Author Topic: Interesting Opinion Piece on Juul Ban  (Read 476 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

GardenSkater77

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 3125
  • Rep: 1035
Interesting Opinion Piece on Juul Ban
« on: June 27, 2022, 03:59:27 PM »
I don’t smoke any nicotine products but the idea that the FDA can pick and choose what tobacco products are fit for consumers is outrageous.

First Roe V Wade, then right to carry concealed guns in public, and now e-cigarette prohibition. The hypocrisy is too much to bear.

Really nicely written piece on the subject…

https://www.commentary.org/noah-rothman/the-staggering-hypocrisy-of-the-war-on-nicotine/

LesbianPUNCH

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 580
  • Rep: 25
Re: Interesting Opinion Piece on Juul Ban
« Reply #1 on: June 27, 2022, 04:23:37 PM »
Thanks to vapes I’ve been cigarette free since 2018. And because vape options are a lot more broad, I was able to slowly decrease the nicotine, and I haven’t smoked or vaped anything in 100 days. I think this is a clear tactic to increase cigarette/tobacco dependency.

Spectre

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 157
  • Rep: -40
Re: Interesting Opinion Piece on Juul Ban
« Reply #2 on: June 27, 2022, 05:04:27 PM »
Thanks to vapes I’ve been cigarette free since 2018. And because vape options are a lot more broad, I was able to slowly decrease the nicotine, and I haven’t smoked or vaped anything in 100 days. I think this is a clear tactic to increase cigarette/tobacco dependency.

So Phillip morris is behind this possibly?

Coastal Fever

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 3505
  • Rep: 495
Re: Interesting Opinion Piece on Juul Ban
« Reply #3 on: June 27, 2022, 05:51:34 PM »
I never smoked cigs aside from the odd stolen puff while drinking, if I smoked a whole one I’d puke, but when my partner switched to Juuls I started stealing puffs constantly because it tasted/felt way better.  Now I’m a nicotine addicted bum who won’t buy my own vape because that’s admitting I’m addicted. 

Oddly enough when I’m away for work I don’t vape or hardly even think about it, but when she gets home I’m instantly digging in her purse for a drag.  Maybe that says more about me than the average person.

All that to say, I do think the government is crooked and hypocritical as fuck, but I’m kind of living proof of their point on this issue.  I know I’m the anomaly though and for most nicotine addicts, e-cigs can be an extremely useful tool to quit.

in love w/ fs shuvs

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 1297
  • Rep: 110
Re: Interesting Opinion Piece on Juul Ban
« Reply #4 on: June 27, 2022, 07:13:34 PM »
This reality is really so absurd sometimes. Shit's psycho.

ok boomer

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 4842
  • Rep: 1026
  • Gnar Kook
Re: Interesting Opinion Piece on Juul Ban
« Reply #5 on: June 27, 2022, 07:24:32 PM »
I love to smoke real cigarettes

TheLurper

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 3352
  • Rep: 647
  • Bronze Topic Start Bronze Topic Start : Start a topic with over 1,000 replies.
Re: Interesting Opinion Piece on Juul Ban
« Reply #6 on: June 27, 2022, 07:36:33 PM »
I think the best solution is continue on the with the truth.org campaigns and stigmatize the shit out of vapes the same way we stigmatized smoking. I like how we reduced smoking it was a brilliant example of governmentality rather than governing via force.

However, as a former smoker, I'm super annoyed that smoking went down and then the younger generation picked up vapes. We made a ton of progress as a society and then let it fall away.

As for Rothman's argument, it appears to be purposively blind and superficial. It is as if he doesn't know much about the topic but decided to write a knee-jerk reaction to it because it is a hot topic and allows him and his readers to get ideologically riled up. Moreover, it is riddled with half-truths and overt falsehoods.


First, Rothman seems confused that anyone would want to ban the sale of things that provide the users with nicotine along with a host of other chemicals. Not sure why this confuses him. I agree that adults should be able to make their own decisions, but his pseudo-naivety is not endearing.

Second, "We are left to conclude that we are witnessing the raw exercise of power for its own sake." The hyperbole is out of control here. I can hear Hellen Lovejoy shrieking, "Won't someone please think of the multi-billion dollar corporation that saw its rise via youth smoking!"

Third, "the FDA has banned fruit flavors for nicotine vape cartridges (not e-liquids or THC products, which are oftentimes sold alongside nicotine vapes in the very same retail outlets.)" I don't hang out in vape stores that often, but I'm 99.9% sure this isn't true.

Fourth, "No one would even think to ban cancer-causing cigarettes." Also not true: Aside from recent calls by various stake-holders in the community (especially those who like New Zealand raising the age so today's youth won't ever be able to buy them as they age),
"15 US states enacted bans on the sale of cigarettes from 1890 to 1927"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3632991/#:~:text=There%20are%20precedents%3A%2015%20US,local%20communities%20and%20state%20governments.

Fifth, "No one would think to ban cars made by certain carmakers because their products were once unsafe." Not so sure relatives of dead Ford Pinto owners were as forgiving as our author. And, as for product bans in general, yea, they are a thing: https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/gadgets/g972/10-beloved-banned-and-recalled-products/?slide=9

Sixth, lower nicotine means more smoking. Does it? I know it means less habit forming among new smokers and it makes logical sense that this could be an outcome, but where is the medical evidence that this is what happens?


This feels more like an ideological reaction than a well understood and thought out reaction. I agree that the government shouldn't block people from accessing stupid shit that allows them to engage in direct self-harm, but his argument is only helping me emotionally side with the FDA.

« Last Edit: June 27, 2022, 07:58:43 PM by TheLurper »

Quote from: ChuckRamone
I love when people bring up world hunger. It makes everything meaningless.
"That guy is double parked."
"Who cares? There are people starving to death! Besides, how does that affect you? Does it lessen the joy of parking?

GardenSkater77

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 3125
  • Rep: 1035
Re: Interesting Opinion Piece on Juul Ban
« Reply #7 on: June 27, 2022, 08:16:50 PM »
@TheLurper

Thanks for taking the time to really sift through the opinion piece I provided. I never read anything from Rothman before so I don’t know what his agenda is. I looked up a few other writings of his and he appears to be a libertarian or just right wing. I did not get the feeling of either in his article but I will admit I did not read as closely as you seem to have which is great.

My frustration comes from a government agency trying to outlaw some substance because it’s bad for you. If you are going to outlaw Juul because it could cause cancer why not outlaw all tobacco products? I am curious as to why Juul and not other vapeing products.

I understand why flavor options are under scrutiny and in some instances have been eliminated and my understanding is that menthol is in the crosshairs.

Interesting factoid: I knew very little about Juul before this ban but I find it interesting that their headquarters is in D.C.. No other comment here, but I have never heard of any company having an HQ in DC.

To your comment about nicotine levels in cigarettes. My father used to smoke Now 100s which were the lightest cigarettes on the market in the 80s and 90s. He smoked 3 packs a day. Sometime 10-20 years ago he decided he was smoking too many cigarettes so he switched to Chesterfield Unfiltered. He now only smokes 10 cigarettes a day. I have no idea what is worse for your health but at least he is able to regulate the amount of nicotine he wants at a time.

My father has COPD and there is no way of knowing if he smoked Juul all his life whether he would be in the same shape, but for the FDA to say that Juul should not be on the market because it’s not healthy is ridiculous.

I am definitely interested to learn more about this decision as I have to believe there will be books and movies made about why Juul was the target of the FDA and why not all the tobacco companies.

Sativa Lung

  • Trade Count: (+11)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 3638
  • Rep: 871
Re: Interesting Opinion Piece on Juul Ban
« Reply #8 on: June 27, 2022, 09:33:39 PM »
I don’t smoke any nicotine products but the idea that the FDA can pick and choose what tobacco products are fit for consumers is outrageous.

Why is an agency doing the exact thing it was created to do outrageous?

You should probably look into why they're banning them. It's not politics, it's the fucked up nicotine delivery system they use to literally make juul deliver like 500% more nicotine than other vapes and them marketing the shit to kids. So they're not randomly picking and choosing, they're regulating the market which is exactly what a government is supposed to do.

AsianVegan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 1380
  • Rep: 95
Re: Interesting Opinion Piece on Juul Ban
« Reply #9 on: June 27, 2022, 10:04:18 PM »
Rightly or wrongly, it always feels intellectually dishonest to frame vaping solely as a smoking cessation device - which is basically what he’s doing here.

I can believe Juul may have started out with good intentions and e-Cigs are genuinely helpful as a way of kicking analogs - but if the uptake of vaping and Nicotine addiction in a cohort of people that never would have previously been affected is disproportionate to people using Juul for it's "intended" purpose.... you kinda need regulation.

I also don’t buy the libertarian “freedom” argument or that adults can pick and choose what’s good for them - because it's not informed adults they're pushing this shit on... young kids don’t have a clue what Nicotine, how addictive it is or even that it’s in this stuff.

There's no freedom in addiction, so applying this tired ideal to a drug seems especially stupid to me.

It's worth noting that the Altria Group (AKA Philip Morris) holds a 35% stake in Juul - which isn't explicitly stated in the article and might be a valid reason that the FDA has singled them out. 

So maybe in some respects he does have a point, but I wouldn’t call it “vengeance” - why would you ignore the progress made in one area and all the harm reduction associated with it, only to let the EXACT SAME COMPANY get away with causing those same harms a generation or two later?

You just need one look at the target demographic shown in the marketing campaigns, where they advertised or directed on social media etc. and it's pretty fucking clear they weren’t going after reforming smokers.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2022, 03:34:35 AM by AsianVegan »