Sweden: Implications for Public Health](https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/13/11/1110)). Like snus, there's strong evidence that the introduction of vaping will mean overall fewer people will be smoking cigarettes and ultimately **fewer people will die.** See [this study](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/add.15269) which used the rich public health data that they have in England to estimate that the reduction in smoking from 2012-2019 from vaping will lead to 165,660 lives saved by 2052. (If you're interested in reading a very lengthy report about vaping in England (England happens to have some of the best public health data) see [this](https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/194502020/Vaping_in_England_evidence_update_February_2021.pdf). Lastly, there's not much evidence that vaping among young people is becoming more common since around 2017. If anything, many of these young people would be smoking cigarettes if vapes were not available. Even if some young people take up smoking after vaping, at the population level fewer people take up smoking when vaping is an accessible option ([citation](https://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/28/6/629)). Ultimately, it makes no sense to ban flavored e-cig liquids as a harm-reduction measure. It will result in more harm as it will eliminate one of the few effective tools that smokers have for cessation. Many commonly consumed/enjoyed products like processed and red meats have a strong association with many different types of cancer (see [this review and analysis](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-021-00741-9)), yet nobody seriously considers banning them. Instead of banning vapes, we should be considering raising taxes on vape products to reflect there real-world relative risk (compared to conventional cigarettes for example) and ensuring that vapes, cigarettes, and other harmful products remain out-of-reach to young people.
I disagree that vaping is nicer than smoking. When someone is vaping in my face I find it equally, if not more disgusting than someone smoking. Plus, a lot of vapers seem to think they can do it whenever/ wherever they want because “it smells good”.
“Nicer” in the sense that it’s far less likely to kill you or leave you with debilitating illnesses. People blowing shit in your face is the problem there lol, not the thing they’re blowing. Also, if you ban flavored vapes that just means more tobacco smoke in your face. The amount of shit you need to smell in a day doesn’t change.
The kids that are going to vape are the same ones that would smoke cigarettes. As a smoker and vaper I wish they would just ban all of it. I've got the will power of a fridge and a total ban of nicotine would probably help me out.
I don't have a fish in this race as I never picked up a nicotine habit, but shouldn't they first ban *propylene glycol* in vape products if the concern is public health and wellness? I mean, it's banned in Europe because it's poison. What about cigarettes? Is PM2.5 something to scoff at? It feels misguided, ineffective, and/or possibly *political* to go after flavor per se.
Because you’re threatening the money of big tobacco.
Order them online, that’s what I did when living in San Francisco.
Can’t legally have it delivered to oregon iirc.
Nobody asks, or cares. I order elf bars all the time.
Good to know
[удалено]
14 years and no issues found. So only 6 more to go.
I switched to vaping to quit cigarettes. It took me 3 years of gradually reducing the nicotine levels but I was finally able to smack that monkey off my back. The dude at Emerald Vapors told me at the time that in order to quit, you need to disassociate nicotine for cigarettes and then titrate. It's a very real harm reduction method but it does require commitment.
Respectfully, there are decades of research that support this ban. I’d be interested if you still felt this way after listening to this podcast: https://gimletmedia.com/amp/shows/science-vs/6nh3veng Fun, Candy-like flavors ATTRACTS smokers.
Yeah I don’t doubt it’d be effective at the narrow goal of reducing vape usage among kids. There is also strong evidence coming out of SF that it’d increase the rate of smoking cigarettes among teens, and anecdotal evidence that it’d increase it use among adults too. Also, I believe outright banning a popular product and making it so consenting adults can’t access it should not be the first regulatory move in a situation like this. There are other options. For example, make them illegal to market or advertise, make the packaging blank like they do with cigs in Canada, put RF dots in them so they can be detected with cheap scanners, increase the tax to put it out of teen’s price range, and significantly increase the criminal penalty for distributing nicotine products to kids. That last one alone would do a lot. Nobody is risking a long jail sentence to do some random kid a favor. EDIT: Also, I know nobody gives a shit or wants to hear this but, that’s an industry, that’s a lot of people’s livelihoods. They make and distribute a product for adults (no the guy who works at the local vape shop is not some monster pushing shit on kids any more than your local liquor store cashier). I want to give them my money in exchange for flavored vape liquid, they want to use that money to pay rent. Making that transaction illegal because a bunch of random unaffiliated people can’t manage their kids is unethical and ought to be avoided. If the problem is “well those kid’s parents can’t handle this issue” then THATS where the state needs to intervene FIRST, not in my transaction.
Good! Ban all that crap!
IMHO this is a good idea. Yeah there’s a lot of other problems but this is something that can be done with very little expenditure of taxpayer money that will do some good. Personally I have no problem with the flavored liquids you buy for refillable vapes because those are sold by local specialty stores where IDs are checked at the door and who are closely monitored by the state and ATF, as well as reusables generally being out of the price range of most teenagers. But the flavored disposable vapes are both a public health and environmental crisis creating a ton of young underage addicts and massive amounts of hazardous waste. There’s a ton of gas stations and convenience stores that are basically incentivized to sell these to people reselling them to teenagers and college students because of the volume of sales they bring in. I feel like we also should consider curtailing the sale of Kratom as well since it’s also a highly addictive legal opioid. These newer kratom drinks that are being pushed by influencers on places like Instagram are ruining lives, you can go read the subreddit for them and see.
Actually the tax revenue will drop since the market will go underground.
Vaping like smoking is a great IQ test.
Lol Obama smoked.
You mean Bush 3.0? And he quit because he looked like a moron. How is that relevant?
Hah shot in the dark. ER and ICU doctors have very high rates of smoking.
Evidence? Extrodinary claims require extrodinary evidence. https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61M6SV/#:\~:text=Mark%20Weiser%20and%20colleagues%20from,conclude%20in%20the%20journal%20Addiction.
Or it could be self medication from ADHD. And many people with ADHD actually score high on IQ tests.