
Trump Administration Weighs Ban on Flavored E-Cigarettes - jbegley
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/11/health/trump-vaping.html
======
dang
Related discussion from yesterday:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20929796](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20929796)

From recent months:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20535474](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20535474)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18717697](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18717697)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18716016](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18716016)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17968645](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17968645)

------
IronWolve
Most the people who got sick or died was from THC related vape products, ecigs
had nothing to do with it.

Also, they didn't ban flavored alcohol or flavored THC products.

They really need to stop being a nanny state about adults and stop use the
agenda of (Think of the children!) bans.

Kids (Young Adults) did start using juul, because gas stations could sell them
easily, 7-11 banned those juice flavors awhile ago.

The Feds banned an entire market for adults, that has nothing related to the
THC vitamin E grease fiasco...

Vaping is hell of a lot healthier than smoking, but of course not-smoking is
best. But I hate when nanny stats bann something for political reasons, just
like they are doing with trans fats (donut scare!) or cities with sugary drink
taxes.

Video showing cotton balls with smoking vs vaping,
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Pwj6BuS8Ds](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Pwj6BuS8Ds)

~~~
CJefferson
They banned flavoured cigarettes in 2009, which seems like the closest
comparison.

~~~
jdhn
If they're banning flavored cigarettes, why not ban sugary/flavored alcoholic
drinks (alcopops) as well? As others have said, this seems like a shakedown
and/or a bit of an overreach.

~~~
munk-a
These are separate issues - there is a clear close corollary to flavored
e-cigs which is conventional cigarettes - the flavored versions have been
banned. Banning other flavored stuff might be a good idea but is entirely
beside the point.

------
mullingitover
Let's be honest, this is a shakedown. E-cigarette manufacturers just need to
grease the right palms, this is absolutely not about public health.

Amount of money that States in the Master Settlement Agreement profited from
tobacco sales this year: $27 billion

Amount of tax revenue States collected on tobacco in 2018: $12.86 billion

Number of people killed by tobacco last year: 480,000

Number of States that spend the CDC-recommended amount on tobacco prevention
programs: 0

Number of states that have made efforts to ban tobacco: 0

[https://www.tobaccofreekids.org/what-we-
do/us/statereport](https://www.tobaccofreekids.org/what-we-do/us/statereport)

[https://taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/tobacco-tax-
revenue](https://taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/tobacco-tax-revenue)

[https://www.statista.com/statistics/248964/revenues-from-
tob...](https://www.statista.com/statistics/248964/revenues-from-tobacco-tax-
and-forecast-in-the-us/)

[https://cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast_fac...](https://cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast_facts/index.htm)

~~~
CJefferson
In 2009 flavoured cigarettes were banned. This just brings e-cigarettes in
line with cigarettes

~~~
mullingitover
There's a very strong drive to make an equivalency with tobacco and
e-cigarettes, and I think it's extremely irresponsible.

"We don't know the long-term effects" is usually put forward as an argument.
However, preliminary evidence is pretty strong that they're orders of
magnitude less harmful.

Putting e-cigarettes, (which look like they might save hundreds of thousands
to millions of lives if all smokers switched to them) in line with cigarettes
is potentially a public health catastrophe.

~~~
pwinnski
Six people have died so far from what seems to be a vaping-related lung
condition. This may be several orders of magnitude lower than the number
killed by smoking cigarettes an equivalent amount of time, but it's not
something to be ignored. Strangling a baby in its crib is easier than taking
out the full-grown adult later.

~~~
mullingitover
> Six people have died so far from what seems to be a vaping-related lung
> condition.

Vaping what, exactly?

This whole situation is like if the government allowed (and profited in the
billions on sales of) heroin, and a small industry sprang up selling methadone
pills. A few people who took _some unknown kind of pill_ got sick or died, and
the government then makes moves to shut down the methadone industry.

~~~
pwinnski
Oh, I think banning flavored pods is dumb, but then I also think vaping is
dumb. My point was that it's unrealistic to expect reason on the subject,
because "an order of magnitude less" is hard for most people to reason about
when you can list the name of people who have died.

People want action _now_ because the numbers are low _now_ , and if a couple
of years from now we find out things aren't so bad, presumably deep-pocketed
companies will push for rescinding the laws.

It's not great, but it's hardly realistic to expect politicians to make laws
based on science, even in administrations that aren't anti-science on the
record.

~~~
mullingitover
Vaping is dumb, smoking tobacco is dumb, smoking weed is dumb, drinking
alcohol is dumb, eating meat is dumb, driving above the speed limit is dumb.

The difference with speeding, drinking alcohol, and eating meat is that the
government has active measures to make them safer. With smoking weed
(specifically vaping) the regulatory environment forbids reputable labs from
performing quality control, and the FDA isn't helping whatsoever with
regulating the purity of the products.

What I'm getting at is that it's government policy, specifically the lack of
FDA regulation/testing of THC vaping products, that is killing people.

The voting public overwhelmingly supports legalization, and the politicians'
refusal to enact public policy that fulfills this wish and reduces harm is the
problem. Congress has the blood of these victims of tainted product on their
own hands.

------
sarah180
The land of the free, where the government decides what adults can with their
own bodies.

I'm all for taking new steps to reduce the troubling increase in teen use of
nicotine. Also, cigarettes should not be nearly so cheap: they should carry
taxes that fully offset the health impact so smokers are not free riders.
(This would add $10 per pack to the price.)

However, freedom means adults should be free to make their own choices—even if
they're bad ones—as long as they bear the costs. It's appropriate for
government to persuade, but not to choose.

~~~
an_d_rew
> The land of the free, where the government decides what adults can with
> their own bodies.

I have found that such black-and-white sentiments are common here in the US,
and surprisingly missing a lot of very importance nuance.

So... you will _never_ use publicly funded (often emergency) healthcare? Do
you _really_ understand the risks that you are taking? Are you _sure_ that the
risks have been accurately and understandably explained? Are you sure that
_only_ adults will be targeted? Are you _sure_ that commercial interests are
not lying or exaggerating to you?

I remember analogous arguments in the late 70's / early 80's regarding the use
of seat belts. "It's my body! I know the risks!"

It _is_ the role of a functioning society to find a way to help protect its
own members from non-obvious, long-term harm. We can argue if government
regulation is the proper outlet, and we can argue about efficiency and
details, but... no no sane world does a "I can damned well do whatever I
want!" attitude build a safe, equitable society.

~~~
dsfyu404ed
There's nothing other than an annoying chime preventing you from not using a
seat-belt. In all but the "nanny-ist" of states they can't even pull you over
for it (but they may be able to tack on a $50 fine or something if they see
you not wearing it when they pull you over). You can even buy clips that plug
into the seat belt latch that make it think it's buckled when it's not.

Mandating that seat belts be available in vehicles for those that choose to
use them and making it annoying to not do so is a far cry from banning an
entire category of product.

------
theincredulousk
This is 100%-grass-fed, free-range, organic bullshit. How on earth could
anyone, with a straight face, propose an outright ban on e-cigarettes while
_real cigarettes_ are still legal...

In public opinion, this is shaping up to be another tour-de-force showcasing
the defective actors of our democracy. Starring, in order of appearance:

1 Moms that want the government to do their parenting, as the technology
doesn't yet exist to Black Mirror them.
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arkangel_(Black_Mirror)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arkangel_\(Black_Mirror\)))

2 Obnoxiously smug people that are willing to outlaw anything that doesn't
affect them if there is morale high-ground to stand on

3 Corrupt politicians dressing up a power-move or money-grab in the name of
protecting the children/public health

4 A recent but powerful entrant, Facebook users that have conjured degrees in
both Medicine and Statistics, rapidly propagating the most poorly reasoned,
common denominated, premature-birth-of-a-coherent-argument to all of their
friends and family

Good times!

------
hprotagonist
_Mr. Azar said that the F.D.A. would outline a plan within the coming weeks
for removing most flavored e-cigarettes that are not tobacco products from the
market._

Title is editorialized; should read "Are Planning To Ban" or the like.

~~~
nwalker85
Yeah, I came here to say this. The title here suggests that the FDA just
banned them. They have not. Misleading at best, straight up lying at worst.

------
KingMachiavelli
The amount of regulation of these devices is insane. At their core they have 3
parts; a battery, a heating element, and the juice/carrier. There are a lot of
things that could potentially be consumed using these simple devices; nicotine
and THC are just the first most popular ones. The fact that the FDA has the
authority to regulate tobacco products should never have extended to anything
but actual tobacco.

~~~
invokestatic
Flavored e-cigarette cartridges (or whatever they're called, I don't smoke)
are a tobacco product.

~~~
decebalus1
In the US! Technically, you can extract nicotine from sources other than
tobacco.

[https://academic.oup.com/ntr/article/21/3/267/5041976#target...](https://academic.oup.com/ntr/article/21/3/267/5041976#targetText=Products%20that%20contain%20nicotine%20derived,legal%20framework%20for%20FDA%20regulation.&targetText=However%2C%20describing%20e%2Dcigarettes%20as,regulation%2C%20but%20others%20do%20not).

------
stronglikedan
A ban would be devastating for those using ecigs to quit nicotine. I love the
fruity flavors, and purposely started with those when I switched to ecigs. I
figured that would help me get rid of the desire for tobacco flavor, and it
worked so well that just the smell regular cigarettes would make me nauseous.
It was a huge factor in my quitting successfully.

------
siruncledrew
I bet there will be a rush to hoard flavored pods and a crazy resale market
will follow.

~~~
excalibur
I don't know anybody who uses pods. Most likely people will simply start
mixing their own juice, as aphextim mentioned.

~~~
nickthegreek
I mostly only see people using pods and almost never see anyone mixing their
own juice (besides dense clouds flowing out of the random car on the highway).
My guess is that is all related to your friend circle, age, and area. Juul's
are INCREDIBLY popular.

~~~
dmix
No one needs to mix their own juice yet. The difference is when there is no
longer an option in the market for pre-mixed juices, amazon will be flooded
with various flavouring oils.

Just like how the vaporizers are often sold as for 'potpourri'.

~~~
excalibur
> The difference is when there is no option amazon will be flooded with
> various flavouring oils.

Which is highly likely to increase the percentage of vapers using unsafe
ingredients and exacerbate the current health crisis. Hooray for progress!

~~~
dmix
Of course and it just further masks the liability chain and helps fund
associated shady acts.

------
thebiglebrewski
Hilarious seeing all the Juul shills in here already, saying we need vapes to
quit regular cigarettes and that, "this is a shakedown"

------
matthewfelgate
The USA should give gun control powers to the FDA...

------
1_player
Can we please update the title to reflect that they're still deciding whether
to ban them.

Original title: "Trump Administration Weighs Ban on Flavored E-Cigarettes"

~~~
dang
Whoa, that's bad. Fixed now. Submitted title was "FDA Bans Flavored
E-Cigarettes".

NYT is known for changing their headlines; did they get this wrong in the
first place? If not, the submitted title broke the HN guidelines: " _Please
use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don 't
editorialize._"

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

------
aphextim
Guess I'll go back to making my own again.... If anyone else wants to learn
how to mix your own juice here is my go to guide.

[https://liquidnicotinewholesalers.com/how-to-make-e-
liquid](https://liquidnicotinewholesalers.com/how-to-make-e-liquid)

