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. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 14,976   +4,010

    Nobody here cares.

    You get responses to your nonsense / propaganda which you simply can't resolve, and you then regress to spouting a bunch of addict's dogma.

    You're delusional if you think I'm going to waste time listening to some windbag biddy, spouting the same crap I've endured from you for the past six pages.
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2019
    cliffordcooley and pit1209 like this.
  2. pit1209

    pit1209 TS Booster Posts: 48   +63

    Man, the fact that he has been like that just to defend his addiction has worried me more than any smoker or addict I've known. I mean my mother has smoke since I have memory and she knows the consequences and don't care but this guy has been searching for every scientific nonsense like "we don't know what it does yet so it must be good" and promoting it like vaping is the cure of cancer and what not.
    cliffordcooley likes this.
  3. James00007

    James00007 TS Booster Posts: 116   +14

    More worrying is your stance on this, when you have a close family member effected by smoking, that while vaping can't cure cancer / it will help to prevent from developing it from smoking and prevent other smoking related disease.

    Scientific proof isn't nonsense. If you can't accept that vaping is safer than smoking when it is proven scientific fact, if you can't grasp that science and medical research can know enough about something to show that it is safer than something else then you deny reality and common sense.

    like "We know what it does and we know its better".
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2019
  4. pit1209

    pit1209 TS Booster Posts: 48   +63

    It is not a scientific fact and it doesn't matter the propaganda you show in here, I mean it was a "scientific" fact that smoking cigarettes was good for your health also if we go by your rules.
    The only scientific fact is that smoking cessation is healthy and should be promoted and that nicotine is a very strong addictive substance that should not be defended and I'm not gaining anything by going against vaping. You know? in fact I've never been against vaping, we all started this thread because the big corporations are targeting vaping to the young and looks like the majority here understands what that means but you are trying to state multiple times like some kind of brainwashed dude that vaping is the cure for cancer and pharma is against it and "science" and everyone should vape and whatever but you can keep that nonsense for yourself and all the nicotine addicts because your case to validate an addictive substance is just that, nonsense.
  5. James00007

    James00007 TS Booster Posts: 116   +14

    It matters because people that are completely clueless and who publish what can only be described as wrong need to be shown how wrong they are by qualified medical experts. Calling it propaganda is just a tantrum from being proven wrong or having your ignorance disproved.

    By taking this stance then you believe all science is wrong.

    Science has progressed a lot since the revelation of the harms of smoking which was first revealed by the Royal College of Physicians (the same organisation that say vaping is 95%+ safer than smoking).

    Did you know that smoking cessation IS nicotine? Clearly not. Nicotine replacement therapy is used in Smoking cessation using gums and patches, these use the same pharmaceutical grade nicotine that is in e-cigs/vaping. Again showing you lack even the most basic understand of this subject and a complete contradiction of your viewpoint.

    What else is used in Smoking cessation? Varenicline (Champix) (the FDA and Big Pharma want to give this to the youth that you are so worried about) with healthy side effects like:

    - constipation
    - diarrhea
    - difficulty concentrating
    - dizziness
    - flatulence (passing gas)
    - headache
    - nausea
    - sleep disturbance (difficulty sleeping or abnormal dreams)
    - unusual tiredness or weakness
    - vomiting
    - signs of mental changes (e.g., changes in behaviour, changes in mood, hallucinations, thinking about harming self or others)
    -signs of depression (e.g., poor concentration, changes in weight, changes in sleep, decreased interest in activities, thoughts of suicide)
    - seizures
    - signs of heart attack (e.g., sudden chest pain or pain radiating to back, down arm, jaw; sensation of tightness or pressure of the chest; nausea; vomiting; sweating; anxiety)
    - signs of a severe skin reaction such as blistering, peeling, a rash covering a large area of the body, a rash that spreads quickly, or a rash combined with fever or discomfort
    - signs of stroke (e.g., sudden or severe headache; sudden loss of coordination; vision changes; sudden slurring of speech; or unexplained weakness, numbness, or pain in arm or leg)
    -symptoms of a serious allergic reaction (e.g., puffy, swollen eyelids, lips, tongue, throat, hands or feet; hives; shortness of breath; or a severe skin rash with peeling and blistering, possibly with headache, fever, coughing, or pain)

    Hypocritical and contradiction
    Your first post where you attacked it without even the most basic knowledge, and after being shown that knowledge you have ignored it. You have done nothing other than rally against anything positive said about vaping and everyone that has spoke positively in any way of it. You have been nothing but against vaping here.

    Very sweeping statement, most of the vaping industry is not targeting to the young, there are already laws in place to stop this, bad actors that do this should be put out of business (not take out vaping entirely)

    Forum privilege where you and a couple of others here act like you speak for the entire human race then to gang up to berate, silence and get posts removed from anyone that disagrees with you and who prove your complete lack of knowledge and show you up.


    please tell me which post I said either of those things in. That's right I didn't.


    The nicotine addicts that use nicotine in smoking cessation which you said is healthy. I feel embarrassed for you. Everything you have said in this thread has been nonsense or hypocritical and you have shown nothing to back anything up, in fact 1 person came with 1 study against vaping in this entire thread (not sure if that was you) for which I showed it's lack of credibility due to being funded by Big Pharma.

    Is this a joke? With everything you have said this part was the biggest nonsense of all. I would be very surprised if you are actually a medical doctor with the things your have said here, the denial of science and the complete inability to recognise medical evidence above the anti-vaping blithering nonsensical knowledgeless inaccuracy in statements of yourself and your friends. Oh and you use the word combustion, back to the basic level of understand of vaping: there is no combustion.

    This was one of the better ones.
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2019
  6. James00007

    James00007 TS Booster Posts: 116   +14

    We Are Completely Overreacting to Vaping
    The moral panic against it is an irrational response fueled by anti-smoker bias.


    "That consensus—that e-cigarette use should be actively encouraged for adult smokers—is based on a growing body of evidence that e-cigarettes will benefit public health by becoming a substitute for combustible tobacco, helping people to quit smoking, smoke less often, or never take up smoking in the first place. The concept of population-level harm reduction tends to frame the entire debate, and Gottlieb is, nominally at least, a harm reduction advocate who believes in the potential of e-cigarettes to save smokers’ lives. Yet he also seems persistently incapable of advocating forcefully on behalf of adult vapers, to the point that the disjointed communications strategy of the agency he leads is doing far more to stoke fear about vaping than it is to promote the benefits of switching."

    A new study in the New England Journal of Medicine is stirring up a complex mixture of feelings with some objective data about vaping. The study shows that e-cigarettes are 83 percent more effective than nicotine replacement products for helping people quit smoking. In the U.K., the reaction is positive. In the U.S., the reaction is tinged by moral panic.
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2019
  7. pit1209

    pit1209 TS Booster Posts: 48   +63

    You keep creating straws just to get a point, you're obviously brainwashed or an addict. You can say whatever you want but you have no right to state that I'm not what I said.

    There is no conclusive evidence about vaping because it has been in the market since less than 2 decades ago, especially since most are made in china. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_cigarette, and the FDA has clearly stated contrary to your statements that "Although ENDS [electronic nicotine delivery systems] may potentially provide cessation benefits to individual smokers, no ENDS have been approved as effective cessation aids." as well as "A 2016 World Health Organization (WHO) report found that the scientific evidence for the effectiveness of vaping for quitting smoking is "scant and of low certainty" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positions_of_medical_organizations_on_electronic_cigarettes. That's science and it is inconclusive on the matter so you can quit your propaganda about vaping been the next cure of cancer. Yes, it helps in smoking cessation but not that much apparently https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29485005.

    Something is certain about this and that is that vaping is not safe, it is "safer" than smoking but taking into account how this is not targeted just as a smoking cessation product and instead as a new nicotine product to hook anyone no matter the age and that's why I'm here trying to bring some information you have clearly avoided in your pursuit of defending a toxic substance https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/14...-health-toxic-chemical-exposures-heavy-metals.

    I almost forgot:
    • Vomiting
    • Stomach pain
    • Heartburn
    • Drowsiness
    • Nausea
    • Ringing in the ears
    • Loss of hearing
    • Hives or rash
    • Swelling of the eyes, face, lips, tongue, or throat
    • Wheezing or breathing difficulties
    • Hoarseness
    • Fast heartbeat or fast breathing
    • Cold, clammy skin
    • Bloody vomit or vomit that looks like coffee grounds
    • Bright red blood in stools or black or tarry stools
    That's Aspirin side effects and look at this: https://www.webmd.com/drugs/2/drug-...lin-v-potassium-oral/details/list-sideeffects. That's penicillin, hope you think it twice before using any of this so called most important medications in modern medicine and try to understand how medications side effects are disclosed before trying to make one sound like death.
  8. James00007

    James00007 TS Booster Posts: 116   +14

    I totally understand why many pro vaping posters stopped posting here. All this anti-vaping rhetoric is being shared by people that don't know what vaping is, at even the most basic level and this need to share opinion based on some twisted idea of what they have made it up to be in there mind. The lack of knowledge shines through when attempting to debate with anyone who is uneducated on this and they continue to be embarrassed and found wanting.

    95%+ safer than smoking.
    83 percent more effective than nicotine replacement products.

    The continued injured feeling of 3 (all of which have sank to the level of person insult and call for my silence) are of little concern to me. More important is showing real evidence and how completely irrational the opposition has been for anyone else that may read this thread, this is the kind of illogical behavior of anti-vaping campaigners right across the board.


    "Neither Dr Gottlieb or Dr Adams defines the term ‘nicotine addiction’. In real life, addiction terminology is highly contested. For example, some see addiction as a brain disease, while others reject the brain disease model as far too reductionist. But let’s look at the conventional definitions: Sussman and Sussman surveyed the literature and identified five characteristics of addiction"

    "Nicotine is the primary psychoactive substance in tobacco smoke or e-cigarette aerosol. But the dependence-forming characteristic of nicotine is strengthened by interactions with other substances present in cigarette smoke, for example, monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs)."

    "There is no evidence that vape aerosol contains MAOIs, such as ß-carboline alkaloids found in cigarette smoke."

    "What then is the basis for treating all nicotine use as if it is equally reinforcing, dependence-forming and addictive?"

    "There are plenty of reasons why senior public health officials would hear only the most extreme cases, and that those involved in relaying such cases would exaggerate or distort the cases – many of their interlocutors are engaged in a political campaign to use FDA regulation to apply a da facto ban to vaping. Selection bias and confirmation bias are everpresent dangers here."

    "But if we look at what we do know, the picture is far from nightmare portrayed in the press and by public health officials. Let’s try to inject the facts we do have into the discussion."

    "Most adolescent vapers are not regular or daily users"

    "E-cigarette frequency of use matters. There are at least two different vaping behaviours in adolescents and the difference really matters:

    experimentation and frivolous use (most users)
    dependence-forming substance use (some users)"

    " Applying this proportion to the 2018 data would suggest about 4% of high school students are daily users (this compares to the headline 20.8% use in the past 30-days)."

    "But the analysis does not stop there. What would this group of regular or daily users be doing instead of vaping if e-cigarettes did not exist? Needless to say, that data has not been disclosed. The data we do have strongly suggest that many of these more regular users would be smoking."

    "If these frequent-cig users are mostly already smokers or likely to become smokers, then this may be the start of them switching away from smoking – and therefore it could be beneficial for public health (and we have seen rapid declines in adolescent smoking as vaping has risen). From previous studies, we know that frequent vaping is almost entirely concentrated in young people who smoke or use other tobacco products. Less than one in one thousand young people had become frequent vapers having never used tobacco before. And even in these cases, we do not know what this tiny minority would have done in the absence of e-cigarettes – possibly gone on to smoke."

    " Not all vaping is with nicotine"
    "CDC/FDA approach vaping as if it is a tobacco use behaviour, but that is an invalid assumption: some vaping involves no nicotine, some involves other substances."

    "Nicotine is not “uniquely harmful” to the developing brain"

    "A unique danger? Uniquely harmful? Really? More harmful than cannabis, alcohol, crystal meth, fentanyl? More harmful than American football? Worse than a car crash? Obviously, it is inappropriate to make wild claims like that nicotine is uniquely harmful."

    "But what of the more modest claim that young people’s brains are harmed by nicotine? Where would you look for evidence? How about all those young people who have been exposed to nicotine as smokers? There are millions of them happily pursuing adult life: but are they suffering any form of damage? In 1980, 30.5% of US 12th graders were past-30-day smokers, 21.3% daily smokers [Monitoring the Future]. This group would be in their 50s by now, and most would have quit smoking years ago. Where is the evidence of impairment in this population arising from youth nicotine use?"

    "So an important rider on this claim is that: there are no human data that show nicotine causes material harms to the adolescent brain. The evidence that there exists is based on rat and mouse studies. Even the Surgeon General’s 2016 report recognises just how indirect and speculative the claims of harm are:"

    "So 29.8% of high school students are using alcohol, and 13.5% “binge drinking” (according to CDC’s definition) but 20.8% vape. There are about as many marijuana users as vapers. What is the response to that?"
    "If there are any material risks with vaping, they would arise from decades of use, and only if the vaping becomes a smoking habit that would not otherwise have happened. Alcohol use, in contrast, can end a life instantly, pulverised in a road traffic accident, or put young people into violent, abusive or vulnerable situations that can be acutely harmful."
    "But where are the calls to limit adult access to alcohol?"

    "Dr. Gottlieb is quick to attribute the youth vaping epidemic to ‘flavors’. And quick to determine that taking them off the market would roll back the epidemic. Far too quick."

    "In doing so he misses much subtlety about how flavours and product appeal actually work in public health terms – for both adults and adolescents. Many of us have tried to explain it, but apparently without success. If it can be shown that certain flavours change behaviour, it is quite possible that change will be beneficial – an attraction away from smoking."

    "The absurdity of this approach reached a peak in November 2018, when FDA decided to remove flavoured e-cigarettes from convenience stores and allow them only to be sold in age-restricted locations."

    "So cigarettes were unaffected, and the only vapes allowed were those most like cigarettes. FDA has completely lost track of what it is doing and why.

    AG Miller also highlighted the obvious absurdity of leaving only those products which most closely resemble cigarettes on the market.

    Generations of young people have taken up cigarette smoking using
    almost exclusively tobacco and menthol flavors. There is no obvious logic to restricting e-liquid flavors to only those that mimic the most dangerous tobacco products and have been the main basis for initiation in the past – and no justification of such a move has been provided.

    Attorney General Tom Miller, Iowa. To Scott Gottlieb. Youth tobacco and nicotine use – proportionate and responsible reaction, 14 November 2018. [link]"

    "But nowhere in the Act is a false equivalence created between, for example, dying in agony from cancer or the debilitating misery of COPD and adolescent vaping, which is, objectively, a low-risk behaviour with minimal health consequences. Quitting smoking by switching to vaping is a huge benefit to a smoker. Starting to vape causes negligible harm to an adolescent – and even those vaping regularly may be doing it as an alternative to smoking, in which case it is a benefit."

    "My view in brief: we are a drug using society, and nicotine – delivered without smoke – is a relatively benign drug. Efforts to stop people using nicotine run counter to efforts to reduce their exposure to smoke. The government should not be intervening to obstruct much safer alternatives to smoking while allowing cigarettes to be ubiquitously available.

    So when is this debate about rethinking nicotine actually going to happen? Or is it just a diversionary tactic to look serious without being serious? At the moment we have FDA and the Surgeon General taking to social media with slogans that appear to have been copied from the playbook of activist organisations. That is not the debate we need now."

    "FDA, CDC and the Surgeon General have lost sight of the most important fact in tobacco policy. To paraphrase Bill Clinton: “it’s the smoke,stupid“. Yet all have become obsessed with the ‘threat’ from much safer alternatives to smoking, such as vaping. FDA is hardly doing anything to address the 2.3 million teens still using combustible tobacco products (CDC, 2017)."
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2019
  9. James00007

    James00007 TS Booster Posts: 116   +14

    I don't recognise this language. This is nonsense.

    Ignorant personal insult which has been resorted to due to embarrassment.

    I have a right when you have no proof of this being true, on even an intelligence level.

    Wrong. Denial of scientific and medical evidence which by your standard eliminates your own views/"evidence" (there is not much and none that I haven't shown completely invalid).

    Irrelevant. Do you want me to list what else is made in china? Most of the things you own.

    I have shown why the FDA is so out of touch on this issue throughout this entire thread.

    Scott Gottlieb, M.D. 23rd Commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
    "Vaping may well be a good alternative for currently addicted smokers to help them quit cigarettes, and reduce their risk"

    (see previous post for more this)

    The World Health Organisation are funded by Big Pharma. There are millions of vapers that have switched from smoking to vaping.

    It has been one of the most pressing unanswered questions in public health: Do e-cigarettes actually help smokers quit? Now, the first, large rigorous assessment offers an unequivocal answer: yes.

    The study, published Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine, found that e-cigarettes were nearly twice as effective as conventional nicotine replacement products, like patches and gum, for quitting smoking.

    Repetitive nonsense that we already went over. I didn't say vaping was a cure for cancer. The first thing I said was:

    1 Billion Tobacco deaths this century if trends continue. Advocates who support free and unhindered access to the full range of e-cigarette (vaping) products will help to enable the single most important advance in public health since the discovery of antibiotics: in one small country alone, full support for this approach has the potential to save millions of lives just among those alive today.

    No medical evidence there and nothing to support your ignorance.

    95%+ safer. This is a matter of what you class as not safe. You can say smoking is not safe (even though smoking doesn't kill everyone that smokes) but it will take at least 30 years for it's effect to cause harm. Now take something that is 95%+ safer, how long will that take to cause harm?

    This is just made up to suit your narrative. You make up these alarmist statements which and false and completely destroy your credibility.

    I am pro vaping. It's your anti-vaping job to bring this information
    At least we know what you based your views upon (sensational media). I'll take The Royal College of Physicians reports and the multitude of doctors, experts over your alarmist and inaccurate media article.
    I have clearly shown numerous information and brought plenty of information to prove you wrong.

    Yes these are the side effects of medications which are not present in nicotine use when used in vaping or NRT.


    Chantix users reported thousands of suicidal thoughts and self-harm (Review, PLoS One)
    "After receiving hundreds of postmarketing adverse event reports of suicidal thoughts or behaviors (and 32 completed suicides) associated with smoking cessation drug varenicline (Chantix), the FDA slapped a black box warning on the med in 2009 and commissioned two large retrospective observational studies totaling more than 40,000 patients starting either varenicline (Chantix) or nicotine replacement. Those studies showed no difference in psychiatric hospitalizations in the 30-day window after therapy initiation with either treatment. But those events were rare -- only 72 hospitalizations -- and the study didn't capture suicide, depression, aggression, or assaults not resulting in hospitalization."

    "We found that Chantix is associated with more suicidal behavior reports than any other smoking-cessation drug on the U.S. market. The risks simply outweigh the benefits," Furberg said."
    How would explain your stance that Chantix is healthy and superior to vaping to the families of those completed suicides?

    You really want to ban vaping and give this to kids? Really? This is what the FDA and Big Pharma want and the narrative you have associated yourself with.
    Supporting a drug that is known to lead to suicide to be given to youth is the epitome of irresponsibility

    back to
    You have stated vaping is safer. Adult's have the right to choose so lets bring this back to the core issue of youth:

    "If these frequent-cig users are mostly already smokers or likely to become smokers, then this may be the start of them switching away from smoking – and therefore it could be beneficial for public health (and we have seen rapid declines in adolescent smoking as vaping has risen). From previous studies, we know that frequent vaping is almost entirely concentrated in young people who smoke or use other tobacco products. Less than one in one thousand young people had become frequent vapers having never used tobacco before. And even in these cases, we do not know what this tiny minority would have done in the absence of e-cigarettes – possibly gone on to smoke."

    (see previous post for more this)

    Last edited: Feb 1, 2019

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...