I'm not sure I get the point -- from a health perspective -- nicotine isn't the problem, the combustion of tobacco and mode of administration presents 95% of the negative health consequences associated with smoking. So you get ... less drug, more side effects, higher profits for cigarette companies because people will smoke more to get the same nic fix?
Am I missing something here?
In terms of getting everybody else around me who smokes to quit and try vaping instead... that was very exciting back around 2010-2011 or so, but I long ago stopped being a zealot and just answer people's questions if they have them. To each their own, vaping has worked for me, for which I'm very grateful.
They didn't say eliminate nicotine from combustible tobacco, but lowering it. That could be used to encourage smokers to give vaping a real shot, as the nicotine levels will not be reduced there. It will take a lot of consumer education to convince them to switch when they've had years of regarding and labeling vaping as the demon's spawn.
Dating back to the mid 1990s the US government started forcing lower nicotine levels under the cover of improving your health but mostly increasing tax profit. They turned a pack a day, into a 2 packs a day smoker by mid 2000 and with added taxes. In reality yes you are consuming less nicotine per pack but twice if not more tar and carbon monoxide while making up for the nicotine reduction. With vaping starting up around early 2008 we were fighting back against government regulation of watering down our nicotine and getting into our pockets. If it hadn't been for us rebels vaping may have never happened.
Last edited: