Should Children be Allowed to Buy e-Liquids that contain Nicotine?

[Jman8]

Since I"ve read at least 4 instances of mech mods burning holes in pockets just this last month on this forum, by those who didn't know the safety measures involved or didn't follow them, I can only say:

I imagine that an ecig catching fire on a school bus would definitely fall under the title of "distracting*.

The other point is are children more knowledgeable about these issues, and/or do they have the maturity to be able to use that knowledge to remain safe and keep others around them safe.........if grown adults, with some knowledge of vaping, aren't all succeeding in this respect?

I guess, in the absence of a reasonable response, we can just revert to calling everybody stoooopid. Or careless. But that is not the response I'm looking for.....I'm actually looking for a thoughful answer.

You've presented a classic example of adultism.

If the answer is - not all children will exercise the knowledge to remain safe and keep others around them safe, then it would be stereotyping / discrimination to suggest that all children should be denied. Because you are an adult and apparently have little trouble asking the question but, also apparently, don't recognize the bias, let me ask the same question you asked but change the noun and see if you think it helps to understand the bias at work.

The other point is are women more knowledgeable about these issues, and/or do they have the maturity to be able to use that knowledge to remain safe and keep others around them safe.........if grown men, with some knowledge of vaping, aren't all succeeding in this respect?

 

[Lessifer]

oh oh. i wouldn't use the "addictive" word here. Dependent is okay. In case you didn't get the memo ... prevailing opinion here is that nictotine is not addictive.

Many vapers claim that vaping is a hobby.......there is no addiction. Others claim that it is a dependency but not an addiction. Other vapers claim that neither is true, but that they enjoy the effects of nicotine and so does their body/health.

Not saying I agree or disagree, just saying you are bound to run up against this issue if you remain in these kind of topics.

I don't mind the word addiction, when used in the proper context, which this wasn't but I let slide. I am addicted to nicotine, I became addicted when I smoked tobacco.

I fully believe the notion that nicotine by itself(as we are using it) is not addictive, especially since the growing body of evidence that points to this is not coming from BT, BP, or the vaping industry but from medical research.

Since I"ve read at least 4 instances of mech mods burning holes in pockets just this last month on this forum, by those who didn't know the safety measures involved or didn't follow them, I can only say:

I imagine that an ecig catching fire on a school bus would definitely fall under the title of "distracting*.

The other point is are children more knowledgeable about these issues, and/or do they have the maturity to be able to use that knowledge to remain safe and keep others around them safe.........if grown adults, with some knowledge of vaping, aren't all succeeding in this respect?

I guess, in the absence of a reasonable response, we can just revert to calling everybody stoooopid. Or careless. But that is not the response I'm looking for.....I'm actually looking for a thoughful answer.

Those accusations surface all the time in topics about things happening to children, and of course, it's always because they have neglectful, stooopid parents.........despite the fact that we know that things happen, in a split second, to children with watchful repsonsible parents......but there aren't many here who work in trauma centers or ERs and know these things.......

1. You've just made a point for no one to be allowed to vape, at least with a mech mod.
2. If you're saying that adults are sometimes stupid, and kids are inherently more stupid, that's debatable.
3. Just because it is legal for kids to buy something does not mean that children of all ages actually will.
4. If you want to require a minimum safety course, free of charge, for ANYONE buying vape gear, I'm all for it.
5. Yes, at some point, adults have to be responsible for what their offspring purchase/use/misuse. If you allow your 12 year old to buy something, you should make sure that he/she knows how to use it safely.

A child having the money to purchase a mech mod, battery, charger, atomizer, liquid, and learning how to use it, even improperly, isn't something that happens in a split second.



ETA: I will say this though, yours is the first reasoned response I can recall seeing that actually provides an argument, instead of just a feeling, though it doesn't really deal with the issue of nicotine.

 

[Racehorse]

I don't mind the word addiction, when used in the proper context, which this wasn't but I let slide. I am addicted to nicotine, I became addicted when I smoked tobacco.

I fully believe the notion that nicotine by itself(as we are using it) is not addictive, especially since the growing body of evidence that points to this is not coming from BT, BP, or the vaping industry but from medical research.

I have not done as extensive reading on this subject as you have, and it may very well be that there were other things in cigarettes that addicted us, not nicotine. Perhaps there is some kind of habituation that is stronger with cigs than with vaping, I know I have noticed that myself. I can put down vaping in a way I was unable to put down cigs.

I am not really against nicotine anyway.


HOWEVER, I do adhere to the idea that Adults may make a decision to become "lab rats" ..... sorry, but I don't believe children can or should be making that decision. If that is discriminatory, then so be it. That is because, like most adults who have been around children, I know how they make decsions. It is very different from the way in which most adults make decisions.

Most parents here understand what I am saying.

You've presented a classic example of adultism.

Its becoming obvious that some of the people on this board will stop at nothing to make sure their agenda is advanced.......in this case, even an 6 year old or 8 year old should be able to vape ---- lest one be accused of adultism.


"Any restriction or exploitation of people because of their young age, as opposed to their ability, comprehension, or capacity, may be said to be adultist. "


While you're campaigning for the right of children to vape, lets make sure we don't disallow *children* from being executors of Wills, voting, purchasing contraception, holding office, and while we're at it, drive a motor vehicle, or become child soldiers....heck........ lets even change the Age of Consent, too. Heck, so as not to engage in adultism, let's erase ALL BOUNDARIES which discriminatorily note differences, based on age, between adults and children.


All those "mileposts" that neuroscientists, psychologists, etc. note, regarding the actual developmental stages which describe the growth stages (physically, emotionally, and intellectually) of actual human beings? Toss 'em! Since they do seem rather *discriminatory*.



What a bunch of nutty psycho-babble. But carry on. For my part, it's good to know who you're dealing with when having a conversation.

 

[Jman8]

Its becoming obvious that some of the people on this board will stop at nothing to make sure their agenda is advanced.......in this case, even an 6 year old or 8 year old should be able to vape ---- lest one be accused of adultism.

It's funny that you are engaging in bigotry. Ha ha ha ha. (Not)

"Any restriction or exploitation of people because of their young age, as opposed to their ability, comprehension, or capacity, may be said to be adultist. "


While you're campaigning for the right of children to vape, lets make sure we don't disallow *children* from being executors of Wills, voting, purchasing contraception, holding office, and while we're at it, drive a motor vehicle, or become child soldiers....heck........ lets even change the Age of Consent, too. Heck, so as not to engage in adultism, let's erase ALL BOUNDARIES which discriminatorily note differences, based on age, between adults and children.


All those "mileposts" that neuroscientists, psychologists, etc. note, regarding the actual developmental stages which describe the growth stages (physically, emotionally, and intellectually) of actual human beings? Toss 'em! Since they do seem rather *discriminatory*.

I wonder if these same scientists would note any developmental disparities between people of different genders (physically, emotionally and intellectually)?

If yes, then perhaps we could discriminate against all men based on this and think we be smart. Women are allowed to vape, men not because, well, you know. Fundamental differences.

To which I think you might say....

What a bunch of nutty psycho-babble. But carry on. For my part, it's good to know who you're dealing with when having a conversation.

 

[Cavenerd]

The idea is that believing that vaping is harmful to children, stands on the belief that vaping is harmful, and if vaping is harmful I don't want you to do it near my kid, or near me, and really you shouldn't be doing it at all so if you continue to do it we're going to tax the hell out of it to discourage your use, because we care.

To put it another way, what is the basis of your "moral choice?" What exactly are you keeping the children safe from?

So the crux of the argument is that vaping has to be 100% safe in order for it to not be legislated against. In turn, that means NIC (in the form we use it) HAS to be 100% safe in order for it to not be legislated against.

I'm not in favor of across the board regulation for NIC or juice, but It also hasn't been proven, to me, that NIC (as we use it) is completely non-habit forming or addictive. Where are these studies? Who wrote them, who peer reviewed them and what medical center or education institution published them?

I'm not trying to be counter but I think these are reasonable questions that need to be asked, at the very least.

The moral decision I alluded to is what was stated: children should not have access to purchase or possess NIC until it is proven and medically accepted to be non-habit forming and not addictive. To allow them to have access, I believe, is immoral and irresponsible, and until I can make an informed decision, I'll make a safe decision.

It concerns me that decades ago smoking was thought to be non-harmful and now, much later, we KNOW smoking is bad for you. Do I think vaping is much less harmful. Absolutely. Am I convinced that there are no adverse effects? Not yet, but we've been studying vapor and vaping for only a very short time. I'm saying until we have all the information, from non-partisan sources, we should make the decision that protects, at the very least, children.

 

[zoiDman]

Tell zoiDman, with regards to post #241 that the answer to his question (as well as the meaning of life) is:

42

See this is the Glaring Hole in the "Let's make it Legal for Kids to Buy Nicotine" argument. And those who are for it Don't seem to want to Answer a Fundamental Question.

Do we want to give Kids who Don't Smoke Legal access to Nicotine knowing that they will Buy it?

Because that's what Making Nicotine Legal for Kids will do. And the Number of Kids who Don't Smoke but Now Use Nicotine via e-Liquids will Far Exceed the Number Kids who Smoke.

To make a Very Applicable Pun... "They are throwing the Baby Out with the Bath Water."

The Pro Nicotine for Kids Argument is Also Flawed in that a Small Percentage of Kids are Smoking, when Buying Cigarettes is Illegal. So Why would these Kids who Can Obtain Cigarettes Illegally have any problems Obtaining e-Cigarettes?

 

[zoiDman]

...

Its becoming obvious that some of the people on this board will stop at nothing to make sure their agenda is advanced.......in this case, even an 6 year old or 8 year old should be able to vape ---- lest one be accused of adultism.


"Any restriction or exploitation of people because of their young age, as opposed to their ability, comprehension, or capacity, may be said to be adultist. "


While you're campaigning for the right of children to vape, lets make sure we don't disallow *children* from being executors of Wills, voting, purchasing contraception, holding office, and while we're at it, drive a motor vehicle, or become child soldiers....heck........ lets even change the Age of Consent, too. Heck, so as not to engage in adultism, let's erase ALL BOUNDARIES which discriminatorily note differences, based on age, between adults and children.


All those "mileposts" that neuroscientists, psychologists, etc. note, regarding the actual developmental stages which describe the growth stages (physically, emotionally, and intellectually) of actual human beings? Toss 'em! Since they do seem rather *discriminatory*.



What a bunch of nutty psycho-babble. But carry on. For my part, it's good to know who you're dealing with when having a conversation.

Yeah... I Hear that.

And it seems to be a Page right out of the ANTZ Manual.

 

[zoiDman]

Somehow you've missed the point. I would leave it up to the school to decide their policy about use on school property, including school buses. Though, since as you already know, I don't have an issue(with the current evidence) with anyone vaping, I wouldn't personally be against it. On the bus might pose a distraction issue for the driver, so again, I'd leave that up to the school.

...

Just a Question.

When e-Liquids that contain Nicotine are "Deemed" a Tobacco Product at the Federal Level, do you Really Believe that there is Much Chance of them Being used on City, County, State or Federal Properties where Smoking is Now Currently Banned?

It would be a Shame if a Child couldn't put their APV down for Some Reason, and then had to hop on a School Bus and Couldn't Vape all day Until they Got Off that same Bus in the Afternoon.

Its Hard to Teach to Kids when their Attention is Distracted by thoughts of Where can I take a Stealth Hit before Math Class.

 

[Lessifer]

So the crux of the argument is that vaping has to be 100% safe in order for it to not be legislated against. In turn, that means NIC (in the form we use it) HAS to be 100% safe in order for it to not be legislated against.

I'm not in favor of across the board regulation for NIC or juice, but It also hasn't been proven, to me, that NIC (as we use it) is completely non-habit forming or addictive. Where are these studies? Who wrote them, who peer reviewed them and what medical center or education institution published them?

I'm not trying to be counter but I think these are reasonable questions that need to be asked, at the very least.

The moral decision I alluded to is what was stated: children should not have access to purchase or possess NIC until it is proven and medically accepted to be non-habit forming and not addictive. To allow them to have access, I believe, is immoral and irresponsible, and until I can make an informed decision, I'll make a safe decision.

It concerns me that decades ago smoking was thought to be non-harmful and now, much later, we KNOW smoking is bad for you. Do I think vaping is much less harmful. Absolutely. Am I convinced that there are no adverse effects? Not yet, but we've been studying vapor and vaping for only a very short time. I'm saying until we have all the information, from non-partisan sources, we should make the decision that protects, at the very least, children.

Nothing is 100% safe, I disagree that vaping needs to be regulated any more than many other products people of all ages enjoy.

Here are a few articles/studies about nicotine, and it's lack of developed dependency in the absence of tobacco:
Nicotine, the Wonder Drug? | DiscoverMagazine.com

Professor: Nicotine does not cause cigarette addiction | The State Press - An independent daily serving Arizona State University

http://smokefree.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/mythsaboutNRTfactsheet.pdf

Here's one about actual sugar addiction, physical dependence, for comparison:
5 Clues You Are Addicted To Sugar - Dr. Mark Hyman

If you're still unsure, I get that, we've been lied to a lot, probably by both sides. I would simply argue that instead of being FOR an age restriction in the absence of evidence, one that would be near impossible to remove later, that we simply abstain from legislation until we know enough.

 

[Lessifer]

Just a Question.

When e-Liquids that contain Nicotine are "Deemed" a Tobacco Product at the Federal Level, do you Really Believe that there is Much Chance of them Being used on City, County, State or Federal Properties where Smoking is Now Currently Banned?

It would be a Shame if a Child couldn't put their APV down for Some Reason, and then had to hop on a School Bus and Couldn't Vape all day Until they Got Off that same Bus in the Afternoon.

Its Hard to Teach to Kids when their Attention is Distracted by thoughts of Where can I take a Stealth Hit before Math Class.

I don't believe they SHOULD be deemed a tobacco product, since they contain no more tobacco than a pepsi contains coffee. In addition, unless that child was a heavy smoker before they picked up vaping, they are not going to have the dependence on their APV that a former smoker does.

I've presented you evidence to back my opinion, you've presented rhetoric.

Since you refuse to acknowledge, or probably even read, what I present, and are unable to present your own evidence, we, again, are at an impasse.

 

[zoiDman]

I don't believe they SHOULD be deemed a tobacco product, since they contain no more tobacco than a pepsi contains coffee. In addition, unless that child was a heavy smoker before they picked up vaping, they are not going to have the dependence on their APV that a former smoker does.

I've presented you evidence to back my opinion, you've presented rhetoric.

Since you refuse to acknowledge, or probably even read, what I present, and are unable to present your own evidence, we, again, are at an impasse.

Here's the Deal Lessifer.

Whether e-Liquids that contain Nicotine derived from tobacco plants Should or Shouldn't be deemed a Tobacco Product is Immaterial. Because they Are going to deemed as a Tobacco Product.

That Train left the Station back in 2009. And it Aint coming back. So maybe it is Time to move on? And start Considering things that Are going to happen. And Not what Should or Should have happened.

What you consider Rhetoric is at the Core of what Many People have a Problem with when it comes to Kids buying Nicotine.

And that is that Kids who Do Not Smoke will start using Nicotine via e-Cigarettes.

 

[Lessifer]

Here's the Deal Lessifer.

Whether e-Liquids that contain Nicotine derived from tobacco plants Should or Shouldn't be deemed a Tobacco Product is Immaterial. Because they Are going to deemed as a Tobacco Product.

That Train left the Station back in 2009. And it Aint coming back. So maybe it is Time to move on? And start Considering things that Are going to happen. And Not what Should or Should have happened.

What you consider Rhetoric is at the Core of what Many People have a Problem with when it comes to Kids buying Nicotine.

And that is that Kids who Do Not Smoke will start using Nicotine via e-Cigarettes.

It hasn't been deemed yet, I can still hold out hope, and try to spread information as much as possible until that happens.

As for what's at the core of Many People's Problem... If you would actually read the articles that I link to, you would see that the evidence shows that exposure to Nicotine, is not the same as exposure to Tobacco. I get you don't want kids to start smoking, I don't want that either, I don't really want kids to start regularly using nicotine either, unless it is something that could be beneficial to them. Like if they have ADHD, or tourette's, are at risk for parkinson's or alzheimer's. What the evidence shows though is that using nicotine, without using tobacco, does NOT develop dependence. Failing to acknowledge that does nothing more than helping others demonize vaping, and equating it to smoking.

 

[renacer]

If a minor already smokes I don't see a problem with them vaping with their parents' approval.

 

[zoiDman]

It hasn't been deemed yet, I can still hold out hope, and try to spread information as much as possible until that happens.

As for what's at the core of Many People's Problem... If you would actually read the articles that I link to, you would see that the evidence shows that exposure to Nicotine, is not the same as exposure to Tobacco. I get you don't want kids to start smoking, I don't want that either, I don't really want kids to start regularly using nicotine either, unless it is something that could be beneficial to them. Like if they have ADHD, or tourette's, are at risk for parkinson's or alzheimer's. What the evidence shows though is that using nicotine, without using tobacco, does NOT develop dependence. Failing to acknowledge that does nothing more than helping others demonize vaping, and equating it to smoking.

Lessifer, I Don't want Kids to Smoke. And I also Don't want Kids to use e-Cigarettes.

Addiction aside. Can you tell me what the Developmental Impact of Adolescents using Nicotine? How about the Long Term Harm on Inhaling Food Flavorings and Artificial Sweeteners?

 

[zoiDman]

If a minor already smokes I don't see a problem with them vaping with their parents' approval.

How do you Feel about Minors who Do Not Smoke using e-Cigarettes?

 

[Lessifer]

Lessifer, I Don't want Kids to Smoke. And I also Don't want Kids to use e-Cigarettes.

Addiction aside. Can you tell me what the Developmental Impact of Adolescents using Nicotine? How about the Long Term Harm on Inhaling Food Flavorings and Artificial Sweeteners?

Can you? Since you want to BAN something(for a certain age group) and I simply want to let things exist, you should be the one to provide a reason. Not an "it COULD be harmful" but actual evidence.

As for the Developmental Impact of adolescents using nicotine, alone that info isn't available yet, in tobacco smoke, we're all(all of us who started smoking before age 18) anecdotal evidence that the effects aren't devastating, at least not to everyone.

 

[zoiDman]

Can you? Since you want to BAN something(for a certain age group) and I simply want to let things exist, you should be the one to provide a reason. Not an "it COULD be harmful" but actual evidence.

As for the Developmental Impact of adolescents using nicotine, alone that info isn't available yet, in tobacco smoke, we're all(all of us who started smoking before age 18) anecdotal evidence that the effects aren't devastating, at least not to everyone.

So We have No Info on Potential Harm to a Childs Developing Body when He/She Ingests Nicotine.

And there is Also No Info on the Potential Harm for Habitual Inhalation of Food Flavorings and Artificial Sweeteners at the Dosages seen with e-Cigarettes. Either for Children or Adults.

But we should sell e-Liquids to ALL Kids because a Very Small Percentage of them Smoke.

Gotcha.

 

[Lessifer]

So We have No Info on Potential Harm to a Childs Developing Body when He/She Ingests Nicotine.

And there is Also No Info on the Potential Harm for Habitual Inhalation of Food Flavorings and Artificial Sweeteners at the Dosages seen with e-Cigarettes. Either for Children or Adults.

But we should REFRAIN FROM IMPOSING A LEGAL BAN THAT WILL BE NEAR IMPOSSIBLE TO REPEAL, AND GIVES THE ANTI-VAPING CROWD THEIR BEST ARGUMENT.

Gotcha.

There, fixed it for you.

 

[zoiDman]

There, fixed it for you.

Whatever makes you Happy Lessifer.

It's your Universe. I'm just Passing thru It.

 

[erikajeanT87]

DMAF - Ask Jman8 if he has he way, and there is No Age Limits for Kids to buy Nicotine, how many Kids will Buy Nicotine and start using e-Cigarettes who Don't Smoke?

Tell zoiDman, with regards to post #241 that the answer to his question (as well as the meaning of life) is:

42

Whoa Whoa Whoa I know I'm halfway neutral but I didn't realize I was a mediator now. Then I guess it's time for me to lay down some