I have smoked both traditional and e- cigarettes for decades, and to a large extent regret my decision to start the habit many years ago. This being said, understanding the motivation of young people to start smoking in the first place. Bans are an easier way to deal with the problem, but understanding the motivation and developing educational programs, treatments, and compassionate counseling would probably be 10 times as effective. Otherwise the motivation will just find another dangerous outlet/product/behavior.
Well most (though not all) of the lung-injuries and deaths have been linked to Vitamin E Acetate in illicit THC vaping cartridges. Those sold in shops where states that have legalized marijuana do not seem to be the problem, though even in those states, the store prices remain far higher than those in the black market, making it tempting to not get the tested, legal supply.
We need to legalize marijuana at the federal level already and require strict testing/quality control procedures for all derivative products like vapes and edibles and not tax them to death thus maintaining a black market. People would be willing to pay somewhat of a premium for a product they know is safe.
1
There is something being overlooked here. The biotech industry has a long history of trying to deliver drugs through inhalation and most attempts have failed due usually to bad side effects. One or two have succeeded. This raises the possibility (only the possibility admittedly) that just inhaling large complex molecules is generally risky independent of the toxicity or chemical activity of the substance. It is a possibility that needs to be addressed.
2
While we are arguing about what sort of medical care system we should have, strengthening our public health system to deal with smoking, drinking, obesity and diet, STDs, pregnancy and early childhood development, mental illness, and even gun control would potentially save astronomical amounts of money down the road.
Once again, anti-regulators have helped enable a huge problem.
So Big Tobacco has gotten a pass here. Disheartening is the best thing to be said about this editorial.
Do we care about the jobs of heroin manufacturers more than the damage done by their "product? That seems to be the logic we hear from not only out warped, immoral "president", but now from the Editorial Board. WHY has Big Tobacco been given a pass on listing the ingredients in their products?
It is known that over 400 chemical substances are used in cigarette production, but the FDA specifically did NOT require ANY ingredients to be listed on cigarette packages. Even though some of those chemicals are known carcinogens. NOW, with vaping products, the FDA, once again, and cowardly, does not require a list of ingredients, even though recognizing the potential health dangers from tobacco products (of which nicotine vapes are).
It is not enough to recommend e-cigarettes are treated like cigarettes, as that is WEAKER than what should be happening. ALL tobacco products MUST list ALL ingredients. Lung injuries (and DEATHS!) are being caused by these products NOW, and these are not just related to THC containing products. Our "Surgeon General" has also been a disgraceful "no show" as this tragedy has unfolded, and continues to unfold. CONTROL BIG TOBACCO!
2
Juul has long had the ability to stop minors from using their product by incorporating "virtual carding" into their product. The idea is simple: an app that is used to register an adult user is bound to that user's phone and requires its owner to provide proof of his age (just as a buyer of cigs at the local store have to present id before sales). Once authenticated, that phone -- and only that phone -- is pair with the user's Juul device. The Jull device then must be near the user's phone to ignite.
Unlike adults who buy cigarettes or alcohol for minors, adults will be very relunctant to share their phone with minors. For most minors, Juul will simply be "vape locked."
I though myself clever, but then read Juul's extensive patent portfolio -- and low and behold, this very mechanism is covered by their patents. In fact, in response to possible government regulation, they announced that they'd launch a test of a similar mechanism in some foreign markets -- a promise that never happened once Scott Gottlieb. the head of the FDA who wanted to regular Electronic Nictonine Delivery Systems (ENDS) left office.
So the bottom line is this: Juul had the technology from close to its very start to prevent use by minors.
What they chose to do, however, speaks poorly of the founders who claimed their mission was to help established smokers transition to something somewhat safer.
Remember this: Juul's economics can fully handle "virtual carding." They chose not to do it.
1
It took me years to quit smoking. I managed to pull it off for a year cold turkey only to start again.
What worked in the end is a slow weaning process I heard about on a radio interview. You postpone the first cig of the day by a half hour then on a daily basis add 15 minutes to that time. SMoke normally after.
It took months and then I was done. I have been quit for 25 years now.
If you are addicted to nicotine you can use nicotine gum to assuage it.
Inhaling anything but clean air is bad for you.
4
The Board is right.
Banning stupid is impossible.
So is banning nicotine products.
Except for protecting kids,
forget legislation trying to stop suicide.
Education attempting to cure ignorance
is the only tool likely to work.
But when at least half the population nurtures
ignorance as an article of faith, it's a long shot.
1
It is hard to quit nicotine-not just smoking cigarettes. I heavily smoked for 44 years and it took two concerted efforts to quit, but I did it before e-cigarettes came alongS. Using nicotine replacement products such as patches and gum certainly helped but they did not contain the amounts of nicotine that e-cigs and other vaping products contain. The idea was to gradually withdraw from nicotine not to find a new and more powerful addiction. That's why a ban on these products is called for. Smoking cigs may be worse for your lungs but the facts are not in on vaping these products even when they are not the black market substitutes with the vitamin E oils. Permanent nicotine addiction is not a healthy substitute for smoking.
2
The debate on nicotine products arouses great emotion as well research-based opinion from responders to this article. My friends and I started smoking whenever possible at 11 (yes - that was way back in the day when you went into the corner store and bought a pack of cigs "for my dad" - if indeed the clerk cared to ask who you were buying them for. But I began to smoke daily and in front of my parents at 18, about a pack a day, until a month before my 31st birthday - when a friend and I made a promise, smoked our last cigarettes, and quit cold turkey over cups of cappuccino - boom, that's it! Bye bye cigs.
Many combinations of body and brain chemistry, pressure from loved ones, concern over one's own health (and since THOSE days, simply tne cost!) go into the ease or difficulty of quitting.
Yup. It doesn't bother me in the least if folks around me smoke but the sight of adults VAPING makes me want to yell "oh please, stop it!" It looks so pretentious in adults - in youth, they are just trying to look and be oh so cool. But my point is this: with what we know today, the calculated targeting of very young people by the e-cig industry with vape "flavors" that kids tend to love is utterly despicable. The owners and executives of these companies are parasites. They have no redeeming qualities, period.
1
Nicotine is incredibly addictive and very, very hard to quit. So naturally some saw this as a road to quick profits making a device easily hidden because it looks just like a USB memory stick and blasting teens with cool colors and trendy flavors. And our oh so business friendly FDA decided that with tthese new addictive drug delivery devices and the drug solutions offered they would rely on the industry to police itself. Lastly, some criminals looking for even more profits spiked gaping solution with THC cut with vitamin E acetate which has caused thousands to have severe lung damage and dozens to die. Congress needs to enact harsh penalties to curb product adulteration, pandering to kids, requirements for FDA to monitor and regulate vaping solutions, packaging, devices and advertising. It is time to get government back to working to protect consumers. And this should not be twisted into a bargaining chip to protect Trump.
1
Your editorial is very disappointing!
While your proposals for improving public health are spot on, it is ridiculous to allow another product on the market that is specifically designed to addict users to nicotine. Nicotine has been associated with lung cancer, heart disease, and stroke, among other health problems. There is NO rationale reason to allow such a product on the market.
3
tobacco companies are public. spend a fraction of the defense budget to buy them all and shut them down forever. the reduction in federal cost of care for lung cancer and heart attacks will pay back ten fold.
2
In all of the articles I've read about this topic, I haven't found a satisfactory answer to one question: What is the harm of nicotine usage (for adults) when divorced from the other toxins in tobacco? Is nicotine itself toxic or carcinogenic? If not, why are we vilifying it?
2
@Lora
Nicotine is toxic in very large amounts, but not at the level in cigarettes or e-cigarettes. It can lead to increases of blood pressure and mild circulation problems in some people (personally I already need to take medicine to keep my blood pressure up to 100/60) but it does not cause cancer - that's from the tars and other chemicals caused by combustible tobacco.
Nicotine is helpful for some people with ADHD or depression, and research is showing some positive effects for some neurological conditions.
It's also enjoyable. Personally I see no reason to quit using it.
3
I'm getting tired of people, especially people who should know better - like the NYT Editorial Board, saying that the government, specifically the FDA, have been doing nothing about e-cigarettes for the past 10 years. Nothing could be further from the truth.
First of all, the 2009 law that gave FDA authority over tobacco products didn't provide for regulation of e-cigarettes. FDA wasn't able to "deem" that authority for itself until 2012.
Second, your paragraph titled "Invest in research" undercuts your own argument. As a regulatory agency, FDA needs to base all of its decisions on scientific data. That data takes years to produce. You ask, "How safe is long-term e-cigarette use?" 10 years is NOT long-term; 30 years is. There simply has not been enough time to answer many of these questions, but FDA is engaged in multiple research initiatives to begin addressing them. We will have the answers eventually, but we don't have them now.
Finally, don't forget that the industry has a seat at the table. They spend millions on lobbying and litigation to slow or stop outright nearly every regulatory decision that is made.
Many of the NYT's recommendations make sense. In a perfect world, we would have the kind of robust public health system envisioned in this article. But in reality we don't and we probably never will. In that case, banning some e-cigarettes (like flavored products) might be the best thing to do to prevent another generation of youth from becoming addicted.
1
So much ignorance on display in these comments. Nicotine does not cause cancer and there is no evidence that vaping products cause any form of cancer. Adults enjoy flavors as well, not just children. After all, who wouldn't prefer 'Mango' or some other flavor to the taste of face tobacco?
We are never getting rid of Nicotine. There are studies currently being done that show the benefits of Nicotine in fighting early onset Alzheimer's, for example. But besides its benefits, you don't get to ban something that has shown no adverse health affects and is already legal in other, more damaging forms.
Vapes do not cause cancer. Nicotine does not cause cancer. Any statement to the contrary is speculative and/or flat-out wrong.
6
@Justin Perhaps you would like to explain the double lung transplant a sixteen year old underwent after vaping.
1
As a smoker for over 60 yrs and numerous failed attempts to kick the habit, I tried and succeeded when I switched to vaping. The result is quite remarkable. No more inhaling of tobacco smoke, no more reeking of cigarette smoke, my health stats have improved dramatically, no more having to go outdoors to smoke, no likelihood of harmful second hand smoke. Could go on and on but you get the picture. Is vaping a health hazard? I don’t know. But I do know from my personal experience that it has benefitted me and possibly added years to my life. Our lawmaking can attempt to ban or restrict vaping. But they will do so out of ignorance and will do more harm than good and probably create a lucrative black market.
6
The awful truth is that all tobacco products, including ecigs, ought to be illegal. Can you imagine that if tobacco was a new product on the market it could ever gain approval by the FDA? Of course not. We ban other drugs, why not ban nicotine except in pills? I know that is impossible, but consider how much better off we would be.
@Tom Rowe Do you know anything about nicotine? Or just assuming it is bad based on a significantly incomplete and unresearched article?
6
@Alyssa Explain the double lung transplant a 16 year old underwent after vaping.
"The impulse to remove e-cigarettes from the market is understandable." Where is this same energy for cigarettes, which have killed MILLIONS more people?
The NYT coverage on vaping is beyond disappointing...just say you'd rather see people dying from smoking cigarettes. In addition, why does this article not even mention the fact that the people who are dying from e-cigs are vaping THC with vitamin E acetate? You're leaving out the most important part of these people dying - they're buying black market weed cartridges with shady ingredients. If you're going to publish more articles on vaping, you need to be clear that the majority of these illnesses are from THC vapes. Articles like this make people want to ban vaping.
And while we're at it, I saw an ad for a "fruity pebbles beer" online yesterday, complete with unicorn imagery. Let's ban beer, heck, any alcohol, that markets to children. Better yet, lets just have all these industries babysit the kids, since obviously parents aren't doing a good enough job. *rolls eyes*
PS, teens in England vape.
4
Oh, come on! Do you really need some sort of crutch to stop smoking? I’m an Oldster now (80) but in my late teens and early twenties I used to smoke over one pack of cigarettes daily. For some time, I considered quitting due to the health risks and expense – about 35 cents a pack back then, but like many smokers just put it off. Then one morning in May 1965 when starting my day, I concluded that smoking had absolutely no benefits and was just a waste of my money. I never lit up that first cigarette of the day and have never looked back. Oh yes, a couple of months later, I tried a cigarette; my impression – YUK! Smokers are just wasting their money in order risk their health and that of others through second hand smoke.
@Richard B
I apologize for the tone. This reply was intended for @John Warnock below. The intent and information are still the same, though.
Some people are able to quit smoking cold turkey, but many of us can't.
Some people are also able to quit using the other over-the-counter nicotine replacements, patches, gum, and lozenges with their low. slow nicotine release, but many of us can't.
Some people are able to quit with help from drugs like buproprion or Chantix, but many of us can't.
Hypnotism and supportive therapy help some people to quit, but definitely not all.
Vaping has worked wonders for many of us who have many times tried and failed to quit. It still provides user controlled nicotine, but does not provide the 'tar' and other cancerous and lung damaging components of smoking.
2
@Richard B
Balderdash.
Some people are able to quit smoking cold turkey, but many of us can't.
Some people are also able to quit using the other over-the-counter nicotine replacements, patches, gum, and lozenges with their low. slow nicotine release, but many of us can't.
Some people are able to quit with help from drugs like buproprion or Chantix, but many of us can't.
Hypnotism and supportive therapy help some people to quit, but definitely not all.
Vaping has worked wonders for many of us who have many times tried and failed to quit. It still provides user controlled nicotine, but does not provide the 'tar' and other cancerous and lung damaging components of smoking.
1
Hogwash! You do not need e-cigs to quit smoking. You stop. It is not fun and doesn't always work the first time. You try, try, again until you quit. Millions of us have done it.
58
@John Warnock
Well, decades of research disagrees with you - quitting cold turkey is the worst way to quit. But you certainly do sound like you know everything.
46
@Murph
I'd like to see that research. I quit both alcohol and tobacco 'cold turkey', and while it was no walk in the park, it was the only way I could do it.
Granted, some drugs have some wicked withdrawal symptoms, even alcohol if one's been a drunk for a long time, so there may be some wisdom to weening off before stopping. Yet, it isn't as if 'cold turkey' will kill the individual (and that is not to say it might happen, sure, just like someone might sober up over time, and then find out his/her body is so shot from decades of abuse, that he/she has some really serious problems).
The fact is, there is probably no 'Best Way' to stop any addiction. My view is: whatever works.
Cold turkey worked for me. So someone saying otherwise, and not providing any links to those decades of research (research that isn't done by individuals who are funded by the Betty Ford Clinic or other "we can help you get clean! for a price!" people), well, I say you're wrong.
And it is a bit hypocritical for you to say someone else is acting like a know-it-all when you're doing the very same thing.
13
@DKM
"Yet, it isn't as if 'cold turkey' will kill the individual." I beg to differ. Quitting alcohol cold turkey can trigger seizures and even death. When people are weaned off alcohol in rehabs they are usually given Librium or some other medication to lower the potential doe seizures. I saw somebody have an alcohol withdrawal seizure, and it nearly killed the gentleman.
It's because cold turkey is so painful and traumatic that addicts will do nearly anything to assure a supply. Using medication to help people quit their addiction is proving both humane and effective. Of course addiction has a powerful emotional element too which must be addressed. Medical relief from withdrawal is well within our capabilities, and no alcoholic or addict needs to endure cold turkey. .
11
It really is a shame that more emphasis was not placed on the Fact that virtually all of the illnesses arose out of vaping THC where vitamin E oil was used.
6
@Robert
And they are not happening in any other country. If these illnesses were caused by vaping regular nicotine then they would be happening elsewhere.
4
The problem is that these little e-cigs have the potential to completely unwind the spectacular gains on smoking cessation that required decades of research (some of which was undoubtedly tainted by the agenda), decades of convincing people that their bodies would fall to pieces in the presence of first, second, even third-hand smoke and lobbying of local governments to essentially force private business owners to ban smoking in their own establishments (the argument being that it's not fair to make prospective customers and employees choose to frequent/work for an establishment that doesn't allow smoking or has a section for each). The banning of smoking was the only thing that actually had an effect. When people were told cigarettes caused a litany of fatal health conditions they continued smoking over ten cigarettes a day on average in the US. Public bans, by contrast, led to a stigma and ultimately to substantially less smoking. In come these little vapes: they're sneaky and can be ripped surreptitiously at all hours of the day, loaded with nicotine, really a great bit of fun, and almost impossible to make a credible argument that the use of them in public places is harming the health of people other than the user (not that this will stop people from trying to make such arguments). Americans love inhaling nicotine. They couldn't quit even when they learned it was destroying vital organs. If these things turn out to be harmful, it's gonna be awful hard to stop their use.
1
Ban regular and e-cigarettes. If you are caught producing and selling them you go to jail. Drive the Tobacco companies to bankruptcy and litigate the executives for willingly killing people. Not only killing people but forcing the rest to pay much higher premiums for healthcare.
This is insane. Laws are there to stop people from doing idiotic and criminal things, to themselves and others. If we have laws against people killing, maiming, beating, raping people; vandalizing property, public and private, speeding, polluting, why do we all of a sudden discover freedom to do what we want to ourselves and others? Could it be because it is profitable?
Yes!
1
Smoking cigarettes may kill you one day. Vaping may kill you next week.
Ban vaping, even it it means nicotine addicts will smoke instead.
@Mike Cigarettes WILL kill you one day. I know you're mad about it, but I'm keeping my perfectly safe nicotine vape.
5
You should be ashamed of yourselves. Defending a death industry. Ban them yesterday.
Well, after reading these comments I am going to go outside to smoke my 2nd cigarette of the day.
1
Your call to not ban flavored e-cigs makes no sense. They banned most flavored cigarettes, notably sweet tobacco from India, and it made smoking less attractive for kids. If they want the tobacco drug, give them the tobacco taste only, and while we are at it, ban menthol in cigs, too. They are the most damaging and the hardest to quit.
@Minnoka
The absolutely last thing people quitting smoking want is to have their vaping to taste sort of like (it is a hard flavor to replicate) tobacco.
I suppose we could also ban all flavored alcohol. Since adults don't like or need flavors.
5
Ban all smoking devices. It’s time to say no to the tobacco and nicotine industry. Squash the lobbyists! This is American health at risk. It’s outrageous that I can go into Walgreens a health and beauty store and face death sticks at the cashier.
A little late, NYT. You've been in full reefer madness mode since e-cigs appeared, and now you've published stories that falsely conflated them with an unrelated doctored black market marijuana product. Now that real damage has been done to the industry and to those of us who gratefully replaced cigarettes a decade ago and enjoy much improved health, you begin to (sort of) backtrack.
Honestly, the hysterical, misleading and often just ridiculous stories you've written during this time about this life saving alternative have been unconscionable. You need to publish the WHO report and other valid research and pay attention to the stories of the *millions* of us who quietly quit heavy smoking habits 10+ years ago and have suffered nothing but relief from the ill effects of cigarettes. Ask my doc about my lungs. Let adults choose.
6
1 Many years ago, I attended a series of free smoking cessation classes given by a local hospital. They gave out, or gave prescriptions for:
nicotine gum
nicotine patches
drugs, namely, Bupropion (which made me wake up at 3am, a known side effect, so I had to stop)
AND,,,,,,,
Wait for it.......
NICOTINE INHALERS!!!! (These were not e-cigs, as there was no vaporising heating element.)
None of the above worked.
2 Several years ago, I bought an e-cigs kit. It wasn't satisfying, and I smoked both cigarettes and e-cigs. But, after 6 months, I had weaned myself off the cigarettes, and puffed the e-cigs only. I Haven't had a cigarette since.
3 As the NYT's pointed out: Learn from Britain.
The UK's National Health Service found:
"Long-term vaping 'far safer than smoking' says 'landmark' study"
You can see it here:
https://www.nhs.uk/news/heart-and-lungs/long-term-vaping-far-safer-than-smoking-says-landmark-study/
But, former chain-smoker, President Mike Bloomberg will probably have none of that nonsense.
5
You keep focusing on vaping itself as the source of the recent health issues. But those illnesses were caused by vaping black-market THC laced with Vitamin E. It has nothing to do with vaping nicotine. You have created a totally false impression.
7
Until all tobacco products are banned, nothing should touch vaping. This is the same mentality as being able to sell beer in grocery stores but not wine. Government can’t cherry-pick what to ban when it’s dependent on taxable income from harmful products or tobacco would’ve been illegal years ago (same as other addictive drugs).
I’ve never smoked or vaped, and as long as people don’t do it around me, go ahead. It’s your life.
The tobacco industry had decades to hook people and kill them. Vaping has done it in less than ten. If people are that stupid and want to harm themselves with legal products, it's their right.
For the record...I've never smoked or vaped.
No, banning e-cigarettes is good. Only corporate profits drive any opposing argument. America is sick of this gaslighting brought to you by other corporate entities with skin in the game such as ad dollars. Enough!
1
Smoking rates fell in tandem with higher taxes, increased regulation, and prominent warnings. But those weren't the main reason. The biggest single factor was rising social opprobrium.
Slowly but surely, a majority of the population came to see smoking as not just a choice, but a dirty, stupid, and frankly quite disgusting choice. Smokers didn't just have to stand in some dingy outdoor 'smoking area', they saw the look on non-smokers faces who watched them as the lit up.
That was what really turned people off smoking.
Ideally, people will vape instead, but in perfect world, the rest of us will all agree that vaping's pretty gross and stupid too. If that happens, we'll eventually break the world of its nicotine habit.
1
“Critics are right to be skeptical of such measures.”
Duh.
So why propose them?
Just make these nicotine-delivery systems available by prescription only.
Send black marketers to jail.
There, problem mostly solved.
@SRP The black market is for THC vapes, not nicotine vapes.
2
My brother switched to vaping after 20 years of smoking traditional cigarettes. Within three weeks his perpetual cough had entirely gone, and the color in his face improved dramatically. He also finds himself consuming less nicotine generally (vaping just several times a day, versus smoking two packs of cigarettes a day). He also has much more energy.
Making vaping illegal while regular cigarettes are still legal is nothing other than massive government overreach as well as sheer stupidity.
5
This is a nice thing for the editorial board to come out and say, especially when certain writers like Denise Grady have been chasing this story with a fervor that doesn't feel journalistic or scientific, despite her laudable accomplishments as a science writer. The NYT should acknowledge that this "health crisis" was manufactured in part by breathless sophistry printed in their own pages. Michael Barbaro blocked me on Twitter (with my 12 followers) for daring to ask him if the Daily was contributing to a false public health hysteria. It's super disappointing that I can't trust the NYT on health issues--as this editorial rightly points out, vaping is seen in other places (like the UK) as a harm reduction tool. That should have been clear from the start of the reporting on this issue. For a while, you all were nanny-journalism run amok.
4
It's funny. The NYT brings this article on keeping vaping alive (I don't smoke), but then they place a banner ad in to the article from ExxonMobil pushing the prudence of biofuels due to theoretically less CO2 that would be created. So says the ad. Great news! Would biofuels pass the Greta test? I think not, so double-speak is going full steam here! Not too much blame from me, because no bucks = no Buck Rodgers.
To stay somewhat on point: one freind of mine went to a session of pin-pricking/hypnosiss designed to cure him of smoking. After the stressful session was over, the first thing he did when he left the establishmant was to light-up a cigarette.
Annother friend of mine solved the situation much better. He bet his brother (rich brother) he'd quit for the mere sum of $25,000 and he did quit, because if he would have lost the bet, he would've had to pay his brother $50,000! Money is therefore not just the root of all evil...it, apperarently, can also cure a smoking addiction.
1
How many Editorial Board members who contributed to this opinion piece are current smokers or vapers? Readers should know this.
1
So I want to know if Juul is paying for the lung transplant of the young kid I just read about. Once again smoking is bad we know it, why do we have to pay for it.
@Calleen Mayer
Juul didn't cause that kid's problem. If any of the deaths or injuries were really caused by nicotine vaping products such as Juul, we would have seen this happen many years ago and not only just now. Additionally, it would be happening not only within the U.S. but outside of the U.S. too----we are not the only country in the world where people use nicotine vapes or even the Juul. However, we do seem to be the only country with a blackmarket weed vape industry, though. This should make it incredibly obvious that nicotine vapes aren't the problem.
I smoked for 18 years (sometimes up to 60 cigarettes in a day) and thanks to Juul, I haven't smoked a cigarette in 2 years.
This conflation between blackmarket weed vapes and legit nicotine vapes is causing unnecessary hysteria and needs to stop. They are two very different things and the media is being intellectually dishonest conflating the two. Too bad people lack critical thinking skills and this exacerbates that problem. But then again, Trump is president too. I guess I shouldn't be surprised at the stupidity of the American people anymore.
6
If the government can ban e-cigarettes, menthol cigarettes, flavored cigarettes...why don't they just ban cigarettes? Like, unilaterally?
I had no idea they had this power. I think it's very telling that they're only willing to use it on something that is novel and hip among youngsters. I guess there's too much money to be made selling cancer to middle-aged white people for the states to bother doing the right thing? I would hope that this is common sense, but the very LAST nicotine products that should be banned are the SAFEST ones, by Jove, not the first!
Parents, if your teens are vaping illegally, that is frankly your own problem. Not the state's. And not mine! As teen vices go it is pretty quaint. Enough of this fuddy-duddy panic. Get some perspective, people. I say all this as a "traditional" smoker who thinks vaping is totally lame.
18
@heliotone
There was a multi state tobacco suit and settlement and most of the states get large amounts of money from the tobacco companies based on the amount of cigarettes smoked.
The more people who quit smoking the less money goes to the state. Many of these states put that money to use for general revenue or special projects. I believe North Dakota is the only state where an initiative was paqssed requiring that all of the money goes to anti smoking use.
The radio and television stations love this since a lot of that money goes directly into commercials that run day and night.
1
@heliotone
The government doesn't have the power to ban cigarettes. The 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, which established the FDA's regulatory authority over tobacco products, specifically prevents FDA from banning cigarettes (even menthol cigarettes) altogether.
2
@heliotone Because prohibition always works. There is a black market for everything that is banned, so you still have the product and in addition add crime.
1
I quit smoking in 1991 because I was in a foreign country and cigarettes were almost $10 a pack. I started when I was 13. It was enormously difficult to quit but I really wanted to. I see young kids vaping and no matter the form, a whole new generation is becoming hooked to nicotine. All the people I know quit smoking cold turkey. One thing that’s has kept me away from cigarettes is that I don’t ever want to go through that again. My mom quit cold turkey, my dad , my brother, my husband etc. The aim of a tobacco/nicotine company is to develop a client usually between the ages of 12 and 14. Success!
“The better, if more complicated, option would be to build a public health system that’s strong enough to combat all nicotine addiction in the long term.”
The explosive demand for the devices has bred a dangerous and unregulated third party cartridge market. The sweetness and flavors offered by the products create a clear and present danger to minors. And millions of people are beta testers for the cartridges as well as the delivery devices.
This is not about Puritanism. Unregulated, e-cigarettes are a train wreck for long term public health, because the victims are so young. The editorial board both sets up a straw man and suggests a false dichotomy - a full blown ban of e-cigarettes and creating an effective public health system are not mutually exclusive options; there are dozens of gradations.
3
"Invest in public health." Yes, but invest in disease that we have little control over, not clearly self-inflicted, avoidable causes.
"Invest in research. There remains much we don't know about e-cigarettes". Yes, invest in research, but research health and disease that are not purely man-made. There are certainly things we do not know about e-cigarettes, but we DO know that they are completely unnecessary.
The simplest and best solution is to ban ALL smoking and tobacco products, regardless of delivery method. Nobody needs these products.
2
As one of the millions of adults who uses e-cigarettes as intended, this media-fueled hysteria is nonsensical. The CDC has noted that the vast majority -- if not all -- of all vaping-related illnesses were caused by black market THC devices - NOT ecigs.
As evidenced in Britain, plenty of people have used ecigs as an alternative to regular cigarettes with no major repercussions. From a cost-benefit perspective, the net lives saved from eliminating deadly addictions to mainstream cigarettes outweighs the costs. You can eliminate the appeal to young people without imposing a mainstream ban. Would a rise in teen alcohol abuse result in a ban of all flavored alcohols? No.
1. Ban regular cigarettes which are clearly linked to cancer and a whole medley of health issues. To ban ecigs under the pretense of harm while making more harmful traditional cigs widely available is ridiculous. It doesn't make sense to ban something because we THINK it is harmful.
2. Adults like flavors too. Ramp up age verification processes online, stop selling in them in stores, etc. Imposing a ban on all flavors is misguided, ultimately leading people to seek black market, unregulated alternatives that fueled this hysteria in the first place. Prohibition does not work.
3. Taxation and regulation. Impose hefty excise taxes on ecigs, deterring public use and enabling the government to monetize it. The FDA should also impose strong standards for ingredient transparency and quality control as well.
4
I'm beyond tired of the attack on e cigarettes. Studies have shown that they're not some kind of gateway for kids to start smoking and the folks that have had problems with them had e cigs with THC or some other substance not regularly put in them. My better half went to e cigs after 35 years of smoking and has touched a regular cigarette since. If we're looking to ban a substance, let's ban Chantix. also, as others have mentioned, if we're really worried about a public health hazard, let's actually do something about gun violence.
5
I agree that prohibition is rarely a blanket solution. But it's something rather than nothing while a far more global and systemic attack is undertaken to curtain a massive problem. I do like the Times multi-pronged approach, because at least there are practical steps laid out -- let's give the CDC not only money but also more clout and coverage. Prohibiting any vaping product advertising anywhere would also help. I'd much rather see marijuana legalized everywhere than Juul et al. expand any more.
Vaping as a positive alternative to "real" cigarets is a popular, yet ironic argument in my own illiberal hatred of all these products. While I do have a certain sympathy for people who face horrendous odds in trying to quit nicotine (as with a relative of mine with cancer who returns to smoking after every infusion), the vaping option still makes me think of the notion of serving beer instead of whisky at an AA meeting. A horrible metaphor, I know -- but what we're allowing to happen to our young people today is horrible.
The obsession with "nicotine addiction" is itself misguided: there is no evidence that nicotine is a particularly dangerous drug, and its appeal and benefits are well known. The problem, with cigarettes and now, apparently, some e-cigarettes, is in the delivery system. Perhaps if we worked to develop a safer way to deliver this drug we could consider it more like we do caffeine, as a basically safe drug that might be misused but poses no serious risks.
3
Banning vaping would indeed be far more harmful than better regulation. I smoked cigarettes for over 10 years, started regularly at 17 and tried for the first time at 14. E-cigarettes were the only thing that helped me completely quit, after years of trying different NRTs and other interventions. I vaped for a year, during which I completely lost the taste for regular cigarettes, and then I quit vaping.
At least this generation of kids is moving away from regular cigarettes, though I'm not unsympathetic to parents' concern about using e-cigarettes instead. But kids will be kids, and they need robust support at home that balances understanding their desire to experiment and push boundaries with compassionate reminders of the pains of long-term addiction. Outright prohibition never helps, and it certainly tends to make things even more enticing to younger audiences. Trust that to some extent vaping is a trend for this generation, it will pass, and remember that alcohol poisoning kills far more frequently, and the ramifications of alcohol and drug addiction are way more severe than e-cigarette use. We need better regulation on who is able to access e-cigarettes and when, as well as a national push towards a 21-and-up requirement for smokers. I don't think I would've started smoking in my 20s if that was when I was first able to buy them for myself, but when high school seniors can at 18 it's easy to see how they're getting massively distributed amongst younger people.
4
I continue to be astounded by the failure of governments around the world to confront the damage done by tobacco companies. Millions - tens of millions - have suffered and died from their addiction to nicotine. Sure, lawsuits are filed and sometimes won. But,regardless of legal settlements, whether adjudicated or imposed, they don't come close to paying the cost of the damages done. So profits are privatized and costs socialized. It has always been thus.
As for a strong public health system? In the US? Yeah, right.
1
31 Years. 31 years I was addicted to cigarettes. I wanted to quit. I tried going cold turkey, taking Zyban, using the patch, the gum, hypnosis, behavior modification techniques- you name it, I tried it. None of them worked for more than a handful of days.
So checked out e-cigarettes. I bought different flavors, different devices and worked with the ladies and gentlemen at my local "Vape stores" to find what I liked.
December 17, 2013 I woke up, picked up my e-cigarette filled with a candy flavored "juice" and never picked up another cigarette despite living with a smoker. I started with 36mg/nicotine and every year on my anniversary I step down another level.
If I wanted a tobacco flavor- I could have just kept smoking. It's those candy, fruit and dessert flavors that appeal and helped me to drop a 31 year habit. I am healthier now than I have been in many years and I give all the thanks to putting down the cigarettes and picking up the vaping device.
6
It is not hyperbolic to state that E-cigarettes are a “drug delivery” system, therefore they should come under the umbrella of FDA regulation.
The argument that E-cigarettes should not be banned because they aid addicted smokers to quit is bogus. The addiction remains, only the delivery method changes.
Regulators should consider the rate at which E-cigarettes recruit new addicts to nicotine. E-cigarettes create a flood of new, young addicts on a daily basis.
This is a no-brainer for public health. Ban their use except via prescription for use by addicted smokers.
Behind all this is the American love of puritanism, the awful feeling that somebody else is having fun. As noted by others, nicotine is not harmful in psychotropic doses or even very addictive. The experience of Vietnam should have taught us that addiction depends on the person as much as on the drug. Addicts in treatment often abuse their treatment medications in search of that extra thrill.
But Americans relish their freedoms, one of which is the freedom to place restrictions on their fellows. Hence the current hysteria.
6
It is rather humorous all of the pseudo-science posted about nicotine being so dangerous. As far as I am aware, there is no evidence that nicotine at the levels generated during vaping has any negative health effects. Indeed, there is data suggesting that nicotine may have significant health benefits. First, nicotine is a stimulant and generally an appetite suppressant. As such, nicotine use may well help folks lose weight. And in the US, being overweight is perhaps our greatest health problem. Second, nicotine may help prevent or slow the progression of Parkinson's disease. It is remarkable when cigarette smoking has any positive effect, and one thing it clearly does is reduce the incident of Parkinson's. There are also biochemical studies providing a likely mechanism for this. At least 2 clinical studies are underway to test this hypothesis. Third, there is some suggestive evidence that nicotine may reduce the incidence of multiple sclerosis. Swedish snus users (a form of powdered tobacco you take into your nose) have a lower incidence of MS than non-users.
Lastly, the science very clearly shows that while cigarettes are horribly addicting, nicotine alone is only mildly addicting. This includes both animal studies and hundreds of human studies.
4
Another possible way of dealing with the issue is to simply let Darwin take care of the problem. The world is full of information about the terrible health effects of vaping - it’s everywhere, it can’t be avoided. So, people who vape are making choices and decisions. Those decisions have consequences. In the Darwinian long run, the consequences should produce a human population less likely to make those decisions.
Here in Australia it is illegal to sell vaping solutions containing nicotine. I'll repeat that: vaping solutions sold in Australia do not contain nicotine.
My own experience is typical in that I smoked a pack of cigarettes every a day for about 40 years, had chronic heartburn and headaches, and then amazingly escaped that downward spiral six years ago when I purchased a non-nicotine e-cigarette on a whim at a flea market.
The absence of nicotine was not a factor, because it was really just the relaxation of that puff of vaporised "smoke" that I needed. Much the way people smoke pipes or cigars without inhaling, just for the relaxation of the puff.
It's hard to believe, but many scientists will tell you isn't nicotine that's addictive, it's the relaxing puff that's addictive.
So: could a responsible government possibly produce a safe non-nicotine vaping solution? How hard could that be? And then hand out e-cigarettes containing that solution FOR FREE to actually help smokers get off cigarettes. Like a methadone program? Too altruistic?
I can only say that non-nicotine vaping worked brilliantly for me, plus I have "saved" about $50,000 by not buying tobacco cigarettes these past 6 years, and have never felt healthier.
Then again, maybe it's the money factor, and the potential loss of millions of tax dollars, that's getting in the way of governments doing the obvious right thing in this case.
4
This ain't rocket science:
Banned except when prescribed by medical doctors to cigarette addicts.
Dan Kravitz
"Because these black market products are a leading suspect in the lung-injury outbreak, product bans are more likely to exacerbate this crisis than to mitigate it."
The indiscriminate hair-on-fire hysteria over this problem seems to willfully overlook the key point in this article (and almost every other article that seems to bury the lede) -- namely,that it is black market products that are producing the injuries. This, while bans of approved smoking products at legitimate business outlets only hurt small businesses and responsible users.
If bad batches of bootleg alcohol were suddenly working their way onto the street, would the government shut down licensed liquor store sales just to be safe?
Maybe it would be better if the Cast-the-First-Stone crowd stopped their orgy of recrimination and start putting things in perspective when it comes to other people's vices/pleasures vis a vis smoking etc.
6
I smoked a pack plus a day for 55 years. Then, 6 months ago
I ended up in the emergency room and quit smoking.
Nothing like a good scare!
1
These things should be banned like heroin or switchblade knives. They get people addicted, then they make people sick, then they make people die. And they do it faster than cigarettes do. You're better off smoking. At least cigarettes take 30-40 years to kill you.
What's the argument in favor of these pernicious devices?
If someone really needs one of these things to kick the cigarette habit then it should be available by prescription only.
1
@MIKEinNYC
Regular nicotine vaping isn't making people sick, or killing them. The current health problems seem to be almost entirely caused by bootleg THC cartridges, not, repeat, not by regular nicotine liquids or cartridges This is not, repeat, not happening in any other country. In fact research in Britain and Europe is showing nicotine vaping to be far safer than smoking. Other nicotine replacement products, patches, gum and lozenges are over-the-counter and now labeled for indefinite use.
1
So do we have the e-cig lobby paying off Congress with proof that there is no harm in vaping? Like regular smoking lies will delay health claims for years until they have made enough money to give up. Meanwhile how many will die and pay fortunes for care?
There's no need to go nuts. Vaping is much safer than smoking.
There has been an outbreak of illness and death because of adulteration/contamination, but before this summer there were extremely few problems reported. This is despite the fact that adult vapers tend to take it up with already very damaged lungs.
Several million people have died of smoking during the 15 years since vaping started.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_panic
2
The real culprit is nicotine. This is the only reason people smoke cigarettes or vape. I will not waste valuable space to list the deleterious effects of this dangerous drug, It is a stimulant and also relaxes you, That first puff or vape takes only 10 seconds to reach the dopamine cells of the brain. A feeling of calm sweeps over the body. But it is more addictive than heroin. Now the Times should begin a national conversation on this drug, Can we make it a controlled substance which requires a doctor's prescription? Altria and Phillip Morris will fight this. Let's get some op-eds from industry and public health experts. I am off to Yale soon to discuss a joint response.
The real culprit is nicotine. This is the only reason people smoke cigarettes or vape. I will not waste valuable space to list the deleterious effects of nicotine but once you're hooked
1
The withdrawal results in mild irritability for a week. The stimulation it gives is mild. The craving can be suppressed by any focused activity. So what makes it more addictive than heroin?
1
Regulate, invest, invest, regulate, etc etc. Seriously? You think any of that is feasible right now?
Won't happen.
Ban them and then figure out why we needed them in the first place.
The mechanism burns lungs.
That is not just about the health of nicotine.
It is a dangerous device. It is a product defect, a hazardous manufactured device.
It is a Corvair or Pinto, not a cigarette.
After decades of tobacco use, I was finally able to quit thanks to vaping. The benefits to me, personally, have been terrific. It is unfortunate that most media has conflated two distinct issues and concluded that vaping will kill me. Kids are getting addicted to nicotine. Not good. But it's not Juul putting people in the hospital. It's black market THC liquids produced and sold by amateurs wanting to increase their profits who are to blame.
2
Make ecigs legal if over 21, tax them ‘till people can’t afford them. Tax cigarettes even more until the true healthcare cost of cigarette use is covered(and that’s a lot of money).
Lung Doctor for 40 years.
1
E-cigarettes are not recommended by the American Heart Association as a step-down measure from regular cigarettes. They are health hazards. Editorials such as this do the public a disservice.
"Only a strong public health system can conquer nicotine addiction"
Europe has a strong public health system, yet smoking flourishes.
Rates of smoking:
U.S.A. 17%
Italy 24%
France 28%
Spain 29%
Germany 30%
Austria 35%
I don’ t understant the premise of this article. I sounds like you’re saying it’s better to allow more and more teens to become adicted to nicotine the easiest way imaginable vs. cut off the easy way to at least limit new entrants while we then figure out how to manage those who previously fell prey.
Your plan makes zero sense and clearly does more harm than good.
3
Agreed, follow the tried and true policy that works with vices/dangerous objects ie legality, regulation, responsibility and non promotion.
It worked wonders with cig. smoking and drunk driving and has been a miserable failure with guns since we have not yet employed the cure.
5
Public Health or Public Commerce?: In our world, there has always been this polarity that importantly illustrates significant biases and inadequacies within our "democratic" process.
1
Another place to start might be having the NYT Editorial board getting their facts straight. The FDA attempted to kill vaping 10 years ago by regulating vapes as a drug delivery system, and e-juice as a drug. Having lost that fight in court, the FDA then went about declaring it Tobacco (nicotine does NOT, in fact, come exclusively from tobacco, as the sellers of artificial nic will attest).
Might also be helpful to mention the fact that teen smoking rates dropped off the table coincident with vaping, that most reputable research places the risk of vaping nic at 3-5% that of smoking, and that 400,000 Americans die each year from smoking related illness.
5
If the goal of the NYT editorial page is to reach a point at which e-cigarettes are no more than a harm reduction tool for adults, then make them available only with a prescription.
The underlying logic, that education and better regulation can recreate a time when the public attitude toward combustable tobacco changed ignores the evolution of our knowledge about nicotine and the significant impact of smoking on health.
E-cigarettes may be less harmful than combustibles but they are not safe. And there is research that shows that kids who use e-cigarettes are much more likely to start using combustible tobacco than kids who do not use e-cigarettes. So while it may be possible for e-cigarettes to be a useful harm reduction strategy for adult smokers, they appear to be a gateway to combustibles for kids which argues for a much more forceful approach to e-cigarettes than proposed by the editorial page. Again, my suggestion, make e-cigarettes available only by prescription.
5
I am probably in the minority, but I feel any type of smoking is a public health issue and should be banned in its entirety. If people think that is too draconian, I offer an alternative: Deny health insurance to anyone who smokes.
5
@Bob What about riding a motorcycle, or owning a pitbull? Surely, those pose a public health risk too. Too physical? What about eating potato chips? More Americans die ever year from heart disease than smoking, and frankly I think the potato chip lobby has been marketing their dangerous products to children for far too long. Shall we ban them as well?
4
@Bob
Nicotine vapour contains no smoke. The devices simply do not get hot enough. Get it? No smoke.
3
At the top of the article, the Board brags about being comprised of "...journalists whose views are informed by expertise, research.."
Yet the article refers to vaping as "smoking". That's not what it is. The vapour contains no smoke. The devices simply do not get hot enough (around 200C).
Some expertise, some research.
In fact, the term 'e-cigarettes' is a misnomer. They are no more cigarettes than sticks of nicotine gum are chewable cigarettes or patches are wearable cigarettes.
7
Adolescent use of traditional cigarettes waned in states where higher taxes made these less affordable. Accordingly, e-cigarettes should be highly taxed. The revenue accruing from taxation of e-cigarettes should be used to fund public health programs aimed at reducing adolescent use of these nicotine-addictive devices.
2
The Liberal response (and sadly, the Conservative response on many occasions) is to Regulate, Tax, and -ultimately - Ban. Why shouldn't I get to choose what I put in my body?
2
Because it’s an unnecessary risk that increases healthcare costs.... for the community.
1
@RJ Because the rest of us end up paying for your health care.
Nicotine is an addictive chemical, full-stop. Government should make sure it is "safe" to use (yes, I am aware of the irony) and leave the public to make up its own mind. This whole idea of "banning" something because it is "unsafe" makes my stomach turn. Any reasonable person surely must recognize that the difference between 'safe' and 'unsafe' is a fuzzy one, and that at the end of the day it is up to each independent adult to decide how they live their lives.
2
Invest in public health, have stronger regulations on nicotine content and advertising, invest in scientific research.....guess we will have to wait for a Democratic President and Democratic Senate to accomplish any of these things, maybe. Imagine using European countries as models for good government. How do those countries enable affordable health care and prescription drugs? How do those countries handle personal privacy on the internet? How do those countries deal with violent crimes and incarceration? How do those countries regulate gun ownership and use?
European countries? I come from one. We are better off in the US.
1
@Quinn What absolute nonsense. I guess you haven’t read any of the recent articles on the failures of the British health care system.
Remember the tobacco settlement fund established with states to combat smoking-related disease? Those state tobacco tax funds are running low or empty. Tobacco companies invested heavily into vaping, tax-free. I doubt anyone in this business or government end of vaping really care about the 12 year old kid as much as the money, millions and millions of dollars. The fact that the vaping deaths come from pesticide-laden THC Chinese blends garnered fewer headlines. The lobbying struggle now is about the dollars, I would be surprised to see vaping banned altogether with the potential taxes in the offing.
1
Why is there little to no discussion about the testing done on e cigarettes and why the FDA allowed these products on the market? We can expect similar outcomes with other products until we examine the process that allows these products to be sold in our country.
1
The role of big tobacco in the clamp-down on vaping, and the general amenability of all public health entities to funding from trade groups and from the professional health associations who rely on them for funding are the culprits here.
All American healthcare institutions are infested with marketers.
1
I am an attorney, not a physician, but I was an undergraduate biology major, and spent time previously teaching chemistry and science in public high schools.
A few years ago, I remember commenting to my spouse: "You know, all these young people inhaling all of these lung-pickling (formaldehyde is one ingredient I have read about) unregulated chemical cocktails produced all over the place is a really, really bad idea."
So yesterday, I read about the first double lung transplant on a 17 year old. I feel sorry for families so affected by vaping illness, but sadly, I'm not at all surprised.
If our public health structure in this country can't get together to better protect our young people from such an obvious health threat, our system has truly become institutionally incompetent, industry compromised, uncaring, unethical, or worse. I expect this from our political system these days, but there are lots of M.D.s and Ph.D.s in our public health structure who should demonstrate some backbone, get some political support, and do their job.
2
Instead of thinking about e-cigs in a smart and progressive manner (as the UK does) all the U.S. can do is adopt the same old Puritanical approach they do to everything. USE ecigs to help people instead of banning them and keeping the worse health hazard - cigarettes!
8
Many of the suggestions in this editorial are laudable.
BUT, not all.
"prohibition is not a good long-term solution” OK, make it prescription, like a lot of smoking cessation treatments. Though data on it’s success is limited and questionable. It could be a harm-reduction strategy, but currently it is an ‘addict-the-kids’ strategy.
"Such measures are not guaranteed to prevent teenagers from getting e-cigarettes.” Nonsense if illegal and enforced. Maybe we need to actually get to honesty, and off the black market mentality.
"And they would almost certainly force people who already use these products, including roughly 11 million adults, to choose between traditional cigarettes ... and black-market vaping products.” or, or or, cessation. or even lifetime patches or gum, or, maybe, snus. Make ‘smoking/vaping' unacceptable again. It is always bad for everyone. Do you like me sneezing, coughing or vomiting on you? On purpose?
Let’s spend money understanding why people try drugs (including opioids, meth and nicotine) that are addicting and harmful, and how we can prevent it. Then let’s prevent it.
Cocaine is a recreational drug, while nicotine is a life sentence of addiction. Yet, while narcos are hunted and killed by the U.S. Government the New York Times believes companies like JUUL addicted millions of teenagers to flavored nicotine should merely be regulated. Even the most basic premise of their argument -- that vaping "saves" an older generation from smoking cigarettes -- has already been proven false - smokers simply pick up vaping in addition to smoking.
3
After 30 years of smoking cigarettes, my wife switched to cigarettes four years ago. She feels better and everything smells better. She is consuming less nicotine. Yes, I wish she would give up nicotine altogether but this is better for both of us. Unfortunately we live in a state that just banned flavored vaping juice, ostensibly to reduce teenage vaping. Many adult users used vaping products with flavoring rather than simply tobacco flavored juice. WA already regulated vaping juice, but now flavors are banned. Regulators should avoid knee-jerk reactions which can lead to unintended consequences including more cigarette smoking.
8
People replace cigarettes with vaping. They consider themselves as former smokers. They do not understand that what makes cigarette smoking hard to stop is being used to taking in a lot of nicotine. It’s a habit rather than an addiction. To end the likelihood of returning to cigarettes, one must stop taking in the nicotine. When people switch to vaping, they should plan upon giving that up, too.
2
@Casual Observer
I am a former smoker, and I vape. I haven't had, or wanted, a cigarette for 6 years now, after 40+ years of smoking. Most of the health problems caused by smoking are from the 'tars' and the many chemicals caused by combustion.
I enjoy nicotine, and it is minimally harmful. Continuing to use it is keeping me from wanting to smoke.
12
@Casual Observer
Nicotine has never been accused of causing illness, unless you want to call nicotine addiction an illness.
This may come as a surprise to you, but it's true. Look it up anywhere you like.
The problems that suddenly arose this summer after 15 uneventful years have to do with contamination and improvised black market supplies.
1
@Amoret
ME TOO!!
1
If we can use e cigarettes to cut adult smoking, this would be an intelligent and good policy. The CDC should get involved and copy the British system. You don't want nice pink lungs of children winding up black and destroyed by vaping. We should be phasing out tobacco products. If this is a modality to do that, let's do it. Stop let PMI push you around. These are your lungs, and your own children. Use e cigarettes and control them as you would a drug reduction medicine. NIcotine is terribly hard substance to quit; let's help get rid of it. Prohibition doesn't work; it just makes money for the wrong people and makes it seems cool because it's not legal. We know this. Don't start up that old saw again. Use science and facts, doctors and health studies. Don't make this a political ball game.
1
@Craig
Why would anyone's lungs turn black from vaping? Vapers produce no smoke. It's not smoking.
Almost none of today's commenters know anything about vaping or what caused this summer's outbreak of terrible problems (it was adulteration of commercial supplies, improvised black market products, and using the devices to vape cannabis concentrate).
3
Should add to the article, raise the legal age to buy nicotine products from 18 to 21. Sure, it won't stop teens from using them, but it'll make it harder.
2
Nicotine is not a substance that causes severe physical distress when a user quits as do opioids or methamphetamines. The pleasure is about as significant as yogic breathing practice. The cravings are not regular, if one is thoroughly focused upon something, the cravings do not interrupt.
What seems to make giving up nicotine so difficult is that it is not a habit that demands much and it’s easy to do. It’s really not hard to quit. It’s also not hard to resume. And that’s where one realizes how powerful a habit can be. Samuel Clemens once observed that it’s easy to quit, he’d done so a thousand times.
The thing is, one day one realizes that it’s not doing your health any good, and that one should stop. Then it becomes a real struggle.
1
@Casual Observer
Save it for smokers, not ex-smokers like me.
In the decade and a half since vaping started it has killed 40 people, all apparently this summer, due to contamination. Over the same time smoking has killed 6,000,000 people.
Forty versus six million.
3
How long have you smoked?
Quit and don’t miss it.
E cigarettes are just like the opioid crisis. They were promoted as benefiting society, but its really just a new way to addict people. We were doing great reducing nicotine addiction before these came along. How about trying reducing the levels of nicotine to reduce nicotine addiction, aa the FDA wanted to do years ago. E cigarettes raise the level of nicotine, which doesn’t cure any one.
3
The policies outlined in this article, if enacted, I believe would reduce teen use. Particularly by removing all flavors and capping the nicotine dose levels. Flavor is what drives youth to try them and the nicotine quickly takes root at high doses. Many will say, without flavors, they might as well smoke cigarettes. But cmon, dependent users need the nicotine, and will do anything to get it. Lets not sacrifice another generation because a nicotine addicted adult likes mango or menthol flavor.
Capping the dose to 20 mg/ml is the European Union standard, and makes e-cigarettes less addictive, thus fewer new teen users. Severely addicted smokers can still take a smoke break with an e-cig, and hit their required blood nicotine level with gum or patches.
But let me add three more points: 1) almost all nicotine experimentation begins in youth. That means school health education and high impact counter advertising; 2) invest in nicotine addiction cessation research. There are no standardized and effective youth cessation treatment protocols. We desperately need them; 3) ban flavors, including menthol from all forms of tobacco. Better yet, phase out tobacco altogether.
For those interested in 5-12 grade e-cigarette prevention, a free program called CATCH MY Breath is available for download. Google and see for yourself.
1
"And they would almost certainly force people who already use these products, including roughly 11 million adults, to choose between traditional cigarettes (which remain widely available, despite being deadlier than e-cigarettes) and black-market vaping products." Here's another option: stop smoking anything and everything. No taxpayer dollars necessary.
1
Forty people have died and 2,000 ill because of e-cigarettes. Each day in America there is what the law considers a mass shooting, four or more people shot at one time. In the shooting in Las Vegas, more people died in 15 minutes than have died of e-cigarettes. I'm not defending vaporing. I don't much care for any kind of smoking. But our real health problem is guns and the government won't do a thing about them.
4
Adding my personal testimony -- vaping allowed me to quit smoking cigars over 5 years ago and I've never looked back. My smoking problem was more of an oral fixation than a nicotine addiction -- even though doubtless what and the way I smoked gave me a very high dose. Now vaping is my pacifier, with very low nicotine intake and no more tightness in chest. Adults who haven't gone through this often can't understand how important this alternative is to many reformed ex-smokers. Yes, vaping is a public health challenge relative to adolescents -- focus on getting big tobacco, and its penchant for figuring out how to addict impressionable youth, out of the picture.
9
How many cases of lung disease caused by vaping have been reported in Europe? Last I heard the number was zero.
7
Coming from experience both with traditional cigarettes and vaping, I have two points. (Keep in mind I partake in these hypocritically. I'm not an advocate, just an addict.)
The first being that this article raises points that I'm very happy to hear; such as asking if switching to vaping indoors increases nicotine intake from ease of access. It's something I've always wondered myself.
What I enjoy about vaping is the ability to control the level of nicotine in my product. As in, literally asking for a specific measurement of substance when purchasing. It makes it easier to wean yourself off, while keeping a resilient habit.
But my second point is the speed in which lawmakers have pushed to ban this product, with no mention of also making cigarettes illegal. Seems like they should go hand in hand right? Or is it just scarier to have something kill you in a few years, rather than decades.
A well crafted piece. Information is key to understanding.
3
Let's sure about the causes of deaths, serious illnesses and lung damage caused by some vaping products before we decide.
The Times may have a point, but not if the products are intrinsically dangerous. If people stop smoking cigarettes for vaping and then die of serious lung damage, the trade off is highly questionable.
The libertarian attitude about personal freedoms are valid up to the point that there is a health crisis. In the long run taxes are what support the health requirements for those that choose to do dangerous things. If people had to cover ALL costs for their own dangerous behavior, I say let them do what they want. But that isn't the way a democracy with safety nets works.
1
Nobody that I ever heard about died from cigarettes in months. Nobody I ever heard about had a double lung transplant from smoking cigarettes after a year or two. I am all for helping people to quit cigarettes, but vaping? For some, maybe. Nicotine is addictive, the very act of inhaling can be tied to nicotine, and vaping does nothing to address that. Instead they offered mango flavored nicotine cartridges. The hardest part of quitting cigarettes is that tie between inhalation and the addictive drug nicotine.
2
The Times published an amazing story today about a teenage boy whose lungs became functionally non-existent after vaping, no longer showed up on CAT scan. He was destined to die. His life was saved by a bilateral lung transplant, a challenging operation dependent on hard to obtain transplantable lungs. His future will involve anti-rejection drugs and it is uncertain how long the transplants will function.
I wish the Times had given the story more prominence.
I find it objectionable that those who give glowing testimony and have been helped to stop cigarettes by vaping appear to forget that there are dire medical dangers for some young people. The dangers to young people may be quite different than to those much older. It is also not responsible to defend vaping one substance as being much safer than another. That plants the idea in young people that vaping can be safe for them if they use the right substance. It promotes risk taking, unwise from our knowledge base that is still limited. Their story is entirely different and their risks different also.
3
@blgreenie No, the Times published a sensationalized story about one white kid whose poor sap parents think they're at the center of one the "biggest" adolescent public health crises "in decades," which is false. And ludicrous. Nobody needs to see or read that sob story if their goal is to learn something about vaping.
How about selling e-cigarettes behind the counter at pharmacies and at liquor stores? They are better at checking IDs than convenience stores, so they can keep them out of kids' hands. I think e-cigs are a great way for adults to quit smoking, but also a great way for kids to get addicted to nicotine. So, make it easy for adults to get and difficult for kids.
3
except to the tobacco industry. Look no further
While they are at it ban alcohol as it kills about 88,000 people annually. Add in drunk driving deaths to get some staggering numbers. According to the CDC 29 people are killed per day by an impaired driver. No one has ever killed someone other than themselves with an e-cigarette.
8
The reason usually mentioned for proposing the banning of vaping products have typically centered around the recent deaths and lung damage that has been linked to vaping.
Studies are showing that vitamin E acetate has been the culprit. Vitamin E acetate has been used by some in the cannabis industry to cheaply thin THC oil for cannabis cartridges, but apparently there's been no reason to use Vitamin E Acetate in nicotine vaping products.
So before going off half cocked, first, let's educate the public on the realities of vaping, then talk about what aspects of vaping should be banned or regulated.
For what it's worth, I started vaping nicotine several years ago to help me quit smoking (had smoked heavily since 1954). I no longer smoke. The vaping was effective. Now, I vape a drag or two of medical cannabis when my back pain becomes too much to handle (very effective, but a good time not to get out on the road.
In conclusion, let's gather the data, educate the people, then take the necessary action.
8
You lost me at the system. There's no healthcare system, much less public. There is a healthcare insurance industry, and a healthcare industry. Good luck with that!
3
Nicotine is also found in Brussels sprouts, eggplant, and even potatoes. True, these sources are often just trace amounts, but nevertheless it is wrong to claim nicotine comes from tobacco exclusively.
6
Yep -- Prohibition has always worked in the U.S.
8
This forum reminds me of the two old ladies enjoying a funeral service.
Ms. Critch: We told him all that whiskey and tobacco would kill him but he never listened! He got just what he deserved!
Ms. Flogg: Yes, indeed. And all them fast wimmin didn't help. By the way, how old was he?
Ms.Critch: The paper said he claimed 102 but you know he been lying 'bout how young he was for years to avoid the scandal of that 37 year old wife.
Don't you think the mortician should have got that smile off his face? It ain't decent!
4
Air pollution kills over 100 000 Americans a year. Vaping has killed 40.
10
All this noise about a few deaths, what about the half million deaths yearly from tobacco? It shows how much Washington cares about the people of this country, it's all about the money, federal, state and local taxes rate higher than human lives.
10
One overlooked benefit of e-cigarettes is the reduction in forest fires.
6
@Dennis F
After many years of smoking I had quit even trying to quit.
The immediate part of my switch to vaping was a neurological condition I have made it impossible for me to hold onto lit cigarettes, creating an immediate health and safety hazard.
The ironic part was that 3 months later we had a chimney fire that 'totaled' our house.
I am an adult smoker who would still be smoking cigarettes if it weren't for Juul. This is not a post in defense of Juul at all, but many players contributed to the crisis we are seeing today. Juul is not innocent but they are also not the only culprit.
At the end of the day, e-cigarettes are meant to be a form of harm reduction. Harm reduction WORKS and is one of the best ways to approach dealing with any kind of addiction. For the millions of adult smokers out there who are struggling to quit cigarettes, e-cigarettes could have massive public health implications if we find that they are indeed less harmful than cigarettes.
E-cigarettes are addictive, but for many of us that addiction began with tobacco. When Juul pulls mint pods because teenagers use them, they are leaving behind the adults who use them as well. By this logic, we should take flavored vodka off the shelves too.
And as a former cigarette smoking teenager I can tell you one thing- teens will find a million ways to get around legal barriers to get the substances they want. If you don't think that the ban on mint Juul pods didn't just make mint juul pods the most coveted product in every high school everywhere- you're wrong. Bans are the absolute worst way to go about this and will do far more harm than good.
The bottom line is we need more research. We can make claims in defense of e-cigarettes or against them but none of this matters until we had scientific, unbiased research to back these claims up.
13
Regulating the liquid /e-cigarettes makes sense, but banning them does not. I am 65. Why shouldn't adults trying to quit smoking be able to purchase regulated e-cigarettes, and flavored nicotine liquid? There is no valid reason for the hysteria, when vitamin E acetate has been linked to the injuries.
I started smoking again after having quit for 20 years. Soon I developed the same horrible smoker's cough that prompted me to quit in the first place. This time I quit smoking by vaping. I prefer a mint pineapple flavor. My cough went away completely. I have been able to step down on the nicotine level, and my next step is nearly zero. I have only used nicotine liquids from one store I trust. I am relieved to have had this option.
17
The correct action seems to be immediately taking Vitamin E oil off the GRAS (Generally Regarded As Safe) list for inhalation, along with some other compounds (related to old-fashioned antifreeze) used in both nicotine, THC, and cannabinoid vape cartridges - limiting the contents to the effective chemical itself and DRASTICALLY reducing the amount one gets in a hit - the admixture should be air.
Nicotine is an understudied alkaloid which just might be more effective than low-power amphetamines for treating ADHD - because it is under control of the BATF and not FDA, little research has been done beyond establishing a fatal dose level. Its effects on ADHD sufferers I know seem to parallel the effects of Ritalin and stronger chemicals.
THC vape cartridges available on the street don’t come from overseas - they come from the more-than-half-dozen states, more coming, that have legalized marijuana - it’s still very illegal to cross state lines with it, but ...
And there is almost no restriction on so-called CBD Oil, marijuana extract that has no psychoactive effects.
If it were not for the GOP’s opposition to 14th Amendment federalism, federal action would be needed to legalize marijuana - which would open the door to far more important strict federal gun control laws - one of the reasons state-by-state action is being ignored.
It would also end state restrictions on abortion, gerrymandering and other methods of denying voting rights.
What an ugly knot.
2
Vaping is not a health crisis! Obesity is. Gun violence is. And many of the deaths and serious illnesses from vaping are a result of buying products off the street.
24
It is shameful that the NY Times does not mention the World Health Organization study of vaping that concluded that e-cigarettes are estimated to be about 20 times safer than burning and inhaling plants.
How many smoker's lives could have been saved if they were not scared away from a safer nicotine delivery system such as "snus" or vaping? A friend of mine was always going to the ER for his COPD episodes but not had to do so for years since he switched to vaping.
Instead, the Puritans and purists who want the government to tell people what they can do are in full force. Smokers die because they cannot quit their nicotine habit. Give them safer methods until something changes to remedy this. Unless you think people deserve bad health and early death for being addicted.
153
The article is not in favor of banning e-cigarettes, but isn’t opposed to banning flavors, which is the right thing to do. Lose the attraction to kids, yet keep a safer product available for adults. I mean, adults want harm reduction more than flavor don’t they?
9
@Michelle
It's a little absurd for you to make this claim considering the WHO report was made on short-term data and before the wave of illnesses and deaths started happening. Perhaps we should do as this article suggests, regulate them, make them not enticing to children, and study them so that we understand the effects.
Also keep in mind that youth starting this habit are doing so in greater numbers than were taking up tobacco products before its proliferation.
5
@db
"...the wave of illnesses and deaths..." has only been in the US, and Is now almost totally attributed to adulterated black market THC cartridges, and has nothing to do with normal commercial nicotine vaping.
17
The amount of people in this comments section who have never used e-cigarettes and are so quick to ban them, well, it's depressing.
It's easy to ban something you don't use. It doesn't cost you anything.
Meanwhile, e-cigarettes are the only thing that allowed me to kick a twenty-year habit. Now I'm completely nicotine-free.
The New York Times has spent the last three months wrapped up in scare-mongering and bad science. They tried to tie the dangers of bootleg THC devices to the comparatively safe consumption of e-cigarettes. They bought everything the Trump information was selling them, despite the fact that Britain's NHS has already proven e-cigs to be an exponentially safer alternative to traditional smoking.
I don't smoke or vape anymore. The ban wouldn't affect me. But the ignorance on e-cigs committed by both this newspaper and many of its most vocal subscribers is infuriating.
40
@Murph agree wholeheartedly. I read the Times religiously and was disappointed by article after article fear-mongering without facts. Media outlets need to differentiate between black market THC vapes and ecigs - they are not the same thing.
If people are getting sick from bootleg alcohol, we wouldn't just ban the consumption of all alcohol? Ecig companies are suffering massively due to this coverage. I have yet to see ONE reputable study showing the negative effects of Juul, aside from the fact that nicotine is addictive (so is caffeine and plenty of other legal things!) CDC has confirmed illnesses are tied to vitamin E acetate in black market vapes - which are not found in Juul or any other regulated, legal vapes.
Vaping is no better for you than smoking regular cigarettes. They could well be quite worse as the vaping material comes from who knows where (that "grape" flavor isn't really from grapes, for example).
These are marketed as a way to stop smoking. That is nonsense. Want to stop smoking? Replace that habit with something else.
1
It is certainly not nonsense. I quit smoking nearly nine years ago thanks to vaping. I am far healthier for it.
4
@James
After 40+ years of smoking I quit by vaping 6 years ago, and I know of thousands of others who've done this. The most harm from smoking is caused by the 'tars' and other combustion byproducts that aren't in the vapor.
Adult smokers all over the world have quit smoking and been vaping for 15 years now with no serious health issues.The research done in Britain and Europe shows that vaping is much, much safer than smoking.
6
These products need to be tightly regulated. If they are banned, organized crime will be happy to serve the market. And they have no scruples and obey no regulations at all.
1
FDA/E-cigs
FAA/Boeing 737 Max
I don’t understand what these guys are doing with our tax dollars.
1
Vaping combines the addiction of handheld electronic devices with the chemical addiction of nicotine. It is smoking on steroids. And then they added flavors. Sorry, New York Times, I disagree.
4
@George McIlvaine Do you have a magic wand strong enough to make a ban actually work, though? Because criminals will definitely be serving this market if the products are banned. You'd need the combined efforts of the entire Ministry of Magic to make them go away. It's not going to happen in this world, sorry.
6
Inhalation of a substance compared to ingestion or topical application carries much more risk to the body. Potential toxins reach critical cells almost immediately with inhalation.
The long term consequences of vaping anything are unknown. Common sense though tells us that coating your lungs with a flavored vapor many times a day for many years seems quite likely to cause injury to vital tissue.
It took too long to understand the harms of tobacco. Even today, more than 50 years after harm was demonstrated and regulation begun, more than 1000 US citizens die each day from tobacco induced disease.
I fear we are heading down the same road again. If we don’t ban vaping we should regulate it like a drug and prove its benefits and harms before releasing it for general use.
Sorry. If preventing my children from getting addicted to nicotine, by banning e-cigarette, means that millions of reckless adults die horrible deaths by lung cancer...well that is an acceptable trade off for me.
Asking my CHILDERN to exhibit the type of self-control (to not smoke) that ADULT smokers refuse to exhibit is absolute nonsense.
Let's not criminalize e-cigarette, but ban its sale none the less. And compound it with social pressure not to smoke.
2
@Unkle Skippy The sale of heroin is banned, yet people still get addicted and die. We fight the dealers and we wind up provoking gang violence, and they band together in cartels.
The hidden cost of banning things is that we end up feeding organized crime, which has terrible blowback that rehab and recovery cannot fix.
4
Here we go with all the neo-puritans commenting. The legacy of the crazed zealots that got kicked out of Europe is something American seems to never shake off. Let´s hope when the population is less wasp and more nonwhite that people will stop using the govt for telling people what to do with their lives.
7
Yet the government puts a ‘sin’ tax on tobacco and alcohol and marijuana. If it’s wrong, outlaw it. Otherwise remove the sin tax and leave these people alone because we’re only starving their children. By that I mean; I’ve seen people in the grocery lines, unable to pay the grocery bill, remove milk, cereal and bread, but leave that expensive carton of cigarettes and beer. You are, in fact, doing more harm than good.
3
The FDA needed to review better what was being put into the cassettes. Vit E acetate is approved for oral(vitamin use) and also for topical use(lotions, makeup). It never was approved for injection into the lungs.
6
@Jan The vitamin E acetate was in black market THC products. It isn't used in any normal nicotine vaping liquid. Regular nicotine vaping didn't cause this.
2
Both of these businesses are money for death.
They are arguing for the right to make money addicting people. Their right to addict and kill (either slowly or quickly, and of course slowly is preferred to avoid cause and affect charges as well as to maximize the profit before their customers are killed) exceeds the right to life. They will use some sham to serve as an excuse, such as freedom, to choose while stacking the deck in their favor.
32
@Marie Heck, potato chips and their nutrition-deprived vending machine "brethren" kill people too. Should we ban those as well?
20
@Marie
I smoked for 20 years. Used e-cigarettes for one year, then quit completely. It saved my life. You have no idea what you're talking about.
31
@IO By no stretch of the imagination is a potato chip the equivalent of nicotine.
@Murph Well, there is no dispute that the tobacco and vaping industries exist to addict their customers to one of the most highly addictive substances known and to profit from it. What have are addicts arguing for the right to get their next fix. Addicts have to. There is also no dispute that nicotine is harmful, and that people have died gruesome,and most importantly avoidable, deaths. All in the name of profit. I know because I have experienced it in my own family.
1
We just caught our 14 yo son vaping.
He had been doing it in the house and at school and no one could tell.
I would have never dreamed of smoking when I was his age. To me, cigarettes were "a smelly, overpriced cancer stick." They still are, but e cigs are new and exciting and addicting a new generation at a scale that may soon reverse all the gains of previous anti smoking campaigns.
Any benefit gained by a few smokers transitioning away from cigarettes are small compared to the cost of addicting a whole new generation
74
@dry You are absolutely right. Vaping is not a tobacco cessation device. It's an alternative to smoking. And a fast on-ramp to nicotine addiction for those who aren't already smokers. Juul pods in the US are 3% or 5% nicotine. In the UK, Juul pods are regulated at 1.3% nicotine. The packaging, the advertising, the flavors, even the 'directions'... everything is intended to on-board our youth, which are also referred to by the tobacco industry as "replacement users". It's sickening.
11
@TB to both you and @dry -
There's nothing wrong with being addicted to something in and of itself. Nicotine is not harmful. Combustible cigarettes are. Stop demonizing addiction and realize that saving lives is the most important thing here.
Kids becoming addicted to nicotine via vaping isn't great, but if they stick with vaping legal, regulated products, they'll be fine. It sounds like you're more afraid of the idea of kids being addicted to something that won't kill them (when they would've just tried actual cigarettes 20 years ago) than to adults having a way of getting unhooked from something that almost certainly will kill them.
23
@dry - Who are you to say that the benefits that came to my brother from switching to vaping from regular cigarettes are less important than the harm to your son? Keep an eye on your kids, and talk to them about addiction. But you don't in the meantime get to decide whose health is more important.
30
I started smoking cigarettes when the Marlboro Man was still an iconic TV image. I've stopped a few serious addictions in my time, but nothing compared to the madness of trying to quit nicotine. I tried cold turkey numerous times. I tried gum, hypnosis and drugs. At retirement I was overweight, and in spite of a lifetime of being physically active, could scarcely gather the wind to climb a flight of stairs. Then 6 years ago, I tried E-cigarettes.
Now I walk 4 or 5 miles a day, split wood, grow vegetables. I lost 60 pounds, my BP and A1c have returned to normal. In my small circle of neighbors and acquaintances, I can count 5 other folks my age with essentially the same story. Banning vaping will hurt people And creating a prescription morass, with added cost and inconvenience, will not fix it. Tread carefully.
150
@David Stoeckl thank you for sharing this, but as you and I know Nosey Nathan and Bossy Betty from down the street who have never smoked in their lives will now want to get into our business and tell us how to live our lives, and what we can and cannot buy. Thats the problem with an all powerful federal govt, people get all crazed up and decide to step on people. Look at what they did with alcohol, marijuana.... decades of people getting arrested because some white people in power thought it would be a great idea to make something pleasant illegal.
13
@David Stoeckl
Do you still vape, or have you quit?
See, to me, that is the issue.
Are e-cigs a means to quit or simply a means to "control" one's addiction better.
As an ex-drunk and an ex-tobacco user, my view is that the point is to quit, not to 'maintain' or control it.
Because if you still vape, you still have that monkey on your back.
11
@Dom
What is the relevance of skin color?
9
Good suggestions, but not strict enough. Millions have been thinking: "E-cigarettes must be safe, because the government allows them on the market." FDA should ban e-cigarettes until they have been proven safe, then license the manufacturers to eliminate the cut-rate products that leach toxic metals into the vapor. Until they are safe, let the smokers switch to nicotine gum.
23
@Dennis Mancl
E-cigs, which might possibly be somewhat harmful, do get a lot of people off cigarettes. We have years of evidence that it is harm reduction for former smokers. So ban e-cigs and keep selling cigarettes which we know kill people every day? And they aren't dying from nicotine, by the way, they die from inhaling burning, chemically treated tobacco and paper.
Not a sensible plan.
28
@Dennis Mancl yes, by all means! We must TAX! We must REGULATE! We must protect people from themselves! Because we are the elite! We know best!
Rubbish.
7
Why is it a public health emergency when a relatively small number of folks die from respiratory related illnesses associated with e-cig use, but it is not a public health emergency when thousands upon thousands of people, including children, lose their lives to gun violence each and every year? We ban e-cigs over night, but we allow gun violence to continue unabated. It’s crazy.
241
@Anthony Well, ya see, guns in this country are expressly made for murdering and killing living creatures. So there's really no shock or surprise, when... surprise, they're used to do what they were created for (at least partially). Add to this the simple fact that a good portion of the people in this country believe their right to shoot animals should supersede the consequences of mentally ill individuals murdering everything in sight in the span of 10 seconds... and we have the abomination that folks refer to as the 2nd amendment these days.
But gee, e-cigs, all the companies told the little people that they were safer to consume than cigs. Too bad safer doesn't equate to safe. Too bad, it looks like again, due to 3rd world levels of regulation, our government and media have allowed lies to proliferate throughout the cultural fabric of this country to the point where more than 1/4 of students are using vaping products. Good luck getting millions off their nicotine addictions which they've nursed with vaping pods with magnitudes more in nicotine.
9
@Anthony
as much as I agree with you on gun violence, i am not sure what bringing that into a conversation about e-cigs adds? what is your point, that we should never declare any public health emergency unless and until guns are banned?
Also, the answer to why we can ban e cigs but not guns is straightforward: banning guns is unconstitutional.
12
@Anthony Blame the Dickey Amendment which effectively prohibits the CDC from using its budget to study gun violence
11
The problem is the FDA is now more a cheerleader for the industry it regulates than being a regulator..and it isn't just republicans. Vaping came of age during the Obama administration, yet they followed the GOP party line and allowed vaping products to be sold without any kind of safety testing, or worse, regulation, so what do you see? Vaping shops springing up all over the place selling god knows what, companies like Juul allowed to advertise (under the idea that like Nicorette, they are there to help wean people off smoking *hah*), and allowed to market it as a 'cool product for cool people', with all kinds of flavors, including ones designed to get kids using it. Not to mention the FDA put this under the assumed safe category, rather than requiring testing. Not surprising, the government is still trying to support tobacco farmers....
We don't learn from history. Prohibition came about because of the very real consequences of unregulated liquor sales, but rather than regulate, they banned it. Post prohibition laws reigned in many of the ills,unregulated in ingredients and purity, unlicensed sellers allowed to sell to whom they wished, you name it turned into a highly regulated industry. Online sales of liquor require proof of age to actually get the package, liquor sales require proof of age, liquor companies have regulated advertising (ever notice how they never show someone drinking the product?), their content is regulated, you name it
9
@music observer the VTA or Vapor Technology Association has provided a list of 11 steps that they think would actually help reduce youth vaping. And the AVA and VTA have been trying to get the FDA and other regulatory agencies to put out clear marketing guidelines for years. Please keep in mind that while Juul is big tobacco and in fact most involved in vaping despise them due to what they've done to a less harmful alternative to combustible cigarettes, there is an entire industry of people doing the right thing. And trying to get reasonable regulations and a path to market so that we don't end up with the only product on the market being Altria's juul device.
4
The problem is not the product, it is American's inability to be cool about things. We always have to overdo everything. Europeans don't have this problem because they are not wrapped up in all of the commercialized non sense that we eat up. I introduced Juul to my wife who has been smoking since she was a teenager. It was without a doubt the biggest thing I hated about her. The smell in itself almost ruined our relationship. Thanks to this device, she no longer smells terrible and I kiss her more. We will all die of something someday. Believe that everything that happens in this country is not motivated by public well being. We are trolls, motivated by money. Juul has the vaping market share so they are the big bad guys in the industry. I bet whomever is lobbying against Juul, cannot profit from their success. Propaganda and smear campaigns for a device that is safer than prescription drugs appearing on every other commercial. We are the world's biggest hypocrites! Try banning something that is really bad like guns. Can't do that because it won't work. Neither will such a ban. At least when kids smoke cigarettes, they have to do so outside or in seclusion and cant hide that hideous smell from their clothes. Now they can vape anywhere and undetected! Kids drink too and some die as a result. Are we going to ban alcohol too! Nonsense and smoking mirrors. Just make Juul fund nicotine addiction clinics for minors with their enormous profit margin and move on
1
Addiction to cigarettes is a myth, similar to the more recent nonsense espoused by "scientists" about global warming. WITCH HUNT!!!
1
Donald, Donald, Donald. Tsk, tsk. I thought you'd given up your NYT habit. Cold turkey too hard for you?
2
Will you paternalistic nags ever get off your high horses?
At the end of the day adults should have a right to do what they want with their own bodies, and teenagers will find a way to get their hands on things regardless of their legality.
Why are so many people whipped up into a frenzy over vaping? Why does a ban on e-cigarettes that may (or may not) have killed a few dozen people make more sense than a ban on cigarettes that kill half a million a year?
Why should we ban flavors in e-cigarettes, but not alcohol? Or soda? Or coffee?
Why is there more energy to tell people to not harm themselves than there is to stop our government waging war and killing innocent people against their will?
We are destroying the earth with the carbon you are complicit in pumping out. Do you want some self-righteous jerk jumping up and down in your face about that?
Smokers and vapers endure your stares every day, and guess what, it just makes them dig in more.
There are bigger fish to fry. Someone else's self-destructive habits are not choices are not worth hyperventilating about. Live and let live.
5
Thank god I smoke marlboros.
6
This is ridiculous. Young people are dying because of e-cigs. How much influence does the tobacco industry have over the editorial board?
2
@Morgan young people are dying because of cars, and not just through accidents but all of the emissions. let us ban those as well.
5
So the solution is to ban regulated e cigarettes? If that happens kids and adults are going to switch to black market devices. The mortality rate will fly off the charts.
3
@Dom. I agree. Let's ban cars too. Likely then public transit would finally improve.
I am in agreement that the US needs a much stronger public health system.
It needs to be muscular enough to crack down on and closely regulate nicotine merchants (tobacco and vaping). I am not advocating making them illegal but they should be regulated like the way marijuanas is being regulated in the more efficient states.
I see no reason to do anything to accommodate capitalism in this public health effort however. There is absolutely nothing admirable about addicting people on nicotine, opium and its natural and synthetic derivatives and the people who seek to profit from others addiction deserve no special breaks. Tax and Regulate the (insert the expletive of your preference here) to within an inch of their lives and use those tax dollars to pay for that muscular public health system.
Tremendously disappointing editorial.
2
If you expect the Trump administration (and the Republican supplicants) to care about issues of life and death, you must have been smoking one of those other kind of cigarettes.
27
I have been hoping the FDA would step up and do some studies to determine how to make the safest possible vaping experience. I have found none. I have found studies that found it vaping safe, and studies that have found harm; but have seen no studies that pulled apart the components of e-liquid and found which ingredients might be harmful. The basis of most all e-liquids are either Vegetable Glycerin or Propylene Glycol with nicotine added. Are either of those safe? Is one safer than the other? Then they add food flavorings and sweeteners, which are a mixture of chemicals, some may be safe to inhale, but some may not be, but until they have been individually tested no user knows which to buy and which to avoid.
I have been a smoker since I was 12, I tried everything, and even though I knew it was killing me I could not stop, until 10 years ago at 60 when I discovered e-cigarettes. My health has improved greatly; but I am still additive to nicotine, without vaping, I will have to go back to smoking. I try to mitigate the potential problems by only vaping unflavored e-liquid. I have read enough DIY e-cigarette flavor websites to know that tobacco flavors are among the hardest to re-create, done by mixing many different chemicals together. Thus In only allowing tobacco flavored e-liquids on the market, they are probably making an e-liquid that much more harmful then say, they only allowed apple flavor. Leave it to the FDA to leave us with the most harmful choice.
4
The NYT is drinking the Kool-aid of the big tobacco (and vape) industry, no thank you. There is currently no evidence that e-cigarettes are superior to other cessations aids outside of clinical settings with substantial behavioral support. It is evident, however, that they very effectively perpetuate addiction to nicotine that is as powerful as heroin.
The UK is cited as a role model, however, their "95% safer" ideology is based on poor science and no toxicologist and pulmonary scientists were involved in writing it. There is substantial revolving door activity going on between Public Health England and the vaping industry, maybe the NYT should investigate this first ?
The fear of a black market is overblown and comes right out of the fearmongering playbook of the tobacco/vaping industry. The cannabis vape market was enabled by the legal ecig market and complete lack of regulation. Once devices are banned, youth uptake, and that's what we should care most about, will wither.
2
Time and again, corporate interests have subverted the federal regulatory bodies overseeing public well being. If the FAA, the EPA and the FDA have been proven compromised, how can we possibly trust the opinions of the NYT as advocacy?
2
Public Health is not compatible with Republican ideology, good luck with a fact based argument with them.
If banning e-cigarettes would lead to more, not less nicotine addiction then the tobacco industry itself would be leading the fight to ban them. Stand outside any Starbucks at lunchtime on a school day and maybe the sight of 13-year-olds vaping with no sense of wrongdoing will change your mind on this.
3
Banning this will only create a black market. Do we really need another "drug war," which most serious people see as an abject failure?
3
Nicotine does NOT ONLY come from Tabacco. get it right.
2
It's really amazing to see the number of prohibition advocates on this thread. It's as though we have no history to learn from.
9
How about just letting people die who don't want to live strongly enough to not do stupid things? Why are we constantly having to protect people from themselves?
2
There was just a report of a boy in England nearly killed by regular tobacco ecigs (with no THC). NYT: Please investigate what's in Juul ecigs, Green Smart Living ecigs, Blu ecigs and the other popular brands sold in the US. Is it vitamin E acetate or something else? The FDA isn't figuring it out, so, please, you or WaPo need to tell us.
Every time a new product or technology comes around it takes time for the government to catch up and regulate it as needed. Seatbelts didn’t come around till 50 years after card became common, Tobacco and booze are no different. The 21 drinking age didn’t occur till the 1980s and we didn’t (and still don’t in some states) regulate tobacco and where you can smoke until the 21st century! This is just happening with e cigs whose development are a direct cause and effect to the great job we’ve done at completely changing the culture around cigarettes. People like them because they can get their nicotine fix without having to go outside or smell like a Cigarette. That’s just the free market in action. It’s not as good as a tobacco free society but it’s an encouraging start. Now is just the time for governments to catch up and regulate accordingly.
1
Given that Republicans are bent on deregulating and on weakening the powers of federal agencies, they can be counted on to block sensible initiatives to control this new form of nicotine delivery. Rather than working to protect the health of Americans, they are using their power and influence to protect companies from government regulations, while taking away healthcare from the largest number of Americans their mean-spirited tactics can manage.
Entire states have banned plastic drinking straws. Consensual sex between adults is banned under certain circumstances.
But cancer-causing cigarettes and e-cigs, which cost the country far more financially than the tax revenue they generate are somehow OK?
Simply announce that in 5 years, all cigarette manufacturers will be shut down, and no cigarettes can be imported. Same for vaping. Some people may get agitated. Some may gain weight. But they won't die, and healthcare expenditures will drop.
THAT is a public health initiative.
4
E cigarettes like Cigarettes are aimed addicting and exploiting addiction. E cigarettes are less smelly and less offensive, but just as addictive and deadly.We don’t have to do studies we need to read the studies that demonstrate 480000 per year die from tobacco related illnesses. “The combined profits of the world's biggest tobacco companies exceeded US $62.27 billion in 2015, the last year on record for all the major companies. This is equivalent to US $9,730 for the death of each smoker...” The evidence is that E Cigarettes do not facilitate quitting tobacco but appeal to minors addicting them at rates higher than those who quit. So any careful or delayed elimination of vaping is like the false equivalence that big tobacco relies on.
4
If addiction is a social evil, then ban the substances. If not, then live with the consequences. It seems odd that there's a vigorous effort underway to ban nicotine products, but we all seem copacetic allowing marijuana to become the new national past time. And I might add that as far as public safety is concerned, I'd rather share the road with an addled nicotine addict than some zombie flying high on funny vegetables. Finally, I get the argument about regulating nicotine advertising, but this is America. Is the NYT really saying that it supports legislation banning certain types of 'festive' packaging?
7
@Gary FS
True fact: boring, non-marketing cigarette packages with scary pictures of lung disease have proven to be effective where implemented.
If you allow the product to look glamorous, you've failed to protect.
1
There is no evidence that vaping commercial products is dangerous and substantial reason to think that it is essentially harmless. The base components, propylene glycol and glycerol, are completely harmless and the levels of nicotine generated by vaping are also safe. There is also no evidence that nicotine alone is more than mildly addicting. Cigarettes are horribly addicting, but both published animal studies and human clinical studies have shown that nicotine is at most mildly addicting.
4
@Rob-Chemist Unless you’re breathing in air, I would make the argument that anything you put in your lungs would likely be unhealthy.
So I’m not sure if it’s based on genetics or some degree of addiction in general, but I never smoked cigarettes. Instead, I started vaping in college because I enjoyed the nicotine buzz, and I moved on later to Juuls. It was difficult for me to stop using the Juul, to the point where I weened myself down using a box mod vape with gradual reduction in nicotine mg amount. I suppose for a lot of people it might be “mildly addicting”, but if I didn’t use a Juul for 24 hours at the peak of my addiction, I would genuinely freak out.
2
Yours is an experience well worth considering for the know it alls. Thx for sharing
Your opening misses the point.....
"The nation is facing two distinct vaping-related health crises: surging e-cigarette use among teenagers and a lung-injury outbreak that has sickened more than 2,000 people and killed at least 40."
Should read... "surging NICOTINE use"
I was addicted to nicotine from age 16 untill my mid 40's. Took me 10 years of trying to quit to finally succeed. One of the toughest things I have ever done.
It's beyond rediculous that this drug was allowed into the marketplace without any oversight. Now many teens will be hooked.
Perhaps these vape pens might have been a prescription item, to help tobacco users quit. But never just over the counter to anyone.
This is a perfect example of business operation with no goverenmental regulation or oversight.
16
My father was a lifelong nicotine addict and was probably never going to quit. E-cigarettes probably added several years to his life. If he hadn't had them, or if they had been banned, he would have gone back to tobacco. This would have endangered the health of those around him. Why do heroin addicts get methadone or even clean needles, but nicotine addicts are told to chew gum, quit, or be hounded even out of the state parks?
14
@Jen
"Why do heroin addicts get methadone or even clean needles but nicotine addicts are told to chew gum..."
Hold the presses: Nicotine gum and patches are very helpful. Many people have quit using these aids. I'm sorry your father wasn't able to quit, but there was help available for him (ex-smoker here; quit almost 40 years ago).
And as for being hounded out of state parks; cigarettes are a leading cause of forest fires. Not to mention the fact that nobody wants to inhale someone else's smoke.
4
A very disappointing position for the Times to take. The idea that "prohibition" cannot work because some users will resort to the black market is just as ridiculous here as it is when the NRA claims that gun regulation is futile because criminals will still get guns.
If tobacco were a new product, and had to pass FDA testing before it could be marketed, it could never be sold. It's clearly linked to cancer, heart disease, stroke, and other deadly ailments, and it remains the leading cause of preventable death.
Vaping is simply the latest marketing gimmick the tobacco merchants of death have dreamed up. E-cigs have been sold as a "harm reduction" device for smokers, and yet that supposed harm reduction has not been documented or tested. Meanwhile, they have aggressively marketed to teens and young adults, using candy and fruit flavors, and packing their products with considerably more nicotine than cigarettes, making them much more addictive than smoking.
If e-cigs are subjected to clinical trials, and their effectiveness as a smoking substitute established, then they could be available, with a doctor's prescription, for smokers who are trying to quit. Nicotine, a highly addictive neurotoxin, should not be sold as a recreational drug, no matter what form it is in. Meanwhile, the government should place the highest priority on enforcing a ban on sales to minors.
12
As a smoker who only started within the past 5 years, I can attest to the stress factor in smoking. It temporarily relieves stress. Perhaps promoting other forms of stress reduction for smoking, such as the counseling you mentioned, might be helpful. Also, from a harm-reduction standpoint, campaigns that encourage people to even smoke less cigarettes by waiting in the morning before smoking or not smoking while driving or other periods of stress, could be salable.
1
Consumption of vast amounts of caffeine laden sugary soft drinks and fast food has contributed to an epidemic of obesity and Type II diabetes. Millions will die prematurely. The answer is to ban Coca-cola, Mountain Dew and Big Macs. Surely everyone agrees.
47
@Frank Knarf Take it up with E. Warren.
1
I disagree: suicide is a basic human right.
@PaulN
Not,if society is expected to cover the associated health care costs.
One glaring omission in the recommendations is youth prevention programming, specifically school health programs that build both knowledge and skills that arm kids with the faculties to make informed health decisions. Health ed has been squeezed out over the years to focus more time on "teaching to the test," so to speak. The result? We're left chasing one health crisis after another – remember childhood obesity? Guess we solved that one, because the attention (and funding) sure dropped off when the opioid epidemic surfaced, and now here we are "tackling" youth vaping. While I agree with basically all of the other recommendations to curb the appeal of e-cigs, the vaping epidemic is at the same time a symptom of a larger system failure to provide robust health education as a fundamental part of the K-12 learning experience. If we don't give kids the skillset needed to understand what it is to be "healthy," how can we blame them for making poor health choices? After all, what good are stellar test scores if you're too unhealthy to go out into the world and achieve your potential?
Oh, and there's a school-based program out of the UT School of Public Health (I'm an Austinite, after all) that's been getting a lot of traction with youth vaping prevention called "Catch My Breath" that's free to schools.
1
We might want to require human trials before unleashing new methods of taking nicotine on the public. We might want to make it illegal to bypass FDA certification for new devices and the nicotine fluids they use. We might want to consider water vapor inhalers as an alternative to current "vaping" technologies which contain many untested chemicals. Everywhere I look in this debate we are faced with a paucity of scientific information. We should focus on remedying this situation before everything else.
4
I quit cold turkey in 1987 having smoked for 15 years, a 7-9 packs a week habit. The urge to smoke come few and far between now but the triggers remain the same. The sound of packing a pack, the sight of a flicked ash from a car window, or the smell of lit match.
Nicotine is truly a powerful drug, I got an urge after reading this editorial.
7
Cigarette advertising on television has been banned for decades, yet I am seeing tv ads for vaping products like JUUL on a daily basis. This makes no sense, so a good start would be extending the advertising ban to vapes.
3
@Mark McIntyre
There is much to recommend a ban on advertising of consumed products with no nutritional value and no shortage of health downsides. But let's do it across the board on a thoroughly considered public health basis not on the political culture one of "Ban Yours But Not Mine." Start with sodas and beers, burgers and fries, and work your way along to JUUL. Blackout them all.
8
I have some bad news for those who, in their utter ignorance, think that banning "flavored vjuice" will make it less attractive like candy to kids. Unflavored propylene glycol or vegetable glycerin - the base of e-cigarette fluid -- is not neutral flavored, not tasteless. It's sweet. Sweet enough that there's no real way to make it taste like tobacco. And it's the sweetness of the base fluid, not some nefarious design to hook kids, that sent vjuice makers down the road of candy and dessert flavor varieties. We can regulate away that variety, but the base will still be what it is: sweet.
8
There is a lot that needs to be overhauled at FDA. As one high ranking Biologics reviewer told me during the 1980s when HIV/AIDS was in full political, medical and religious chaos. we at FDA are buffeted by political ideologies, as much as other areas in government, especially when good scientific data are lacking so early on.
I am happy to see the NYT Editorial Board address E-cigarettes in this way. Now we need the highly published experts from all necessary disciplines to help guide FDA in the right regulatory direction in this and other issues.
1
This editorial says that its views are "informed by expertise, research, debate and certain longstanding values."
Sadly, one of those values is the determination to protect corporate products no matter how destructive they are. After all, if we ban one clearly harmful product we just might go after others as well.
There is no 'perfect' solution to vaping. But banning a harmful product makes far more sense than simply treating nicotine addiction after the fact.
The nicotine in cigarettes and vaping devices has one and only one purpose..to inflict the user with an addiction that will turn them into a long term consumer.
This current crisis is but one more example of the moral vacuum that permeates the American corporate board room. The idea that corporate executives would sit around a table calmly discussing how to inflict this damage on impressionable teenagers is a moral crime and should be a legal one.
We need a public health approach to all forms addiction. But while we are treaty those afflicted we certainly don't need to allow these companies to continue to profit from the misery that they intentionally inflict on our youth.
If you can't bring yourself tp endorse banning vaping, then ban nicotine. It's worse that many Class A drugs as it is.
Nicotine should be designated a Schedule I drug because of its addictive qualities.
4
@Helen Wheels Would you do the same for caffeine? It is also an addictive drug. And, unlike cigarette smoking that is horribly addicting, there is no evidence that nicotine alone is more than mildly addicting and substantial evidence (as in both animal and human clinical studies) that nicotine is not highly addicting.
6
@Rob-Chemist
Seriously?
1
@Helen Wheels Yes, seriously. If interested, I would gladly provide links to the published research (all peer reviewed) that supports my position.
I find it sad and odd that the editorial board of the Times is advocating for one addiction over another. The sadness is obvious; we live in a time when a Hobson's Choice is necessary.
The oddity is the degree to which the board - and many clinicians - ignore ample evidence that e-cigarettes are not a "solution" to smoking, but rather an independent source of new health problems.
Look, there's a reason the cigarette industry is all in on e-cigs: They're creating downstream cigarette addicts. E-cigs don't "solve" the threats of lung cancer and emphysema, they just allow us to kick those cans down the road. Let's knowingly allow a new generation - my teens say that vaping in their high schools is close to 50% - to be addicted, so we can focus, as always, on older generations' needs. After all, we hold the purse strings.
And we'll dress it up by a false premise: That shutting down vaping will be The New Prohibition. By that logic, any public health measure that halts any harmful practice is useless, because it will introduce a grey or black market. Better to legislate labels.
But do those advocating e-cigs have any reliable science about the long term biological outcomes of nicotine addiction at higher levels than typically achieved by cigarettes? Do they have any good data on the long term effects of the other harmful volatiles produced by the high temperatures of vaping? Nope, didn't think so. It's all about wishful thinking and short term fixes, isn't it?
7
Banning all cigarettes and addiction to nicotine will do more good.
4
If the goal had been to treat nicotine addiction, e-cigarettes could have been available by prescription.
This unfortunately would have required the same companies that jumped at the chance to profit by addicting a new generation to nicotine, to invest in clinical trials to demonstrate that e-cigarettes are safe and effective as an alternative to cigarettes.
Now there are two separate problems:
1) dealing with all the young new nicotine addicts
2) preventing the addiction of yet more young people
Yes, a public health advertising campaign that undermines the cool-independence vibe by having young people warn others that they are about to be manipulated and addicted by profiteers should help.
(And replace the Juul displays with mango-flavored sucking candy?)
2
A prohibition on all vaping products is ridiculous and as this article points out, would be a boon for the black market. I credit Juul with helping me to give up cigarettes completely several years ago. I don't even enjoy an occasional cigarette anymore—the smell is horrible to me now—but unfortunately I'm way more addicted to Juul than I ever was to cigarettes. By not offering nicotine levels that can be decreased down to 0% (Juul only offers 5% and 3%, both quite strong), Juul is clearly not in the business to assist with nicotine cessation. I have no idea how to quit this terrible habit now. Lawmakers need to see to it that smoking-cessation vaping products are regulated and that vape companies are required to provide customers with products that will help them not only quit cigarettes, but nicotine altogether.
3
@Alison What stops you from using some other vaping product with step-down nicotine levels?
3
Significant groups of voters in swing states are vowing that if trump bans e-cigarettes, they will vote against him and see to it that trump is not reelected.
Banning e-cigarettes would be one of the best things ever to happen for the health of the American people.
We might even get a stronger public health system to boot!
5
@Doug Keller That's the *only* good reason that I've ever come across for encouraging an e-cig ban. I'm a strong advocate for ecigs as a good harm-reduction option, but would almost encourage Melania's little campaign to have them banned if it would damage her husband's odds of a 2020 win to follow her advice.
Almost.
1
We don’t need a strong public health system. Thousands of people have quit without outside help.
6
@Jackson - "Thousands of people have quit without outside help."
And thousands haven't. Breaking news! People (gasp) are different!!
Dear me.
5
@Jackson
Public health was critical to the decline of smoking nationally. Smoking rates started to decline when epidemiologic evidence showed the link between smoking and lung cancer. Richard Doll and Bradford Hill, later knighted for their research, first documented the links between smoking and disease in 1950. Smoking rates peaked among US men in the late 1950s or early 1960s.
Public health efforts to reduce smoking and lung cancer included US Surgeon Generals' warnings, research into environmental tobacco smoke, smoking restrictions, anti-smoking ads and warnings, smoking cessation programs, taxes, insights into addition, and much more. Individuals stopped smoking because the health effects of smoking--on both smokers and non-smokers, including children--became known and because society's attitudes toward smoking changed. That change happened because of the excellent work of the public health system on many different fronts.
I can't understand why Jackson's comment--based on such false information--is a Times Pick!
Perhaps i'm a little naive, but why are traditional cigarettes still available when they are known to cause deadly health problems? The long-term health outcomes are known. I don't believe anyone disputes that. How is it possible that they are still available to anyone? This is what baffles me.
4
@John The simplest answer is that Prohibition taught us that banning something people want creates a black market and ultimately does more than good. Tobacco use has been on the decline in the U.S. for years because of restrictions on advertising and public awareness campaigns about the health risks related to smoking, without all the organized crime.
6
There is no nicotine in the vape cartridges that have caused illness. Those are thc cartridges that allow you to get high in a subtle way. The people that smoke them are often anti nicotine in the same way that people that smoke pot are anti tobacco. E cigarettes and bootleg thc vape cartridges are two totally separate issues. Comparing them is like comparing people who drink too much booze to people that drink to much soda and sugary drinks. They both are technically “drinking” issues but the problems and are two different things that involve two different groups and therefore two different solutions.
15
I think smoking and vaping should both be banned as forms of drug intake.
If you want to take risks with your body that’s on you but I don’t think anyone should have the right to expose the people around them to second hand smoke and its effects.
4
@Eric While we are at it why don't we go ahead and bring back the prohibition as well?
4
@Eric
The notion that you or anyone will be endangered by secondhand exposure to nicotine from e-cigarettes is ludicrous. The danger of second-hand exposure to tobacco cigarettes is real and rightfully regulated, but that secondhand exposure is to the smoke, to burnt plant matter, never to the nicotine.
The ignorance and irrationality brought to this issue is astounding. E-cigarettes should be regulated, and it's an outrage that they have not been. But what should be regulated is their content for the protection of those who use them. That e-cigarette users have not yet been afforded the basic consumer protections provided for users of most other products on the market is in significant part the fault of those obsessed with just wishing them away with a blanket ban, which has not even been accomplished with known deadly tobacco cigarettes.
18
We shouldn’t ban e cigarettes like juul just because of their marketing issues. At end of the day they are way better alternative then cigarettes. If we ban one but not the other what are we really trying to say to our kids? What about mangoritas and strawberryitas from Budweiser? Why are they alright? If we ban flavored e cAll banning juuls would do is make high school kids go back to cigarettes. Is that what we want? Shouldn’t we be kind of relieved the kids are more into that then tobacco? And for the illness issue that has been proven by the cdc to be from bootleg cartridges in copy cat packaging which is more of a result of our failed federal drug policy then it is about the intention of the product. Pretty sure those thc cartridge illnesses are in states where they are already illegal so banning a legal nicotine vape that is in essence a totally different product absolutely makes no sense. Regulate its marketing and distribution like tobacco but accept that it’s a product society wants and should have. It’s that simple.
10
At some point you have to let people hurt their own bodies in the ways they want to
Invest in quality research into vaping, all tobacco, all drugs, and put out non-sensationalized information about the risks. If people knowingly choose to continue, or start, the habit, that should be their right
8
@Graham research of anything containing thc is criminalized at the federal level, meaning that if you as a scientist engage in thc research you will never work in a lab with any federal funding or grants ever again. Black balled. So no research is done on those products, and any sensible research on e cigs in the US was prevented by lobbying by cigarettes companies right up until they launched their own - and then railed against regulation.
1
You have pointed out two critical issues meriting additional exploration:
* control efforts, of whatever types, over time, in an open market society in which profits and commodification, by influential licit and illicit stakeholders are valued norms, and
* information, derived from irrelevant-faux- “science-Posing-questions, which offer too-early-closure “answers,” and not needed relevant UNDERSTANDING
under ever-present realities of interacting uncertainties, unpredictabilities, random and unexpected outcomes, and lack of TOTAL control of relevant parameters, notwithstanding one’s actions, timely or not, are likely to BE little more than mantras. Not effective interventions.
Prohibition, America’s ideological based politico-social experiment. did not achieve its publicly noted goals. The Rockefeller drug laws and Nixon’s “war on drugs” - has resulted in the New Jim Crow.
What do we need to know and UNDERSTAND about people’s interacting: awareness, paying attention, cognitions, experienced and expressed feelings, judging, making decisions and implementing them, or not, under a range of “risky-realities,”learning from the process and integrating into “failing better” the next time?
What and Who are the intervenable human and nonhuman barriers to effective individual and systemic decision making for wellbeing and health; in their broadest achievable dimensions?
What viable “bridges” are possible,available and accessible,when proven FACTS and alt-facts coexist?
My poor 19 yr old son is addicted to nicotine. Indeed he vapes in private bc he is ashamed of his addiction.
We've been through family counseling, done cognitive behavior, etc., all to no avail.
Nicotine addiction is horrible.
44
@Dolly Patterson he has also tried gum and the patch.
2
@Dolly Patterson Do not allow your son to smoke on the property.
Make your opposition clear. Make it more costly for him to indulge his addiction.
2
Son may well have anxiety, depression, concentration or other issues. Get to the root of what symptom Juul is satisfying and then find healthier alternatives to the underlying condition.
9
As a former smoker, I was up to one and half packs a day of unfiltered cigarettes. E-cigs hadn't been invented yet and quitting tobacco is probably the toughest thing I ever did. It took multiple attempts, and I found that public approbation, limited rights to smoke, greatly increased the ability to finally quit. My guess is that the dangers from e-cigs outweigh the advantages, if we continue to allow them, we should allow them only as a doctor prescribed medical device for quitting tobacco, any other use is a gateway to addiction, not relief therefrom.
44
@Steve :O
Again, thoughtful, right on point and well said. Wonder how much lobbying money was needed to buy their way to continued manufacturing.
PEOPLE BEFORE MONEY I SAY!
Stand up to do what is right here. We do not know enough and what we have seen so far is pretty bad.
6
@This just in @Steve :O
But how can we live in a country where you can walk into a store and buy an assault rifle (which are far more dangerous and have resulted in far more deaths) but need a prescription for an e-cigarette?
The only way e-cigarettes are going to be a 'gateway' to addiction is if we take them off the market, driving people back to cigarettes.
8
@Steve :O - Agreed that e-cigs should only be allowed as doctor-prescribed medical devices - if and only if we also say the same for regular cigarettes, currently freely available at every corner store and gas station.
E-cigs are much healthier than regular cigs, as everyone who has switched from one to the other will be able to attest for you. Whatever we decide to do with e-cigs, let's not be hypocrites about it.
4
I used e-cigarettes on and off for several years while living in Spain with zero adverse effects. In fact, I was the healthiest I had ever been -- running 30 miles/week, doing Tough Mudders, etc.. Obviously, these products have been on the market in Europe for years and no outbreak of deaths has occurred. I blame either "bootleg" liquids or some FDA-approved additive that the EU has banned (as it has banned so many other additives the US allows in our food) for the recent illnesses and deaths. My suggestion for a solution is to find out what they allow and what they don't in the EU and follow their lead.
16
My wife switched to vaping to combat a relatively minor cigarette habit. Without a doubt, a year later, she is way more addicted to nicotine than she ever was smoking a pack of cigarettes a week and primarily over the weekends while also having drinks.
I'm not personally a fan, I didn't like her smoking cigarettes around me and our son, I don't like her smoking the vape around us either because I don't like breathing it in.
I feel the same way about THC vapes. Just smoke the plant rather than smoking something that you don't understand.
No one knows what the ultimate health impacts are of any of this stuff.
9
@John I don't know what you mean by a "minor cigarette" habit, but even is she was smoking only a few cigarettes per day then chances are vaping will be less harmful for her in the long term.
5
Nicotine craving is easily subdued with patches, gum, lozenges, tablets containing nicotine. No need for e-cigs for that purpose.
If people need to inhale something, how about air?
11
@Ron Clark No, nicotine craving is not easily subdued with patches, gum, and lozenges, because if that were the case millions of Americans would not continue to smoke. As a former smoker, I tried all of these remedies to no avail. I was able to quit smoking for good after I switched to vaping.
15
@Ron Clark
Most of us who quit smoking by vaping tried all of the above and they didn't work. Vaping has worked much better for us. After 40 years of smoking, and trying to quit I was able to quit smoking within 2 weeks of starting vaping. That was 6 years ago and I haven't even wanted a cigarette since.
2
The E-cigarette products should have had FDA review prior to mass commercialisation, but again, money talks. Regulations protect people. No regulation protects only the greedy and the unscrupulous.
11
@A. Reader
Well said. And with the Opiod crisis still upon us, we certainly do not need another drug out here doing who knows what and is no substitute for cigarettes.
I was in Columbus for the state fair in 2016 and remember seeing signs on the roads that you should call to report someone you thought might be driving while high on drugs. WHAT does that tell us?!
3
Approximately 480,000 people die of cigarettes each year. If we were to be consistent, there is a much stronger case for banning the sale of traditional cigarettes than e-cigarette flavors.
43
@Karoner
I agree. I smoked for 40 years, have vaped for 5. My cough is gone, I breathe better and my teeth are whiter. I don't stink up the house, can't burn it down. Sucking burning leaves and treated paper into one's lungs has to be worse.
6
@Karoner. Your reasoning is not fully constructed. For every person who quits 4 young Americans become addicted to nicotine from e cigarettes. E cigarettes addict some users immediately
2
Regulate e-cigs by restricting advertising, flavors, and retail outlets. Tax them and make sure those funds go to public health efforts. But don’t ban them. It didn’t work for alcohol or marijuana. Vaping will just go underground and we will lose our ability to manage the problems (and create a new set of problems for our justice system.)
7
Agreed, banning e-cigarettes can do more harm than good.
Since it’s easy enough to buy drugs it won’t be any more difficult to buy unsafe products.
3
So we debate banning E-Cigarettes and let our children and others be slaughtered daily by guns. Really! Which one is really a public health emergency?
57
Tobacco kills 480000 Americans per year. Guns are very bad but kill far fewer people even when suicide is factored in to fatalities.
2
@Jacquie Why is always the an either or argument? Surely you understand nicotine addiction affect millions, and this time it's our children.
1
@Jacquie
Cars kill 37,000 Americans a year - ban cars?
Not to quibble. . .OK, to quibble: Nicotine does not come exclusively from the tobacco plant; it is found in the nightshade family of plants (Solanaceae), predominantly in tobacco, and in lower quantities in vegetables such as tomato, potato, eggplant and green pepper. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine
That notwithstanding, I agree with regulation of vaping.
3
Now that the government has belatedly admitted that the issue with lung illnesses is attributable to adulterants in boot leg black market cartridges (largely THC cartridges)..... specifically the addition of Vitamin E Acetate as a "cutting agent" and known to be harmful to lungs when inhaled.... it is time for everyone to back off on the ban legal sales of e-cigarettes narrative. Most of the reported illnesses are not even attributable to nicotine cartridges... other then those sold bootleg on the street (which are probably illegal refills by booleggers with who knows what ingredients).
That said... e-cigarettes do require better regulation and enforcement of regulation to insure they stay out of the hands of minors to the maximum extent possible.
So.. how about we adjust the narrative off of the hysteria and back toward thoughtful science based discussion on regulation of the prodcut, rather then demanding outright bans for the wrong reasons?
24
I bought a refillable ecigarette to transition away from cigarettes in 2014. But knowing that my smoking habit was mainly based on the "oral fix" part of smoking and not the nicotine, I would buy liquid that had zero nicotine. After using it a couple of years I stopped. I still have it in a drawer somewhere, with plenty of e-liquid, one vial containing no nicotine and one that does. I didn't buy the products on the block market but in a store. The vaping did its job for me.
34
I bought a refillable ecigarette to transition away from cigarettes in 2014. But knowing that my smoking habit was mainly based on the "oral fix" part of smoking and not the nicotine, I would buy liquid that had zero nicotine. After using it a couple of years I stopped. I still have it in a drawer somewhere, with plenty of e-liquid, one vial containing no nicotine and one that does. I didn't buy the products on the block market but in a store. The vaping did its job for me.
2
Why is "conquering nicotine addition" a worthy public policy? You have to layout out a problem before I buy into your solution. Smoking and dip are harmful if used habitually. But nicotine gum, for example, is not harmful.
Vaping, while some long-term data is missing, is clearly better than smoking.
Including the THC-vaping illnesses and deaths is an unethical sleight of hand. Hard to ban a product if there aren't bodies, so lets include those bodies as part of our evidence.
The worst argument against e-cigarettes is that it is being marketed to children. Existing laws should cover that, and if not it is a much easier to regulate the advertising of the Juul products.
Increasing taxes on existing nicotine vaping just makes black market products (you know, the things that are actually killing people) more popular.
Marijuana prohibition went for so long that a backlash developed, arguing that THC & CBD was medicine (here is a hint, medicine has a controlled dose). This lead to an uncritical acceptance of THC vaping (after all, no smoking, so it has to be better!).
Congress should legalize marijuana and THC vaping should be regulated, just as beer and wine are. A fragmented state by state legalization effort (one where no bank can interact with the business since they are Federally regulated) leads to shaddy characters.
Obviously, Big Tobacco will morph into Big Marijuana, but that is OK because they are professional and aligned for long-term profits.
29
@James This country is addicted to moral panic and outrage, and deaths linked to "vaping" were a crisis too good to let slide, especially since a handful of the victims swore up and down they didn't use THC. This left just enough room for fear, uncertainty and doubt and the push to essentially ban nicotine vaping products.
12
@James
What a well-reasoned response! I agree with all your points.
There are several high-quality manufacturers of flavored nicotine ‘e liquid” I’ve purchased from for years; they’re clear about what ingredients they use and where those ingredients are sourced. They also share details about their manufacturing facilities (Five Pawns and Kai’s Virgin Vapor are good examples).
Point is there are legitimate, established businesses making high-quality product intended for and used by adults. During the ‘vape hysteria’ of the past few months, It just made NO sense to me that people might suddenly be falling ill from established products that hadn’t changed in years.
There are real issues to address, affecting the health and safety of children and teens, which you outlined so well; we should focus on those, rather than attack the whole industry with a legislative sledgehammer.
7
@James
Nobody starts out chewing nicotine gum. It’s the cigs that get one hooked.
1
The Editorial Board of the NYT has surrendered to The Banality of Evil in seeking to normalize the threat that Vaping represents. Let us be clear, Vaping is a delivery mechanism for an addictive poison. Nicotine has hugely negative effects on almost every bodily system. The devices themselves are made in China who has no quality control. They provide a ready mechanism for the consumption of drugs who, if the reports of the adulteration of the Vape Liquid prove to be true, have killed SO FAR, 20 people and injured 2,021 people. Many of those injuries are going to make those people medically fragile for the rest of their lives.
Shame On You. Retract This Editorial.
8
Vaping is not the problem it’s what is being inhaled. Vaping is no different than using a nebulizer a common treatment for COPD.
30
@John Schwab
Can I sell you something? I don't think it matters what it is.
1
@Bruce1253 Did you even read the editorial? Most of your comments relate to issues stemming from lack of regulation - as you yourself note, the chronic health issues originate from "no quality control" and "adulteration". The article very clearly addresses these problems.
Alcohol too has "negative effects on almost every bodily system", but I don't suppose you're in favor of restoring the 18th Amendment.
Yes, vaping is causing issues - what else would you expect from an almost completely unregulated narcotic. As noted in the article, the health crisis we are experiencing here is largely nonexistent in the UK, where regulation is in place. It is downright hyperbolic of you to insist that a ban is the only solution, and that anyone who favors regulation over a ban is an agent of the "Banality of Evil".
23
The cigarette companies would sure love a ban on e-cigs.
14
@GG Are you kidding??? The cigarette companies love e-cigs, and don't want them banned at all. That why Atria bought 35% of Juul for billions. They understand nicotine and addiction and they'll gladly take over the e-cig business.
1
@GG Altria (FKA Philip Morris) has a 35% stake in Juul. Don't worry, they're hedging their bets.
1
So long as people think it's "cool" to smoke e-cigarettes, they will be smoked.
No matter what.
How about a campaign to make it "uncool?"
Just a thought.
4
@Panthiest It looks stupid now. Vapers look like their cam shaft is working in reverse, exhausting through their intake valves.
1
There is no reason why these shouldn't be banned along with all intoxicating products.
Leaving them unchecked would be nothing but a good source of income for hospitals, pharmaceutical, psychiatrists and criminals.
Pragmatically, they must not be sold via stores, they must be prescription only drug.
Government public health system must use the money they make to offer path to overcome addiction.
1
@Raj
Exhibit A, for why your idea is folly:
The Volstead Act, which enforced the passing of the 18th amendment, making alcohol sales and consumption illegal.
Outcome.. complete failure to stop consumption of alcohol and the complete enablement of an entire generation of organized crime centered on illegal production, distribution, and sale of alcohol anyway.
Final outcome.. the 18th amendment was repealed and alcohol prodcution and sales once again taken out of the hands of criminals.
5
@Raj I assume you're also in favor of banning all products containing caffeine?
3
@Raj
Yep, banning worked so well for alcohol it's the approach we should take for everything that isn't good for us. I'll assume red meat is on your list as well? I am addicted to ribeye steak and pork chops, where is my inpatient treatment?
2
There are important points here, but the overall tenor of the piece regrettably conflates a total ban with a ban on all flavors including, crucially, mint and menthol. This is likely to lead to confusion for your readers. It seems most public health advocates working to reign in the epidemic of youth uptake and new nicotine addictions are focused on banning flavors as the best approach, but leaving plain products on the market at least for the time being. Helpful to keep those lines clear in addressing the problem.
12
yet another article that refuses to acknowledge that nicotine vapes, modded diy nicotine vapes, legal thc cartridges, and black market thc cartridges are different things with different, separate risks.
49
I was truly floored the first time I saw a Juul advertisement on television. Congress managed to ban cigarette ads in 1970. If we want a test to see whether our legislature has become totally non-functional we should see whether or not we can pass the obvious bill banning e-cigarette advertising on television.
49
Written by and for market capitalism in order to protect companies and kill our kids in the process. Solutions proposed are meaningless in the current reality. Complete blather in order to numb the reader's thought capacities. Juul and their marketing department should be criminally charged.
4
@Adam Your legislators are bought and paid for. Millions of teens do not become addicted to flavored nicotine without a lot of people in the know and benefiting.
2