this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2023
151 points (89.9% liked)

politics

18780 readers
3164 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] LexiconDexicon@lemmy.world 51 points 1 year ago (47 children)

Because people enjoy taking drugs and they always will. Being a dictator and telling people they can't do what they want with their own body is hilariously out of touch

[–] WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.world 57 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Some people seem to think that if we just correct all of our unhealthy habits we will live forever. My life has been better with some unhealthiness in it, and times that I’ve stopped has proven that. It’s your body and your time, so you should be able to use it like you want to.

[–] cmbabul@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago (1 children)

“Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming "Wow! What a Ride!”

Hunter Thompson

[–] mindbleach@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (4 children)

A man who reached sixty-seven, wealthy and loved, and put a gun in his mouth while at the kitchen table.

[–] Rayston@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

While talking on the phone with his wife. His son, daughter in law and 6 year old grandson were all in the house.

[–] delial@lemmy.sdf.org 13 points 1 year ago

No More Games. No More Bombs. No More Walking. No More Fun. No More Swimming. 67. That is 17 years past 50. 17 more than I needed or wanted. Boring. I am always bitchy. No Fun - for anybody. 67. You are getting Greedy. Act your old age. Relax - This won't hurt.

Then the sound like someone dropped a heavy book.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MolvanianDentist@aussie.zone 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

In countries with universal healthcare, there is an argument that government should take a more active role in dissuading the use of substances that cause social harm and harm to the body and result in long term expenditure for public health. The detail is in how far government should go, e.g. educational initiatives, regulation, or prohibition, etc.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (45 replies)
[–] raunz@mander.xyz 38 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I don't quite understand how the science is clear if "there is still no data on the long-term effects of e-cigarettes".

[–] draagon@infosec.pub 14 points 1 year ago (3 children)

We dont have long term data because e-cigarettes haven't been used for a long time. They got popular ten years back?

[–] itsJoelle@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Also, as a vaper who switch from cigs because I was desperate for an alternative, I'm also curious about the different strata of products that exist on the market. For example, I visit a juice shop that mixes their products on site with pure materials, and I get to customize what exactly appears within my harmful juices. I build and maintain my parts as well. How does this approach compare to 'over the connivence store counter' kits like Juul?

It wouldn't surprise me if those products contain preservatives, or byproducts of a corporation skirting regulatory lines, that could be hazardous for consumer health. Though, that is purely my speculation — yet I wonder if my choice method of getting my sweet, sweet nicotine will get lumped in with everything else.

[–] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So the science isn't clear yet. It's still emerging

load more comments (1 replies)

You would think 10 years would be enough time to see a groups increased risk to associated illnesses. If I made a study group and made them smoke daily for 10 years there would definitely be poorer health. The science is pretty clear, but the WHO doesn't want to admit that vapes are net neutral, whereas tobacco is bad, so obviously that would make vapes "healthy" in comparison.

Nicotine in the body acts much like caffeine, it increases your blood pressure, giving the effect of a "calmer" feeling, and headaches when in withdrawal. No one is lobbying against coffee/caffeinated drinks, even though it's understood that too much caffeine can cause health risks. That's really where we're at. Alternative methods like nicotine gum or patches have existed for a long time and while there can be dependencies formed on these, no one would dare say nicotine gum is as dangerous as smoking cigarettes. The associated cancer risks from tobacco come from the carcinogens that are created when burning tobacco, not from the nicotine itself

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] mindbleach@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago (20 children)

"It beats smoking" is a low fucking bar.

The science is that putting shit in your lungs is not great. There's no upside for non-smokers. It's a lark. The only truly positive side is that it's objectively better than inhaling smoke, and that only matters if it's a tobacco alternative - and contains nicotine. Which let this low-impact delivery mechanism create new addicts.

Two decades in either direction and the calculus would be trivial. 1990, the way people smoked back then? We'd solve the epidemic overnight. Trade it for vaping in a heartbeat. 2030, the way statistics were headed? Pointless and inexcusable. A brief fad that would linger in countries with hookah culture.

Instead, the worst-case scenario happened immediately. The same murderous liars made money hooking a new generation with a fairly unsafe and hideously addictive chemical. Like they'd previously done by adding filters, and then menthol, and then cloves.

[–] Sausage@kbin.social 26 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Smoking kills 8 million people worldwide every year. I think it's worth pushing the alternatives.

[–] Shrek@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe I read it wrong but what I got from it is this:

Vaping is good as an alternative to non-smokers. The problem is that it's being pushed to non-smokers. It's not as bad as smoking, but the best is neither.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] dismalnow@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Yeah, that's a lot of words when they could've just said "I don't understand risk, harm reduction, any statistics relavent to the topic, or science."

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] dirthawker0@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Vaping was how I quit smoking tobacco and then quit vaping too. I started vaping to quit tobacco using premixed liquids for about 2 years, then switched to mixing my own so I took control of my nicotine intake. Over the course of about 8 months I kept cutting the nicotine in half. I would have a bit of a headache for a couple days then I would get better. After vaping at 0% for about 2 weeks, I noticed I was not picking up the vape as often and I could just leave it on the other side of the room and not care. About another month and I was entirely done. Previously about 1/2 pack a day smoker for 25+ years, now free of everything for about 6 years now.

[–] Th4tGuyII@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago (6 children)

The problem isn't pushing it as an alternative to already active smokers, that's what it was initially touted as...

The problem is it became the new smoking fad. People who never smoked are taking this up, and are now the new generation of hungry addicts to keep the tobacco corps alive and well.

[–] Sausage@kbin.social 16 points 1 year ago (6 children)

An adult should be able to do whatever the fuck they want, as long as it doesn't impact other people. Vaping doesn't emit any carcinogens or toxic substances, and 10 times less nicotine than smoking does. At the end of the day, vaping does far less harm than smoking, and it's easier to reduce the amount of nicotine consumed with vaping. Nicotine also has health benefits, such as slowing down the onset of Parkinson's.

If teenagers are vaping then that's an enforcement issue, but at the same time I would be less worried if I found a vape in my kid's bedroom than a packet of cigarettes. Teenagers will experiement with substances. Nicotne vapes are way down the list of ones I would be worried about.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] itsJoelle@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I haven't smoked a cigarette in six years. Most of the time I use nicotine lozenges during the day, and my vape is for when I'm drinking or I need to fall on my crutch. It's familiar to my known vice, and stopped me from the more dangerous method of handling my addiction.

Grand stand all you will about how it was 'solved' over night, but I got hooked on the bitch in the 2000's due to family history and culture. People still smoke all around me, and it was only a matter of time I tried it and got hooked. And I've made peace with that. That's before we even touch a more terrifying addiction that exists all over my country within opiate-families despite them having a stronger controlled classification. While the chemical exists in the environment potential addicts will happen across it and subsist.

'It beats smoking' is a pretty important bar for me, as an addict, because it reduces harm to myself

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)
[–] BB69@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago (4 children)

If we ban vaping, we should ban cigarettes, cigars, chew, alcohol, and weed as well.

All have a negative effect on your health.

[–] arditty@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Strongly agree. We’ve already learned that prohibition doesn’t work and that people will always find other ways to get their fix.

If flavored vapes are “marketed to children”, what about flavored THC edibles and fruity/candy flavored alcohol? What about energy drinks and highly caffeinated sodas? What about high calorie ultra-palatable foods with absurd quantities of high fructose corn syrup? How is nicotine so different from any of the other drugs that society has decided are socially acceptable?

Humanity has had a relationship with mind altering substances since the dawn of time. It’s ingrained in our cultures, and may even be partially responsible for how human intelligence has adapted to where it is today. Nobody is going to overwrite thousands of years of history by banning vapes. People will just find some other way to access nicotine and other substances, probably by switching back to smoking or chewing. A brief ten-year interval of pushback against smoking in select countries didn’t mean that people no longer wanted nicotine, it just meant that people wanted a less objectionable way of consuming it than burning leaves in paper.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 5 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Yeah, that is basically my view on it. Vaping isn't healthy, but it seems to be healthier than the alternatives. If you aren't willing to ban all nicotine products, just tax it and treat it like other nicotine products.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] markr@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago (6 children)

All advertising for all tobacco products should be banned, including of course the product placement bullshit.

Other than that, and age restrictions, people should have the right to consume it. They should not have the right to force other people to consume it, as in secondhand smoke.

Same with other addictive and/or harmful products.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] paultimate14@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Why do all of these articles always assume all vaping is nicotine-related? It's exchanging the words "e-cigarette" with "vape". Seems irresponsible of the author. It's like writing an article on the dangers of squares and mixing in the word rectangle

[–] handhookcardoor@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Most of these anti smoking articles are written by people who don’t understand smoking devices themselves. Irresponsible for sure.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] gk99@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

Bro I could say the same thing about global warming, vaccines, race, and abortions, but I'm still surrounded by people fighting progress. Vaping is no different.

[–] DLSchichtl@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

When are we, as a society, going to wake up and realize that teenagers are going to do whatever we tell them not to do. It happens over and over and over, but people are still surprised. "That's bad for you" is about as ineffective as a deterrent as it gets. I breath all manner of fumes, exhaust, and whatnot every day. Our land, sea, and food supply is packed to the brim with forever chemicals and microplastics. Those are bad for us, but we seem more worried about what we are intentionally putting in our bodies? Okay, sure.

"They're targeting kids!" Because adults don't like things that taste good, y'know. Fuck the kids. They'll be alright DESPITE all the meddling us adults do.

[–] kryptonicus@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I appreciate your "aww shucks, kids gonna be kids" worldview; however, the data is clear, we have dramatically reduced the rate at which young people smoke cigarettes by instituting rules and guidelines concerning advertising targeting adolescents. Further, we have clear data showing that level of education greatly effects the likelihood of an individual using tobacco.

So with all due respect, this is something we can easily tackle. We know for certain the adolescents respond readily to marketing, and we therefore can control tobacco adoption by reducing said marketing to their demographic. This isn't anywhere near as futile as you're making it out to be.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] mr_rusty_shackleford@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Why are people all of sudden so concerned about other people’s health? I should be able to do just about anything I want to my body, as long as it has minimal impact on those around me. I can understand second hand smoke being a problem indoors, what impacts does exhaling vapor have on others?

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Oh wow governments don't follow the science

[–] Reverendender@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

How are the health risks of vaping marijuana?

[–] Imgonnatrythis@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Data suggest it mainly affects the ability to formulate clear sentences.

[–] refurbishedrefurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 1 year ago (5 children)

(Guesstimating) Better than smoking, but as any doctor will tell you, putting anything that isn't air into your lungs is worse than not putting anything that isn't air into your lungs.

I say this as someone who both smokes and vapes cannabis.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›