1. TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users. Ask a question and give support. Join the community here.
    TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users.
    Ask a question and give support.
    Join the community here, it only takes a minute.
    Dismiss Notice

FDA: If youth e-cigarette use doesn't decline, it will be banned

By mongeese · 158 replies
Jan 20, 2019
Post New Reply
  1. p51d007

    p51d007 TS Evangelist Posts: 1,965   +1,230

    Well, look at it this way. If they don't, one of these days sadly in the USA, "government healthcare" will be mandatory, and these 16+ now kids will have lung problems that taxpayers will have to pay for!
    Just put a label that if you e-cig, and end up with a respiratory problem, your insurance WILL NOT cover it.
    learninmypc likes this.
  2. MaXtor

    MaXtor TS Maniac Posts: 253   +191

    With all due respect, you are absolutely incorrect. While non-smokers should not start vaping as inhaling anything other than air is not ideal: Vaping is minimally 95% safer than smoking according to the Royal College Of Physicians in the UK (founded 501 years ago), the same group of 35,000 physicians who first claimed smoking was dangerous more than 50 years ago (while American health organizations denied the dangers).

    First the truth for the motivation for the anti-vaping campaigns in America:

    It gets worse, Dr. Margaret Hamburg, the former Commissioner of the FDA who was vital in creating the dooming vaping regulations (which are still intact), was indicted on Racketeering and Corruption chargers with connection to Johnson & Johnson. Why does this matter? Well Johnson & Johnson are the creators of quit smoking aids like Nicorette gum, lozenges, and patches.

    “While Defendant Hamburg was FDA Commissioner, her husband, Defendant Brown’s annual income, not coincidentally, increased from a reported $10 million in 2008 to an estimated $125 million in 2011 and an estimated $90 million in 2012, due in whole or in part to Defendants’ racketeering conspiracy to withhold information about the devastating, life threatening, and deadly effects of Levaquin.”

    Now let's address the top anti-vaping propaganda and how every major anti-vaping headline has been debunked, of course, the scary headlines are what make the news (and that's what people such as yourself see.)

    1. "E-cigarettes will lead young people into smoking"
    According to Public Health England:
    “Our report found no evidence so far to support the concern that e-cigarettes are a route into smoking among young people. UK surveys show that young people are experimenting with e-cigarettes, but regular use is rare and confined almost entirely to those who already smoke. Meanwhile, smoking rates among young people in the UK continue to decline.”

    2. "Vaping causes popcorn lung."
    This is false, simply for the fact that the Harvard study completely ignored the most relevant context, cigarettes. The naturally occuring chemical diacetyl (found in buttery flavored foods) is believed to cause scaring of the lungs. This chemical was found in vaping, what they fail to mention is that it is found at hundreds of times higher levels in cigarettes, and smoking has never caused scaring of the lungs.

    3. "Vaping contains anti-freeze."
    Vaping does contain Propylene Glycol which is used in Pet Safe anti-freeze. Propylene Glycol is also found in all sorts of food products we eat and drink every day. It is also pumped through hospital and restaurant ventilation systems to prevent the spreading of germs.

    4. "Vaping contains formaldehyde."
    This one made headlines even though it was immediately debunked as the study was completely flawed. Vaping uses cotton saturated with a vapable liquid against a heating element to allow it to vaporize. The researchers had no airflow going through the vaporizer, this means no pressure pulling the liquid into the cotton. When that cotton goes dry, it can burn (creating formaldehyde), of course this taste horrendous and no one can continue vaping when this happens. So the levels a vaper is exposed to is not dangerous, in fact you're exposed to significantly worse levels walking down a side walk in any city.

    It's really depressing to know just how little most health organizations and governments truely care about our health. As with everything, it's all about $$$.
  3. xxLCxx

    xxLCxx TS Addict Posts: 231   +153

    They investigated this in Germany and let a group of non-smokers "vape" for half an hour. They measured their stats before and after. It turned out that after only half an hour of vaping, their lung volume (ability to breathe) had decreased by one third. Of course, once they stop they will recover. If you do this regularly, however, consider yourself f*****! Likewise, the nicotine will still have the very same effect it has in ordinary cigarettes: your blood pressure will fire up immediately. This means heart attacks, strokes, ... you know the drill.

    Vaping receives a lot of ILLEGAL advertising. You will notice the forums being flooded by marketers, telling you the same stories over and over again:
    "This is so much better than smoking."
    "I used to smoke before. This has changed my life. I feel so much better now!"
    ... feces like that.
    This follows the narrative that it's better to shoot yourself into the crotch rather than into your head. It's not advisable to shoot yourself anywhere - period. Anybody claiming that it is, and that this is better than XY, is simply taking the pisshh out of you. There are many ways to stop smoking. This isn't it. It's not even a replacement for "not stopping".
    cliffordcooley likes this.
  4. Bubbajim

    Bubbajim TechSpot Staff Posts: 679   +660

    It's not all in his head, but it's also not some magical property of vaping. When smoking, carbon monoxide is inhaled that binds to haemoglobin in place of oxygen, meaning the blood's overall capacity for holding oxygen is reduced. This leads to being quickly out of breath. Vaping contains no carbon monoxide and so the haemoglobin are able to bind to and transport oxygen freely. So within 2-3 days of stopping smoking, people feel more energised and are able to exert themselves more.

    I can't believe the number of people in this thread who have been convinced that vaping is worse than cigarettes. Literally 3 minutes' research would prove otherwise.

    And to anyone saying 'ban the lot of them!'; get a life. Let people do what they want to do when it's not harming anyone else.
    James00007, Theinsanegamer and Hexic like this.
  5. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TS Guardian Fighter Posts: 11,389   +5,016

    Coming from someone that has quit twice, I do have grounds to stand on. Ban them all.
    xxLCxx likes this.
  6. Bubbajim

    Bubbajim TechSpot Staff Posts: 679   +660

    Sure. Then let's heed ex-drinkers' calls to ban alcohol, and vegan calls to ban meat, and public transport users' calls to ban cars, and religious calls to ban blasphemy and, and, and...
  7. xxLCxx

    xxLCxx TS Addict Posts: 231   +153

    Yes, thank you dear robot. We cannot do one thing right, because we'd have to do them all otherwise. Nice logic - NOT.
    I’m seeing teenagers "vaping". We haven’t seen them smoking for a long while. Tobacco was on a decline. Then the industry came up with something new, which looks and tastes like candy. They advertised this to kids aggressively (and illegally), with the effect I described above. I rarely see adult vapers. They still smoke cigarettes. It’s the kids, whom I see vaping. Therefore, f*** you tobacco slime balls and your "satanic" offspring, the vaping industry!
  8. Bubbajim

    Bubbajim TechSpot Staff Posts: 679   +660

    What's your logic for banning smoking? Then, separately, what's your logic for banning vaping?

    And arguing from a position of "I'm seeing" isn't likely to convince anyone. If you can find some credible data on vaping uptake among youths who didn't previously smoke, I'll concede that there's a problem there. But the vast majority of data sets I've seen about use here in the UK is that non-smoking youth uptake of vaping is negligible, but the number of people transitioning from smoking to vaping is much more significant.

    If you're anti-smoking, vaping has been the best anti-smoking development for a century.
    James00007, Theinsanegamer and MaXtor like this.
  9. xxLCxx

    xxLCxx TS Addict Posts: 231   +153

    More of the same logic, thanks but no thanks! Oh yes, and the FDA is alarmed without reason. The sky is blue, blablabla ... :p
  10. MaXtor

    MaXtor TS Maniac Posts: 253   +191

    Youth binge drinking rates are a much more serious concern (resulting in death). However, the FDA is not alarmed by it, they also don't care about all the "advertised to children" candy flavored alcohol.

    They're in bed with big pharma, wouldn't happen? Look up the former head of the FDA, Dr. Margaret Hamburg. And then Harvard, the school who created the biggest vaping scare by completely ignoring context (popcorn lung). Look up how their professors are also in bed with big pharma. Students noticed their curriculum was being influenced by big pharma. They protested, Harvard ruled that professors would now need to disclose their ties to big pharma. One professor disclosed ties to 52 pharmaceutical companies.

    It's sad that so many current smokers will never try vaping and save their lives, the propaganda has won, the public has been brainwashed. Drinking down the government and big pharma's koolaid with a smile of moral superiority on their face.
    James00007 likes this.
  11. xxLCxx

    xxLCxx TS Addict Posts: 231   +153

    "It's sad that so many current smokers will never try vaping and save their lives"??? This is worth a lawsuit.

    Binge drinking is in the decline among young adults:


    What really helped in Germany, was slapping a nice tax on the so-called 'alcopop' beverages. This was pretty much the same attempt we are seeing with vaping. This drinks didn't taste of alcohol, but looked and tasted like candy/lemonade instead. They targeted children and teens specifically. Law intervened and now the freak show is over...
  12. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TS Guardian Fighter Posts: 11,389   +5,016

    How about all the heath problems I witnessed while smoking. And then the ones I witnessed go away when I quit. And I witness people complaining about the very same symptoms, while refusing to quit themselves. All because their status in society when they started was to look cool doing it. And now they have a mental problem stopping,. They can't ignore the thought of picking another one up. It is the dependency that should be banned. It is not a drug that may or may not make you better. It is an addictive drug that has been proven to make you worse. It is not some food item that you have a choice whether you want to eat. And unlike food choices, cigarettes and vaping are not something we survive on.

    And your thought on transportation, sure just as soon as public transportation goes everywhere. But then again I don't see the health risk involved in driving your own vehicle. I do however see health risk in driving badly because you are distracted smoking, texting, or simply acting stupid. As for religion lets not go there. I would hate to think you were trolling me to go down that road. Although I would love to do exactly what you said.
    pit1209 and xxLCxx like this.
  13. Theinsanegamer

    Theinsanegamer TS Evangelist Posts: 1,547   +1,767

    Driving your own vehicle is the single most dangerous task most adults undertake on a day to day basis.

    If your basis for banning something is "it's dangerous" then driving would absolutely fall under that same catagory, as would drinking, any non super healthy food (remember, obesity is going to cost more, and kill more, then cancer very shortly), sports, ece.

    Why does smoking or vaping constitute being banned because of "health reasons" yet junk food and driving do not? It's called a slippery slope. Once you ban something in the name of "health" other people will use that rule to ban other things, things you use on a daily bases, because of "health reasons". Obesity kills, directly or indirectly,more people per year then smoking does, so should all non healthy food be banned too?
    James00007 and Bubbajim like this.
  14. toooooot

    toooooot TS Evangelist Posts: 817   +402

    Here is my interpretation of the concern: traditional tobacco product makers lose customers and volumes of sales, so it would be wise to ban e cigarettes to get sales back.
    James00007 likes this.
  15. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TS Guardian Fighter Posts: 11,389   +5,016

    No it doesn't. Tell me exactly how sucking on burning leaves gets you closer to making a living. Apples to oranges is what you are wanting me to compare. No one needs to smoke period. What would this world be like if no one drove?
    xxLCxx likes this.
  16. Bubbajim

    Bubbajim TechSpot Staff Posts: 679   +660

    I can concede basically every point here about smoking, but still not think it requires a ban because no one is unaware of the risks of smoking, so if they choose to do it, that's up to them. I smoked for 11 years, then for all those reasons and others too, decided to quit.

    But, the crucial point here is that this is a thread about vaping. None of the points you've raised, which are all great points against smoking, matter in the least for vaping. The vast majority of health conditions from smoking are caused by carcinogens, tar, and particulate matter. In vaping, there's no particulate matter, no tar, and, as far as I'm aware, while the jury's still out on the carcinogen impact of vaping, it'll be nowhere near that of smoking.

    If someone wanted to ban alcohol, they'd have tons of good reasons. But if that same person wanted to include 'alcohol free' beers/wines too, because they're too similar to alcoholic drinks and can contain up to 0.05% alcohol, wouldn't you think they were crazy?
    James00007 likes this.
  17. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TS Guardian Fighter Posts: 11,389   +5,016

    My first comment was a bit sarcastic, even though I was serious. I might wish for a ban on smoking, but I'm not expecting them to. The chicken Sh!t bastords want to ban vaping because minors are using. When they never considered banning smoking because minors were using. That was the point I was making. It is another one of those ban the gun and the murderer will find another tool scenarios.
  18. Trillionsin

    Trillionsin TS Evangelist Posts: 1,806   +407

    People are going to do drugs regardless of whether it's healthier or not.

    IDK why all the debate on what's better for you or not...

    Seems like the debate should fall on the fact that it's apparently so easy for these kids to get them, why it's so available to them, whether it's their parents fault...

    Kind of interesting that we get caught up in that discussion whether which is healthier. Addicts don't care about how healthy something is until it's a problem, or until they can notice the physical toll its taking on them.

    I suppose, it's probably best to ban the **** if we can't keep it away from kids. Just like all the other drugs these kids are doing these days, that'll show 'em!
    xxLCxx likes this.
  19. xxLCxx

    xxLCxx TS Addict Posts: 231   +153

    It's not only that “the kids can get to them”, THEY ARE SPECIFICALLY TARGETING KIDS with their candy look and candy flavors. They are explicitly addressing them on the Internet, telling them lies about how healthy it is (compared to tobacco).
    The tobacco industry already did this a long time ago. Remember chocolate cigarettes for kids?
    The booze industry did it with “alcopops”...

    This isn't an incident. It is an easy way to make plenty of money - on children; “over their dead bodies”, so to speak.
    pit1209 likes this.
  20. pit1209

    pit1209 TS Booster Posts: 47   +57

    It is not worse in the sense that something can be bad but not terrible and many of the things you mentioned are not addictive per se except caffeine. I'm a medical doctor and I have knowledge of the multiple and harmful substances that just the combustion of something can create specially when it's absorbed in the lungs that are not for anything else but O2/CO2 exchange.
    xxLCxx likes this.
  21. pit1209

    pit1209 TS Booster Posts: 47   +57

    What you just said doesn't make any sense in the context of banning an addictive substance and it's derivatives that has been proven time and again to be harmful and unnecessary for the body in any way other than personal satisfaction out of mental dependence. Driving is more "dangerous" yes but if you follow guidelines and rules it can be safe. Now tell me in what context smoking is anything but harmful to you and anyone by your side and how that can be of benefit for you or any person.
    xxLCxx likes this.
  22. bandit8623

    bandit8623 TS Addict Posts: 153   +58

    I'm not a smoker, but it doesnt take a brain surgeon to see tar and **** from a cigarette is worse than vape.
    James00007 and jason lee like this.
  23. jason lee

    jason lee TS Rookie Posts: 18   +7

    Here's an idea -- how about we educate kids and parents be held responsible for supervising them?
    If we're going to ban e-cigs because underage minors use them when they're not supposed to, let's also ban alcohol and tide-pods while we're at it.

    Stupid ****in' American kids.
    James00007 likes this.
  24. jason lee

    jason lee TS Rookie Posts: 18   +7

    Seriously, those that think vaping is more harmful than tobacco smoke needs to check this video. Looks pretty dumb obvious to me which one is less harmful.

    James00007 likes this.
  25. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TS Guardian Fighter Posts: 11,389   +5,016

    That really depends on the battery not exploding.

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...