
Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul - mises
https://www.wsj.com/articles/federal-prosecutors-conducting-criminal-probe-of-juul-11569268759
======
numair
True story:

I have two very close younger friends who are practically my little brothers.
They come from an established family in Hollywood, and have a very famous
actor-dad. The younger brother is about 20 now, and is friends with half of
the teen “influencers” on Instagram/YouTube; the older brother is about 22,
and hangs with a group of LA kids who are obsessed with the movie American
Psycho and dress/look the part — ironic given that their lives are a 2010s
version of that book’s author’s other classic, Less Than Zero.

About two years ago, I’m at a club in Hollywood when these two hand me a thick
pile of paper, which looks like a legal document. I’m really confused — is
someone getting sued? Is this a screenplay? Am I being asked to sign an NDA?

The older brother, in his American Psycho-inspired suit, takes a puff of his
vape and then whispers in my ear, “this is the funding prospectus for Juul.
Our friends have been invited to invest.”

I looked at the thing. It was crazy. The valuation was well over $1 billion.
The growth rate was off the charts. And, looking around at that club in
Hollywood, filled with kids vaping in the outdoor area, I realized the numbers
made sense. But the fact that a 19 year old Hollywood kid was handing me the
funding documents for this company and telling me that his friends had been
invited to invest told me that there was something very, very wrong about how
Juul got into the hands of all of these young people — it clearly wasn’t an
accident.

~~~
Despegar
Maybe you should relay this story to the FTC and the federal prosecutors so
they can investigate this and bring Juul to justice.

~~~
morpheuskafka
Having a 19-year old investor/employee at a tobacco company isn't illegal. Not
really sure what the prosecutors could glean from this in terms of hard
evidence of a crime.

~~~
Kudos
> Not really sure what the prosecutors could glean from this in terms of hard
> evidence of a crime.

That's why it's called an investigation, you follow leads not knowing whether
they will pay off.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
19 year old kids are still of age, there would be nothing really to
investigate.

~~~
dcposch
The question at hand is whether Juul intentionally marketed nicotine to people
below 18.

There's pretty strong circumstantial evidence that they did. Building
relationships w teenage social media influencers is part of that.

The unfortunate fact is that Juul achieved explosive popularity among high
schoolers. It spearheaded a U turn in youth nicotine use rates, which had been
declining for a long time and are now way up.

The investigation is here to determine to what extent this was the result of a
deliberate strategy.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
That they marketed the investment to a 19 year old kid says nothing about
whether they marketed anything to those under 18. It isn’t a lead that they
FTC could use in any kind of reasonable investigation.

High schoolers during my day smoked a lot, and did a lot of pot. They didn’t
need to be marketed to, they will find the bad stuff on their own. Marketing
to them directly would actually have the opposite effect (eg nothing promoted
drug use more effectively than DARE). I feel like we’ve all become old fogeys
that remember nothing about what it was like to be teenagers.

~~~
gnu8
Actually, it's a comment on an Internet forum, which could be a faithfully
retold anecdote or a pure fabrication. In fact, if the book were current, I
would be more inclined to take that post as an advertisement for the novel
'Less Than Zero', which I may check out later.

You make a good point though, that we somehow expect that kids exist in a
vacuum when they are actually full and active participants in society. It is
ludicrous to think that Juul's advertising to make their product seem
desirable to adults would not also affect young people. It's similarly
unrealistic to think that kids wouldn't vape in the absence of any advertising
whatsoever.

I wonder what kind of evidence might be uncovered that would prove Juul did
something that is clearly illegal. Joe Camel was held to be a cartoon
character and therefore an appeal directly to children. In the case of Juul
hiring influencers though, perhaps they could analyze the influencers'
analytics data and see if they disproportionately reach under-18s, but pure
numerics might be hard to sell to a jury without a smoking gun like an email
that says "sign Jim Fortnite because he's big with the 14-16 year olds this
week".

------
sbilstein
One thing that gets lost in Juul and vaping supporters is just how bad
nicotine addiction is for your personal life. I recently quit nicotine a few
months ago and it made a big difference for me.

Nicotine withdrawal kicks in very quick which is why smokers take constant
breaks. The anxiety, the grumpiness, irritability and anger you feel as a
smoker when you are without nicotine will piss off your partner, make you seem
difficult to friends and colleagues and generally just color your world in a
dark way.

Juul pods helped me stop smoking for a short period of time but I became an
order of magnitude more hooked on nicotine. I work from home and couldn't go
more than 15 minutes without sucking on that stupid device.

I quit smoking cold turkey 90 days and it's made a dramatic difference to my
mood. I no longer worry about being socially outcast or being judged for
blowing vape clouds.

~~~
earlz
I think the key with vaping (not necessarily with Juul though due to market
availability) is that it's very easy to decrease the dosage of nicotine
without reducing the fixation amount. For traditional cigarette smoking you
want a high amount of nicotine to fill that void (and also to get through the
other side of other addictive substances in tobacco beyond nicotine) and to
effectively "get hooked" on vaping instead, to the point that normal
cigarettes are completely unattractive to you.. Afterwards, decreasing dosage
with a vape is super easy, especially if done in a blind way, ie, buying two
identical flavors at different dosages (your "normal" and the lower dose) and
put them into two carts. Pick a random one each day to use. I've heard of
people doing this all the way down to 3mg to get over the lowest dosage hump
even. One has no nicotine, the other only has 3mg. Eventually the non-social
fixation (ie, at your house alone) stops, and the social fixation (ie, outside
of a bar, etc) is controllable with no nicotine... Then that's not even
getting into the different ohm ratings etc that further control dosage without
affecting the fixation of using the vape.

edit: note I say "easy", but its not a short process.. If you try to go
immediately from 48mg to 3mg you won't have a good time. It takes months for
each step down

~~~
ThrustVectoring
Nicotine's method of action for addiction isn't commonly understood very well.
It's extremely specific - nicotine works to make the things you do around the
exposure more habitual. If it's slapping on a nicotine patch and going on a
run, you're more likely to get into a habit of slapping on a patch and going
on a run. If it's taking a break outside and puffing from a vaporizer, then
it's simply taking a break and puffing from a vaporizer.

That's largely why e-cigs are the most successful way to quit smoking tobacco
products - it's the most similar habit to smoking cigarettes, so it slots into
the existing highly-reinforced habits that smokers have. You drop a bunch of
the random other chemicals that are present in cigarettes, and wind up
reinforcing the replacement habit before dropping dosages and having a regular
habit that's as easy to quit as, say, biting your fingernails.

~~~
PeterisP
Thing is, the fact that you _can_ reduce the nicotine dosage does not
necessarily mean that people _will_ ; unlike cigarettes, it's trivial to also
_increase_ the nicotine dosage many times.

~~~
Karunamon
I don't think a significant amount of people do that. Coming from someone with
a lot of experience vaping (actually helped me quit smoking), it's somewhat
difficult to find ejuices with pleasant flavors (anything that's not a
stereotypical cigarette flavor like menthol) above 6mg, and around 9mg or
higher, the nicotine flavor becomes quite pronounced and overpowering, and
your flavor options are severely limited.

------
holy_city
> 28% of high school students this year said they had used an e-cigarette at
> least once in the past 30 days

Holy smokes! If you look at data from a few years ago [1] that's more than
double what you'd see for cigarette smoking (eyeballing the numbers here, the
data is more granular).

Is it easier for kids to get e-cigs than cigarettes? Or do they just want them
more?

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK294302/table/ch13.t3/?...](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK294302/table/ch13.t3/?report=objectonly)

~~~
webkike
1\. They taste better

2\. Yes, they are easier to get, for a couple reasons: once you have a juul
you only need juul pods, and additionally you don't need to purchase a lighter
(which you need to be over eighteen a lot of places to purchase).

edit 3. They are far more discreet (you can vape in a classroom if you are in
the back and it is dark) and deliver more nicotine.

~~~
holy_city
Why is it easier to buy juul pods than a pack of cigarettes?

And I'm not aware of any place in the states you need to be over 18 to buy a
lighter - and as a former dumbass teenager, I don't think kids have difficulty
in figuring out how to light things on fire.

Discretion makes sense, but I feel like rationalizing an irrational decision
here. Wouldn't it be more discrete not to vape?

~~~
bsder
> Why is it easier to buy juul pods than a pack of cigarettes?

There are non-nicotine pods. And they have all of the social addictiveness
even if they don't have actual nicotine in them.

~~~
t-writescode
if there’s no nicotine, then who cares? Magic the Gathering cards and pogs
were addicting back in the day, but kids could still buy them.

~~~
TeMPOraL
If they _have_ nicotine, then who cares either? Nicotine is addictive when
combined with other substances in regular cigarettes. Not as a stand-alone
chemical.

(Of course avoiding getting any kind of particulate in your lungs is better
than getting it.)

~~~
navd
I'm not sure why I see this popping up throughout the comments. Nicotine BY
ITSELF is extremely addictive.

~~~
jacobolus
Nicotine by itself doesn’t seem categorically different than caffeine (coffee,
tea, yerba mate, guarana, ...) or other stimulants (khat, coca leaves,
ginseng, cinnamon, ...). Yes these are generally addictive, but not
necessarily life ruining. Dosage, frequency of use, etc. matters a lot.

Frequent long-term use of any stimulant is probably not great for you; e.g. my
mother has a pretty severe coffee addiction (she typically drinks 4–8 cups per
day), and gets headaches and shakes if she goes a couple days without. But
compared to other kinds of drugs, it doesn’t seem like such a huge public
health threat that we should freak out about it.

~~~
navd
I think you’re partly right. However comparing nicotine to caffeine is like
comparing apples to oranges. They are similar, but nicotine affects the brain
in a much more different (and arguably more addictive) way than caffeine does.

------
didericis
A tainted, unregulated THC product killed people.

That is bad. That does not mean we should immediately ban all vaping devices.
There should be long term studies done on devices and juices in order to
determine health effects, and there should be audits on vape juice
manufacturers to make sure they aren’t putting really bad stuff in them.

I don’t understand the moral panic. Marketing nicotine products to kids may be
reprehensible, but marketing in general is largely reprehensible. It’s a
matter of degree. Why do we decide marketing devices that have not killed
people, but have just been vessels for unregulated product that have done the
damage, is worse than marketing soda and sugary foods, which kill thousands,
or addictive apps and social media, which damages mental health significantly,
or overpriced unnecessary college educations, which cause people to go into
debt for decades, or cars, which both increase debt and are a leading cause of
teenage death? Most of those things are unnecessary for the majority of the
population. Healthy foods, real life interactions, apprenticeships/job
training programs, and public transportation are all generally better than the
alternatives for the safety and financial future of young people.

The moral panic happening RE vaping is how the war on drugs started. People
saw something that affected the youth and tried to smash it with a big stick
rather than attack it with sophistication and respect for the free decisions
of the population. It didn’t work.

If vaping is bad, let’s find out why/what specifically is bad, and let’s ban
the stuff that killed the people that just died. Banning all of it is
draconian. There is no good reason to drive well tested products that people
enjoy out of the market, even if they aren’t 100% healthy. I don’t want to
live in the Demolition Man future. Plus people who want to vape if products
become very expensive and hard to get due to taxes, bans and overregulation
will be tempted to buy the crap that isn’t tested that will actually kill
them.

~~~
gpm
Non THC vapes have at the very least put people in intensive care, if not
killed people.

It's far premature to try and claim the lack of any health effects from any
type of vapes, they just haven't existed long enough.

[https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/vaping-
london-1.5292161](https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/vaping-london-1.5292161)

~~~
didericis
It’s also far to premature to claim any specific health effects from vaping as
a whole.

The article said the teen using a nicotine based product, but that’s not
enough information. We don’t where the nicotine juice he was using came
from/whether he bought it off the street or from a reputable seller. We also
don’t know if that was based on blood tests or self reports, although I think
it’s likely the report is accurate/the issue just happens to affect THC users
much more.

This spike in illness is very recent and seems to be fairly acute. Vaping has
existed for a number of years without similar cases, and they all just
happened to appear all at once.

It seems fairly obvious to me that it has something to do with a particular
kind of juice that was recently introduced and is more common in illicit THC
products. I suspect one or several shadier manufacturers started using
something bad fairly recently, and that it has affected mostly THC products,
but is not related to the THC itself.

The current reaction is like jumping to ban all toys because of that issue a
few years back where some Chinese manufacturers were forced to recall toys
with lead paint.

~~~
didericis
EDIT: looks like I missed my editing window. Apologies for the typos and
grammatical issues, wrote out the above pretty quickly.

------
paxys
> The San Francisco company has said it never marketed to teens

Says a company that:

• Recruited social media "influencers" to post about Juul

• Sponsored programs at schools and summer camps

• Ran "youth education" and "holistic health education" programs where they
told teenagers about the dangers of nicotine and (reportedly) that using their
product was safe

~~~
nullbyte
Is this for real?

Do you have sources for the last 2 statements?

~~~
paxys
There are tons of sources for this.

From the house oversight committee - [https://oversight.house.gov/news/press-
releases/economic-and...](https://oversight.house.gov/news/press-
releases/economic-and-consumer-policy-subcommittee-held-part-i-of-hearings-on-
juul-s-role)

NYTimes - [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/25/health/juul-teens-
vaping....](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/25/health/juul-teens-vaping.html)

Others - [https://nypost.com/2019/07/26/juul-targeted-teens-by-
spendin...](https://nypost.com/2019/07/26/juul-targeted-teens-by-spending-
over-200k-on-influencers/)

The FTC has already been investigating them for a while now as well -
[https://www.wsj.com/articles/juuls-marketing-practices-
under...](https://www.wsj.com/articles/juuls-marketing-practices-under-
investigation-by-ftc-11567096073)

~~~
onlyrealcuzzo
Who decided to let Juul give a presentation at the schools? It sounds like all
of those people need to be fired, too. I mean, obviously Juul is not innocent,
but at the least on the schools' part, this is negligence to a point you need
to fire someone.

------
foxhop
Why so many comments about a ban? There isn't any mention of a ban... even if
prosecuted for marketing to minors and found guilty, does not mean the product
will be banned...

Should Juul be found guilty they will be punished via fines, just like a
tobacoo company.

Of course Juul knew this and decided it was worth it because if their device
went viral, which it did, they would be locked in as a market leader, which
they are.

All they have to do now is lawyer up and try to survive the next year or so
and they are locked in.

If they are fined so hard as to go out of business, the product is still not
banned and you would have the next in line take the market leader position.

The product is here to stay, banning the devices will be more difficult than
banning marijuana (which is a loosing battle).

Will Juul be a brand in the United States in 5 years? Maybe?

Will we still have e-cigarettes in the United States in 5 years, definitely.

If prohibition really occurs of course we will have 3d printed vapes and an
even strong black market vape.

I think regulation will likely occur, likely making it require a prescription,
but that is still not an outright ban.

~~~
outsidetheparty
> Why so many comments about a ban?

New York State banned flavored e-cigarettes recently, on the grounds that they
encourage kids to take up vaping; that ban wasn't specifically targeted at
Juul (who saw the writing on the wall and stopped selling flavors last year)
but that's the brand name everyone knows, so that's why they're catching the
investigative heat now.

~~~
jroll
> Juul (who saw the writing on the wall and stopped selling flavors last year)

What? Juul still sells flavors, even if you select that you live in NY or MI
(also banning flavors) on the popup when you enter the site:
[https://www.juul.com/shop/pods](https://www.juul.com/shop/pods)

------
treebeard901
Meanwhile, The stock prospects for the traditional big tobacco companies are
going up.

Guess what it does to their value after getting an entire generation hooked on
vaping nicotine for a decade, then for a brief time remove all flavors but the
ones you can find in traditional cigarettes, then once people switch to
tobacco and menthol only, remove e-cigarettes entirely. The only option is
traditional cigarettes or not smoking at that point. If it was easy to quit,
we would’ve never had a need to create e-cigarettes to begin with.

It’s completely evil any way you look at it.

------
rblion
I used one for a month and some change during a long road trip. It helped me
avoid smoking around the campfire, something my friend and I would do for 'old
time's sake'.

I'm glad I didn't use it for a long time. I had a feeling this was just as bad
as smoking. I tried to tell some kids I know who are always vaping but they
laughed at me with a statement like 'science bitch!'. Well, here you go.

------
konfusinomicon
Could the recent smear campaign on vaping have anything to do with the
upcoming release of IQOS in the US market?

------
Gatsky
Forgive me, but I just can’t believe we are doing the cigarette thing all over
again. I can’t believe it. The vendors have just read Big Tobacco’s marketing
manual. The interaction of Juul with social media, what a match made in heaven
of modern society’s best elements. The users are saying the same things all
nicotine addicts say “I make friends! It helps me think! It’s my money!”.
Imagine if you will, hearing these same arguments in the cancer clinic where I
work. Symptoms of total brain failure, and paying for the privilege.

Nicotine products cause only harm to society. That’s enough. Any other
argument for individual freedom or benefit is moot. We should ban commercial
enterprises based on nicotine. There is one moment when this is possible,
which is now. Anyone who thinks that vaping reduces harm from cigarettes is
dreaming. Why on earth do we want to spend the next 50 years studying vaping
and understanding the risks and benefits of life long vaporised nicotine use,
so that Juul’s founders can make a lot of money? If you enjoy moderate and
sensible recreational use of nicotine - sorry.

------
musicale
It's about time.

~~~
bcook
Tell me more about your perspective.

------
thismyrealone
The world is burning to the ground but at least these damn kids won't have
Mango flavored e-cigs anymore. What a lovely use of our resources.

~~~
save_ferris
I completely disagree, investigating vaping companies for targeting kids is
absolutely worthwhile.

Big tobacco was prohibited from advertising is various media for creating
characters like Joe Camel, only to circumvent the spirit of the law via the
internet.

Vaping is killing kids, how is this not a valid use of resources?

~~~
w3rhn2j34oh5o
It really isn't killing kids, and I would challenge that they are 'targeting
them'. As an adult vape user, I love the fruit flavors. They are for my
(adult) use only. I would never let someone under 21 get access to this. Why
should I be penalized because lots of kids are breaking the law?

The recent (adult) deaths from Vaping are due to black market THC cartridges
filled with vitamin e acetate. It is very likely the kids are obtaining (safe)
retail product, which is a failure in retail process, not the manufacturer.
While it is a bad thing that school aged children are illegal acquiring Juul
-- how is this different (or even worse) than Alcohol? We should investigate
alcohol vendors for making tasty beverages too. Can't have flavors that adults
might like...

There is a combination of events occurring simultaneously that is making it
hard for folks to objectively understand the problem, and if there is actually
a problem at all.

~~~
AdamHede
If you don't think fruity flavors target kids as at least collateral damage,
will you tell me this is classical marketing aimed at your (adult) age group?
[https://s3-prod.adage.com/s3fs-
public/styles/width_1024/publ...](https://s3-prod.adage.com/s3fs-
public/styles/width_1024/public/20190828_Juul_3x2.jpg)

Also, no nicotine product is (safe). There is no safe amount. In my opinion,
we should just work towards a smoke-free future.

The analog to alcohol is a bit of a whataboutism. Just because alcohol is bad,
doesn't justify smoking.

~~~
pault
What is the mechanism by which pure nicotine is harmful, other than a massive
overdose (which can easily kill you). As far as I'm aware nicotine itself is
no worse than caffeine. If you mean the other chemicals produced by the medium
and the combustion process, you should be specific so it doesn't sound like
fear mongering. Otherwise I'd be interested in hearing any objective evidence
that the nicotine itself is harmful. I have to say though, when people talk
about banning things because they believe it's for the greater good, my
morality police spidey sense starts tingling.

------
enahs-sf
Given all the problems in this country, somehow this seems like not the
highest priority issue.

~~~
paxys
Public health and youth health is always a high priority issue.

~~~
jMyles
If that were true, we'd be talking exclusively about cars, opioid drugs,
suicide, and gang violence. All other causes of death are rounding errors for
this age group.

~~~
inimino
The thing about this age group is they grow up.

------
todipa
Why can't we ban nicotine?

~~~
hn_throwaway_99
Yeah, because prohibition always works so well.

~~~
dymk
It does - drunk driving accidents and violence caused by alcohol plummeted
during prohibition.

~~~
twblalock
That was not the only outcome of prohibition...

------
ent101
Honest question: how much of the recent pushback could be attributed to
incumbents feeling threatened by Juul et al.?

~~~
dumbfoundded
Maybe a better question is who would benefit from Juul failing?

I'm not sure who. I don't think it's big tobacco. They need vaping to addict
the next generation. Maybe vaping spend is taking away from another vice.

~~~
ceejayoz
> Maybe a better question is who would benefit from Juul failing?

Public health?

~~~
slfnflctd
It has been proven over and over again that when you ban an addictive
substance, the black market and similar-but-still-legal options will rush in
to fill the void.

Pushing for transparency, research and more data so adults can make better
informed decisions about what to do with their own bodies is the answer.
Treating adults like children who aren't mature enough to make their own
decisions is not.

~~~
ceejayoz
The massive, decades-long decline in tobacco usage, particularly amongst young
people, serves as a strong and _highly_ relevant counterpoint.

Restrictions on advertising, access, and efforts to increase the cost etc.
have been quite effective there.

------
ganitarashid
Vaping under 18, I get it, you’re young and dumb and succumbed to peer
pressure. It happened to the best of us. But vaping after 30? It’s like
they’re saying: Hey I want you to take me seriously while I am willfully
destroying my body in front of you.

If you don’t care about yourself, you can’t be trusted to care about anything.

~~~
simplecomplex
Okay. But there's a double standard when it comes to food. Why do fat people
get a pass? Why is it legal to eat cheeseburgers and drink soda? The health
risks from obesity are statistically just as bad as smoking. It's the leading
cause of preventable death in the US. 1/3 of America is obese. It's a larger
problem than smoking, statistically.

I don't smoke or vape. But it's a glaring double standard. McDonalds can
market to kids, lure them with toys, and people who are 300+ lbs are allowed
to eat whatever they want, as much as they want.

Why is it legal for parents to feed a 12 year old Cheetos and Pepsi? It's just
as damaging health wise. In my city's public school there are teenagers who
have _gout_. Yet nobody cares.

~~~
cblades
Because you have to eat, and eating a Big Mac isn't unhealthy. Eating a Big
Mac several times a week is.

You don't have to intake nicotine, at all.

~~~
simplecomplex
> Big Mac isn’t unhealthy

Neither is nicotine, necessarily. Neither is smoking if it isn’t done long
term and on a regular basis. But of course people who eat Big Macs tend to do
it more than occasionally.

People don’t have to intake sugar. They don’t have to intake meat either.

You think I’m being facetious, but I’m dead serious. I’ve lost one family
member to obesity and another suffers from type 2 diabetes.

------
mathemagics
E-cigs should be banned. Same as cigarettes of any kind. In fact, any airborne
addictive substance should be blanked banned.

I used to rent an apartment that had a shared ventilation system. It was a no-
smoking building. My neighbors decided to ignore this. The smell would get so
bad it would make your head spin. The building management did nothing, because
it was hard to prove which neighbor was the culprit. I ultimately had to break
the lease & move out.

I don't care if you drink yourself under the table, snort meth on the regular,
or whatever other self-destructive habit you choose for yourself. It's your
right to be an idiot. But your rights stop the moment they infringe on my
right to not part take in your self-destructive habits.

No, we don't need smoking rooms. No, it's not sufficient to ban smoking in
public places. None of that has prevented me from coming in contact with
nicotine or weed. Just ban it outright. It's really that simple.

Nicotine patches, weed cookies, etc. on the other hand? Those are fine. Go
nuts. As long as you leave me out of it.

~~~
ribosometronome
>In fact, any airborne addictive substance should be blanked banned.

So long to baking cookies.

~~~
mathemagics
Sure, if they emit an addictive airborne substance. Thanks for clarifying.

~~~
cwkoss
Scent of fresh baked cookies is definitely an addictive airborne substance.

