Nicotine withdrawal kicks in very quick which is why smokers take constant breaks. The anxiety, the grumpiness, irritability and anger you feel as a smoker when you are without nicotine will piss off your partner, make you seem difficult to friends and colleagues and generally just color your world in a dark way.
Juul pods helped me stop smoking for a short period of time but I became an order of magnitude more hooked on nicotine. I work from home and couldn't go more than 15 minutes without sucking on that stupid device.
I quit smoking cold turkey 90 days and it's made a dramatic difference to my mood. I no longer worry about being socially outcast or being judged for blowing vape clouds.
edit: note I say "easy", but its not a short process.. If you try to go immediately from 48mg to 3mg you won't have a good time. It takes months for each step down
I chew one 4mg piece of gum over the course of a day for mental stimulation and that's had some really nice side effects for me, such as being able to stay up later and continue on mentally engaging work.
There's some truth to this. I used to believe it wholly. You can go through my comment history and see that I've mentioned it before on Juul-related threads.
My more recently-developed stance is that it doesn't work as well as you'd think it does. It may work for some people, in some situations, but the reality is that your body can become surprisingly good at figuring out that its not getting the nicotine it wants, so you may just end up vaping the lower stuff more often. The double-blind thing honestly wouldn't work for real addicts; it may even be subconscious, but the body knows. You can't trick yourself out of a nicotine addiction.
The ritual is a big part of the addiction, and if you're not careful in regulating the number of pulls you're just going to make the ritual worse, without changing the amount of nicotine you pull in.
If you can combine it with some kind of regimen, like you don't pull more often than once every ten minutes, then sure, that could work. That's why it works for some people; not the strict reduction in potency.
Tobacco had similar issues but I just couldn't smoke tons of cigarettes all day.
Both bad, I think stepping down nicotine works for some but not for me. You gotta do what you can to quit :)
If you ban everything that is addictive you end up doing a disservice to people who can handle the substance or item in question. Banning addictive substances because some people can't handle them goes against my philosophy of the purpose of government.
Do we need some kind of super-citizen test where you have to prove your knowledge and responsibility for people to be able to be free to do/have/use the things they want?
I don't want a nanny state that bans what it thinks is bad for me and prevents me from accessing things that I want because some people can't handle it.
I was talking to some of my old farmer relatives a few months ago and one of them was telling stories about his dynamite license. It was a useful thing to have when interacting with the land and you could get a license and just go out and buy dynamite. This was maybe 50 years ago. That is the kind of world I want to live in, where people who can prove themselves can get any tool they want or need to manipulate their minds or the world around them.
Not a world where a committee (or public pressure) can decide what I can't handle or what's too dangerous.
I don't want to live in a world of padded walls.
NB: Do not do this if you have a felony conviction since this that makes it a crime.
Show me a one-armed guy who bought a stick of dynamite thinking, “No way can I handle this.”
Nicotine is really powerful stuff. I believe there's no free lunch with quitting. Eventually you will take a quality of life hit white quitting that almost directly mirrors how much relief it gave you to get through the day.
The by far best way is to just never start. In Germany we made a lot of very good progress towards that (lowering % of young people getting hooked on smoking), which seems to have been completely upended by vaping.
It's well known that the other chemicals in tobacco act as MAIOs increasing the effect of nicotine which makes it more habbit forming - and I believe that extends to even after you switch to a nicotine replacement program.
Really, the most annoying thing is that tobaccoo is still legal are are both nicotine + cancer. At least vaping/nicotine alone won't kill you so it's strange that it gets more attention.
Smoking may cause cancer and lung disease which kills smokers over time, but that time period is measured in years and decades.
In contrast, 8 people have died in the last few months from vaping-related illnesses despite most of them being active and healthy only a month or two before their deaths. Another several hundred people are in hospital beds with severe lung diseases related to vaping and many of them could die or never regain function.
At the current rate, vaping would need to go another few decades without a single death just to achieve statistical parity with smoking.
It's also pretty gross and strong by comparison IMO. But I guess it's for people who just stopped smoking cigarettes which is similarly harsh whenever I try them now.
The volume held in the device & volume per 'puff' is also a lot less hence the smaller devices.
Still trying to think up a good replacement for this...
It's just not good for your health or happiness. I was especially worried whenever I was going back to the bar/restaurant/office wondering if I smell too much like cigarettes
Holy smokes! If you look at data from a few years ago [1] that's more than double what you'd see for cigarette smoking (eyeballing the numbers here, the data is more granular).
Is it easier for kids to get e-cigs than cigarettes? Or do they just want them more?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK294302/table/ch13.t3/?...
2. Yes, they are easier to get, for a couple reasons: once you have a juul you only need juul pods, and additionally you don't need to purchase a lighter (which you need to be over eighteen a lot of places to purchase).
edit 3. They are far more discreet (you can vape in a classroom if you are in the back and it is dark) and deliver more nicotine.
And I'm not aware of any place in the states you need to be over 18 to buy a lighter - and as a former dumbass teenager, I don't think kids have difficulty in figuring out how to light things on fire.
Discretion makes sense, but I feel like rationalizing an irrational decision here. Wouldn't it be more discrete not to vape?
My little sister told me that the bathrooms are basically used vape-stations between classes now, and most people have tried it.
https://www.motherjones.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/blog_...
This seems to me the same kind of thing as Facebook and Google supporting privacy regulations.
Not that regulation is inherently bad, but this kind of thing seems to be a theme lately. Well, I say lately, but reading up some history, this kind of thing does tend to happen. This is, of course, still not enough of an argument against regulation, but it does tend to temper any optimism I have about regulations that I would be in favor of.
I'm not sure who. I don't think it's big tobacco. They need vaping to addict the next generation. Maybe vaping spend is taking away from another vice.
it's about regulating the vaping industry so that entry /certification costs are so high that only incumbents can afford to certify their products and therefore capture market share from the small/independent players
this will be done by:
1) a draconian 'ban everything' scare-tactic that everyone knows is ridiculous (where we are now)
2) followed up by the 'reasonable compromise measure' (coming soon to a media spectacle near you)
Public health?
If you don’t care about yourself, you can’t be trusted to care about anything.
I don't smoke or vape. But it's a glaring double standard. McDonalds can market to kids, lure them with toys, and people who are 300+ lbs are allowed to eat whatever they want, as much as they want.
Why is it legal for parents to feed a 12 year old Cheetos and Pepsi? It's just as damaging health wise. In my city's public school there are teenagers who have gout. Yet nobody cares.
You don't have to intake nicotine, at all.
Many people use these things because their concept of well being differs from yours, and not every in an individualistic way (like antivaxx). There are a number of benefits to nicotine and if it can be taken safely then all the better.
That is bad. That does not mean we should immediately ban all vaping devices. There should be long term studies done on devices and juices in order to determine health effects, and there should be audits on vape juice manufacturers to make sure they aren’t putting really bad stuff in them.
I don’t understand the moral panic. Marketing nicotine products to kids may be reprehensible, but marketing in general is largely reprehensible. It’s a matter of degree. Why do we decide marketing devices that have not killed people, but have just been vessels for unregulated product that have done the damage, is worse than marketing soda and sugary foods, which kill thousands, or addictive apps and social media, which damages mental health significantly, or overpriced unnecessary college educations, which cause people to go into debt for decades, or cars, which both increase debt and are a leading cause of teenage death? Most of those things are unnecessary for the majority of the population. Healthy foods, real life interactions, apprenticeships/job training programs, and public transportation are all generally better than the alternatives for the safety and financial future of young people.
The moral panic happening RE vaping is how the war on drugs started. People saw something that affected the youth and tried to smash it with a big stick rather than attack it with sophistication and respect for the free decisions of the population. It didn’t work.
If vaping is bad, let’s find out why/what specifically is bad, and let’s ban the stuff that killed the people that just died. Banning all of it is draconian. There is no good reason to drive well tested products that people enjoy out of the market, even if they aren’t 100% healthy. I don’t want to live in the Demolition Man future. Plus people who want to vape if products become very expensive and hard to get due to taxes, bans and overregulation will be tempted to buy the crap that isn’t tested that will actually kill them.
It's far premature to try and claim the lack of any health effects from any type of vapes, they just haven't existed long enough.
The article said the teen using a nicotine based product, but that’s not enough information. We don’t where the nicotine juice he was using came from/whether he bought it off the street or from a reputable seller. We also don’t know if that was based on blood tests or self reports, although I think it’s likely the report is accurate/the issue just happens to affect THC users much more.
This spike in illness is very recent and seems to be fairly acute. Vaping has existed for a number of years without similar cases, and they all just happened to appear all at once.
It seems fairly obvious to me that it has something to do with a particular kind of juice that was recently introduced and is more common in illicit THC products. I suspect one or several shadier manufacturers started using something bad fairly recently, and that it has affected mostly THC products, but is not related to the THC itself.
The current reaction is like jumping to ban all toys because of that issue a few years back where some Chinese manufacturers were forced to recall toys with lead paint.
https://komonews.com/news/local/officials-confirm-first-case...
It's all about vaping. General vaping, no THC mentioned, except right at the end: "The Health District says people that vape or use THC products" which doesn't make a lot of sense, because edibles are THC products and I'm pretty sure you won't get any lung issues from them.
It also says: "A Pierce County man is suing the makers of vape pods and vape pens claiming the products left him wheezing". Woah.. he's probably going to sue Juul right? Wrong. https://komonews.com/news/local/pierce-co-man-files-first-la...
"Puyallup Tribal Police Officer Charles Wilcoxen claims marijuana-laced pods gave him lipoid pneumonia. He was taken by ambulance to the hospital on September 11 when the wheezing became especially severe. After tests, doctors gave him the diagnosis."
This is why we can't have nice things.
If I want to give my money to someone else, in exchange for something I want and enjoy, that doesn’t hurt you - why should you care? You are not an injured party.
You don’t like it, you don’t need to buy it. But outlawing something because you don’t like it is just vicious.
All that said, I don’t vape, but I do enjoy the occasional cigar which has faced similar restrictions on flavors and sales of late.
If you have never had a nicotine buzz, you really don’t know what you are missing. Stress disappears, focus is intensely magnified. It’s great. If you’re not prone to addiction I recommend trying it sometime.
There’s a number of good articles I could list, but despite demonization, it has some fantastic upsides and without the additives isn’t nearly the Faustian bargain it’s made out to be.
I have two very close younger friends who are practically my little brothers. They come from an established family in Hollywood, and have a very famous actor-dad. The younger brother is about 20 now, and is friends with half of the teen “influencers” on Instagram/YouTube; the older brother is about 22, and hangs with a group of LA kids who are obsessed with the movie American Psycho and dress/look the part — ironic given that their lives are a 2010s version of that book’s author’s other classic, Less Than Zero.
About two years ago, I’m at a club in Hollywood when these two hand me a thick pile of paper, which looks like a legal document. I’m really confused — is someone getting sued? Is this a screenplay? Am I being asked to sign an NDA?
The older brother, in his American Psycho-inspired suit, takes a puff of his vape and then whispers in my ear, “this is the funding prospectus for Juul. Our friends have been invited to invest.”
I looked at the thing. It was crazy. The valuation was well over $1 billion. The growth rate was off the charts. And, looking around at that club in Hollywood, filled with kids vaping in the outdoor area, I realized the numbers made sense. But the fact that a 19 year old Hollywood kid was handing me the funding documents for this company and telling me that his friends had been invited to invest told me that there was something very, very wrong about how Juul got into the hands of all of these young people — it clearly wasn’t an accident.
Big tobacco was prohibited from advertising is various media for creating characters like Joe Camel, only to circumvent the spirit of the law via the internet.
Vaping is killing kids, how is this not a valid use of resources?
The recent (adult) deaths from Vaping are due to black market THC cartridges filled with vitamin e acetate. It is very likely the kids are obtaining (safe) retail product, which is a failure in retail process, not the manufacturer. While it is a bad thing that school aged children are illegal acquiring Juul -- how is this different (or even worse) than Alcohol? We should investigate alcohol vendors for making tasty beverages too. Can't have flavors that adults might like...
There is a combination of events occurring simultaneously that is making it hard for folks to objectively understand the problem, and if there is actually a problem at all.
Citation needed.
Protecting kids from predatory companies selling them addictive substances? Yep that’s exactly what we should be spending resources on.
At a minimum, it's probably reasonable to say that political capital is real, and selecting an issue to work on (either in the executive branch or more commonly in Congress) does indeed have costs that impair effort on other issues.
Hahahaha. No.. no it's not. Perceptions about public health are high priority issues. Public health itself is not, unless it risks affecting the upper class.
Nicotine is an extremely complex molecule which has been proven to have positive effects in the treatment of autism, as well as mild cognitive impairment, such as Alzheimer disease. Blanket statements like this are harmful to the general nature of science and show a disregard for empirical evidence.
Nicotine can be utilized for positive measures at therapeutic levels and was in Phase III clinical trials with the FDA for such uses before the backing pharmaceutical firm ran out of money. I recommend you do some research on Nicotine as a compound and interactions with nicotinic receptors in the body, the pharmacology is actually fascinating.
It's not like people are going to be less horny if we make raping illegal!
Says a company that:
• Recruited social media "influencers" to post about Juul
• Sponsored programs at schools and summer camps
• Ran "youth education" and "holistic health education" programs where they told teenagers about the dangers of nicotine and (reportedly) that using their product was safe
Do you have sources for the last 2 statements?
From the house oversight committee - https://oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/economic-and...
NYTimes - https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/25/health/juul-teens-vaping....
Others - https://nypost.com/2019/07/26/juul-targeted-teens-by-spendin...
The FTC has already been investigating them for a while now as well - https://www.wsj.com/articles/juuls-marketing-practices-under...
Should Juul be found guilty they will be punished via fines, just like a tobacoo company.
Of course Juul knew this and decided it was worth it because if their device went viral, which it did, they would be locked in as a market leader, which they are.
All they have to do now is lawyer up and try to survive the next year or so and they are locked in.
If they are fined so hard as to go out of business, the product is still not banned and you would have the next in line take the market leader position.
The product is here to stay, banning the devices will be more difficult than banning marijuana (which is a loosing battle).
Will Juul be a brand in the United States in 5 years? Maybe?
Will we still have e-cigarettes in the United States in 5 years, definitely.
If prohibition really occurs of course we will have 3d printed vapes and an even strong black market vape.
I think regulation will likely occur, likely making it require a prescription, but that is still not an outright ban.
New York State banned flavored e-cigarettes recently, on the grounds that they encourage kids to take up vaping; that ban wasn't specifically targeted at Juul (who saw the writing on the wall and stopped selling flavors last year) but that's the brand name everyone knows, so that's why they're catching the investigative heat now.
What? Juul still sells flavors, even if you select that you live in NY or MI (also banning flavors) on the popup when you enter the site: https://www.juul.com/shop/pods
I used to rent an apartment that had a shared ventilation system. It was a no-smoking building. My neighbors decided to ignore this. The smell would get so bad it would make your head spin. The building management did nothing, because it was hard to prove which neighbor was the culprit. I ultimately had to break the lease & move out.
I don't care if you drink yourself under the table, snort meth on the regular, or whatever other self-destructive habit you choose for yourself. It's your right to be an idiot. But your rights stop the moment they infringe on my right to not part take in your self-destructive habits.
No, we don't need smoking rooms. No, it's not sufficient to ban smoking in public places. None of that has prevented me from coming in contact with nicotine or weed. Just ban it outright. It's really that simple.
Nicotine patches, weed cookies, etc. on the other hand? Those are fine. Go nuts. As long as you leave me out of it.
So long to baking cookies.
Guess what it does to their value after getting an entire generation hooked on vaping nicotine for a decade, then for a brief time remove all flavors but the ones you can find in traditional cigarettes, then once people switch to tobacco and menthol only, remove e-cigarettes entirely. The only option is traditional cigarettes or not smoking at that point. If it was easy to quit, we would’ve never had a need to create e-cigarettes to begin with.
It’s completely evil any way you look at it.
I'm glad I didn't use it for a long time. I had a feeling this was just as bad as smoking. I tried to tell some kids I know who are always vaping but they laughed at me with a statement like 'science bitch!'. Well, here you go.
Nicotine products cause only harm to society. That’s enough. Any other argument for individual freedom or benefit is moot. We should ban commercial enterprises based on nicotine. There is one moment when this is possible, which is now. Anyone who thinks that vaping reduces harm from cigarettes is dreaming. Why on earth do we want to spend the next 50 years studying vaping and understanding the risks and benefits of life long vaporised nicotine use, so that Juul’s founders can make a lot of money? If you enjoy moderate and sensible recreational use of nicotine - sorry.
