- cross-posted to:
- globalnews
- cross-posted to:
- globalnews
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/1425359
Archived version: https://archive.ph/1Iraz
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20230814002229/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-66448563
Regulate nicotine. It serves no purpose besides addicting people to a product. Once people are capable of making a real choice, the problem will become much less severe. Over time, it might even disappear completely.
Regulate different types of nicotine differently. Vapes are highly addictive but not dangerous. Cigarettes are highly addictive and will kill you.
The science isn’t fully decided on vapes - AFAIK the PG/VG and nicotine are relatively harmless (though nicotine does carry some heart/stroke risks) but the flavours are generally only tested for safety when taken orally, not when atomised and inhaled. Flavourless vape juice is therefore probably safe, though hardly anybody sells it, it’s kinda unpleasant, and it does still carry some health risks.
Let me just rephrase what you said. Instead of “the science isn’t fully decided”, which paints an incorrect picture, let’s rather say “of everything they’ve tested in a typical legal vape, everything is essentially harmless. Some of the components haven’t been tested.”
Saying “the science isn’t fully decided” implies “eh, maybe it’s dangerous, maybe it’s not, 50/50”. That’s not at all the case. It’s almost certainly all harmless. Just very addictive.
That’s not true. “The science isn’t fully decided” means that long-terms effects are extremely hard to measure, it literally takes decades. The amount of liquids of different flavors is so big that you can’t realistically test them all. Different flavors require different chemicals, you can get the same taste with different chemicals too. Yes, basic liquid is probably less harmful than cigarettes, but even for that there’s not enough data to say that this is a scientific fact.
Regardless of the health effects, addiction (and related expenses) can cost you hundreds, or even thousands of dollars. People go to counseling, join support groups, and buy nicotine patches to try and quit.
I say “try” because on average, former cigarette smokers had to try to quit several times before they were successful. Many former smokers say that quitting was extremely hard, maybe even the hardest thing they’ve done. I don’t know for sure, but I suspect the same is true with vaping.
I don’t like nicotine because it’s used to manipulate and take advantage of people. The product/delivery method is irrelevant.
What absolute insanity. You see no difference between drinking water and drowning in it?
I think comparing vaping to drinking water is disingenuous - it is not needed and has active harms. Just because one thing is less harmful than another doesn’t mean we can’t regulate both heavily.
It does mean that, unless we are stupid or have ulterior motives, we should not regulate them equally heavily.
Besides, the science shows vaping is nearly harmless. I think that, again unless we are stupid, we should not be regulating it “heavily” at all. Just ban it for under-18s. Enforce that ban. That’s all.
It should be regulated at least as much as food though don’t you think? Not just ban it for under 18s but specify what can or can’t go into a vape product.
Otherwise you’ll get companies using cheap but dangerous to inhale substances over more expensive safer substances that do the same job.
Sounds perfectly fair.
I have no idea what point you’re trying to make.
The delivery method for vaping is water vapor. The delivery method for cigarettes is to wrap the nicotine in poison and then burn it. And you see no difference?
Ah.
Of course I see the difference. The fact that cigarettes are dangerous to your health is so screamingly obvious that I didn’t even think that was something we needed to tell each other.
My point is that nicotine makes it much harder to stop vaping or smoking once you decide you want to. That’s what I meant when I said “the product/delivery method is irrelevant”, and why I started my comment with “regardless of the health effects”.
It doesn’t matter how the nicotine gets into your system. It messes with you anyway. Regulating specific products is like playing an endless game of whack-a-mole. The industry will keep finding different ways to get you hooked.
We’ve tried regulating tobacco, so they found a nicotine delivery system that doesn’t rely on tobacco. Let’s attack the addiction problem at the source - regulate the nicotine. That way, when they come up with something new (like an energy drink or something) the existing laws still apply. The slow-moving government doesn’t have to play catch up. Consumers stay protected.
Nicotine addiction is not a PROBLEM though, no more than caffeine addiction. The problem is when the only legal way to get caffeine is by a cocktail of red bull and arsenic.
Nicotine is not the issue. The delivery method is the whole problem.
That smoking is generally far worse for individuals and society than vaping is.