Vaping - does it make sense just to outlaw it?

@tsarstepan,

tsarstepan wrote:

Then you haven't been paying attention. Apparently, some of the people who have been hit with these mystery illnesses claim they have not been using the THC laced vaping products at all.

Quote:
But Krishnamoorthi pointed out that some of the patients who've gotten seriously ill have said that they've only vaped nicotine products. "Do we still need to be concerned about all e-cigarettes at this point? " he asked Schuchat.

"Claim" and "said" are sure big words for having so few letters. Of course, if you get sick from something, you definitely want to take responsibility for your own actions. Shure you do.

0 Replies

@Linkat,

Linkat wrote:

But does it make sense for the governor to go to this extreme?

Does it sound like I'm defending your governor's instant and total ban? Really?

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

OK, but to my knowledge there's as yet no government oversight of either constituents of Diet supplements or even the claims of efficacy made by their manufacturers. Further, I'm not aware of any "dispensations" given to either tobacco or marijuana smoking products. There are ample valid reasons to believe both are seriously harmful to users, however apart from generally poorly enforced laws on the age of users and occasional high taxes, I'm not aware of any government regulation of their constituents or even claims about what they do.

I agree that some harm does result, but it is mostly confined to those who choose to use them. I certainly don't wish to see the development of a bureaucratic nanny state: I value my freedom more than the harm that comes to smokers who should already know better.

1 Reply

@roger,

Yes because you said he was doing something.

I could have misunderstood sarcasm here.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

Max wrote:

The point I am trying to make is that Americans give special dispensation for smoking products that we don't give to any other product... such as herbal diet supplements or lawn darts.

The airplane wasn't the best choice of example.

Quote:

OK, but to my knowledge there's as yet no government oversight of either constituents of Diet supplements or even the claims of efficacy made by their manufacturers. Further, I'm not aware of any "dispensations" given to either tobacco or marijuana smoking products.

Yes, herbal diet supplements that contained ephedra are banned after some people died. When is the last time you saw lawn darts?

It is my impression that people who support bans of other products resist bans of smoking products. I don't understand why that would be... but that is what it seems like.

2 Replies

tsarstepan wrote:

If E-Cigs Were Romaine Lettuce, They'd Be Off The Shelf, Vaper's Mom Tells Congress

Quote:
A top official with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warned federal lawmakers Tuesday that a new generation of e-cigarettes now on the market is "even more addictive," than early versions of vapes*, and the number of vaping-related lung diseases is continuing to rise.

*Emphasis added by me.

From the vaping thread that predates this libertarian circle jerk

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

The government reaction to documented side effects of ephedra was not a result of a priori regulation and approval. Instead it was a reaction to documented harm that occurred after the supplements were widely sold, just as may yet occur with vaping products as the facts and causes involved become clear.

0 Replies

Here is something very odd I read on the CDC website (which I obtained after reading the information posted on MA's government website about this vaping ban)

According to the CDC there is not one reported cases of Lung Injury Associated with Electronic Cigarettes, or Vaping in Massachusetts.

"As of September 17, 2019 at 5pm, 530* cases of lung injury associated with the use of e-cigarette or vaping products have been reported to CDC from the following states and 1 U.S. territory: AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MD, MI, MN, NC, ND, NE, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WV, WY, and USVI. These numbers may change frequently."

https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/severe-lung-disease.html

Now the state website says "Potential and probable cases have been coming into the State Public Health Laboratory at an alarming rate– on average of 5-10 per day since it was made a reportable condition just a short time ago. "

I am guessing this is either a timing issue - or that this is not confirmed at this point so that the CDC would not report it as such.

https://www.mass.gov/guides/vaping-public-health-emergency

1 Reply

@Linkat,

Oh and to make sure I have the same facts as the governor - and every one else here - this is what is stated as the facts:

"What factors led to the ban?
There is a multistate outbreak of severe lung disease associated with the use of vaping including but not limited to e-cigarettes. The investigation has not yet identified any specific e-cigarette or vaping product or substance that is linked to all cases. The only common factor that is linked to all cases is a history of e-cigarette use and vaping. In Massachusetts, potential and probable cases have been coming into the Public Health State Lab at an alarming rate since this lung disease was made a reportable condition on September 11, 2019. This indicates that we are experiencing the outbreak here in Massachusetts. This, along with the information that has been coming in from across the United States, led the Governor to declare this public health emergency."

So really there are no facts - other than what I have read - the CDC says of what they know -

"Based on initial data from certain states we know: Most patients have reported a history of using e-cigarette products containing THC. Many patients have reported using THC and nicotine. Some have reported the use of e-cigarette products containing only nicotine."

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

It is my impression that people who support bans of other products resist bans of smoking products. I don't understand why that would be... but that is what it seems like.

In general the government often intervenes in cases where immediate and significant harm can result from the use of various products. Pharmaceuticals are an exception in that the law empowers the FDA to exercise prior positive control of the sale and availability of drugs used for the treatment of disease ( the promise of specific health and disease limiting benefits for the use of these products is a significant factor) . In other areas the behavior of the government is indeed variable. In the case of immediate life threatening hazards government actions range from publicizing the danger and alerting tort lawyers and victims to the opportunity to file suit for damages to outright prohibition of the sale of such products (something far more often done by states and not the Federal government.) The cancer causing potential associated with the inhalation of the tars associated with the combustion of tobacco (and also marijuana) are well known. No such prohibitions exist for tobacco as you note, however Federal law (largely unenforced) still prohibits the sale of pot, even as many states authorize it freely. There is indeed an element of inconsistency there, and in a democracy public opinion can indeed rule such maters. I believe this issue involves the justifiable fear of excessive government regulation of personal behavior.

0 Replies

@Linkat,

The news from today suggests that at least some of the problems are from black market products. There is this weird pseudo-brand called "Dank Vapes", people are buying them because they are significantly cheaper than legitimate cartridges.

This changes my original opinion... if the problems can be traced to off-market vape cartridges than the ban could make things worse.

0 Replies

Vaping - does it make sense just to outlaw it?

Quick Links

My Account

able2know