Teen vaping is not what you think it is, researchers say

[HauntedMyst]

Pretty good story

Teen vaping is not what you think it is, researchers say

 

[Rossum]

So goobermint doesn't need to save the children after all?

And the Washington Post is willing to admit that?

Hath Hades suddenly frozen over?

 

[Lessifer]

Pretty good story

Teen vaping is not what you think it is, researchers say

I want to like this story. There's a wary, cynical part of me that feels there's another angle that I can't quite put into words yet. Something along the lines of, even if there's no nicotine, there's still a need to regulate heavily, to protect the children.

 

[LoveVanilla]

Nice. Could be a siliver of light through the cellblock door but the FDA seems set on prohibition. Pass the moonshine, will you?

 

[CarolT]

This is the first one I've seen that doesn't toss in a bunch of gratuitous lies against smoking.

 

[Kent C]

I want to like this story. There's a wary, cynical part of me that feels there's another angle that I can't quite put into words yet. Something along the lines of, even if there's no nicotine, there's still a need to regulate heavily, to protect the children.

There are some 'hints' of that but in this case, the author hits back rather hard with data contrary to the common 'dangers' - gateway, nic addiction, etc. About the only thing left open was the 'we don't know enough' - this is where the long term VG and PG Dow Chem studies, and Pierce's study on diacetyl belong.

Most of the 'mixed pieces' we see point out the benefits first, then counter with the 'downsides', and it is the downsides people are left with - hence what looks like a "balanced piece" is in reality just more propaganda. Sequence matters. Much like the Hajek, Burnstyn, Polosa, et al., studies that list the junk science stuff then follow up with how they are junk science and then showing true science studies that show the opposite.

 

[Lessifer]

There are some 'hints' of that but in this case, the author hits back rather hard with data contrary to the common 'dangers' - gateway, nic addiction, etc. About the only thing left open was the 'we don't know enough' - this is where the long term VG and PG Dow Chem studies, and Pierce's study on diacetyl belong.

Most of the 'mixed pieces' we see point out the benefits first, then counter with the 'downsides', and it is the downsides people are left with - hence what looks like a "balanced piece" is in reality just more propaganda. Sequence matters. Much like the Hajek, Burnstyn, Polosa, et al., studies that list the junk science stuff then follow up with how they are junk science and then showing true science studies that show the opposite.

Right. My comment was less about the piece and more about the researcher quoted in the piece.

This final paragraph of the piece, which is a quote from the researcher, doesn't make me feel warm and fuzzy.

"In conclusion, the majority of US youth who use vaporizers and e-cigarettes do not vape nicotine," the researchers wrote. "This finding challenges many common assumptions and practices, and points to the need for vaporizer-specific research to assess and ultimately regulate the public health threat of vaporizers."

 

[Kent C]

Right. My comment was less about the piece and more about the researcher quoted in the piece.

This final paragraph of the piece, which is a quote from the researcher, doesn't make me feel warm and fuzzy.

Understood and agreed.

 

[Endor]

So goobermint doesn't need to save the children after all?

And the Washington Post is willing to admit that?

Hath Hades suddenly frozen over?

No kidding... my thoughts exactly.

I want to like this story. There's a wary, cynical part of me that feels there's another angle that I can't quite put into words yet. Something along the lines of, even if there's no nicotine, there's still a need to regulate heavily, to protect the children.

We have all become cynical... and yes, "we" includes me, who immediately tried to read between the lines on this stories to see what pro-regulation/pro-government propaganda angle they are trying to work. This is especially true when the story is in a traditionally liberal newspaper like the Washington Post, NY Times, LA Times, et al.

This article was surprisingly fair, and I'm glad to see mainstream coverage of a fact that we've known for a while, that teenagers normally use zero-nic.

Heck, 6 percent of them use eliquid that contains "that stuff", which isn't part of the FDA deeming. As a society, we should be MUCH more concerned over the use of "that stuff" versus nicotine, yet nobody seems to care.

 

[Semiretired]

That is probably why the FDA does not want to give 0 nic a break...

 

[WorksForMe]

That is probably why the FDA does not want to give 0 nic a break...

While that may play a part it this, I think the FDA knows that without including 0-nic juice, the regulations for all open systems fall apart. If 0-nic juice is legal, open system devices to vape it must be legal too. At that point, all you would need is a little black market nic.

 

[sofarsogood]

The appeal of smoking/vaping to kids is visual. If there was no visible smoke or vapor there wouldn't be much attraction. Is there something primordial about "fire breathing"?

 

[Lessifer]

My thinking here is, they're not going to be able to play the evils of nicotine card forever. So, embrace it, and the fact that most teens aren't using nicotine, then explain why the children still need to be protected from the public health threat that is vaping.

 

[pennysmalls]

The appeal of smoking/vaping to kids is visual. If there was no visible smoke or vapor there wouldn't be much attraction. Is there something primordial about "fire breathing"?

That is exactly what got me started. I thought it looked magical and began experimenting at 9 years old.

 

[sofarsogood]

Today I talked with a highschool aged girl who is a dual user but mostly smokes. Her mother, who also smokes, was in on the conversation. The way a lot of kids get cigarettes is to steal them from parents who smoke. (My parents didn't smoke.) The girl told me lots of kids are vaping in her school. Some are dual users. A big theme seems to be kids using vaping as a form of rebellion. There are suspensions because of vaping but it sounds like the suspended vapers would be making some other kind of trouble or already are. I bet kids who want to vape in peace are succeeding. But may be most of the vaping is a social statement and if it wasn't vaping it would be something else.

I was smoking in highschool days and was never caught or confronted about it. In the Spring time we smuggled squirt guns into the building and staged ambushes and big shootouts in the stairwells. I was never caught doing that either.

 

[sofarsogood]

This may be the actual published paper.
What are kids vaping? Results from a national survey of US adolescents | Tobacco Control

 

[Semiretired]

My thinking here is, they're not going to be able to play the evils of nicotine card forever. So, embrace it, and the fact that most teens aren't using nicotine, then explain why the children still need to be protected from the public health threat that is vaping.

But by then they will have already steeped the country with control over all products and nothing that we know today will get to come back because they will never approve it.

 

[choochoogranny]

If the FDA is so worried about the "kids" picking up smoking, aren't they admitting that their "educational" products/programs all these many years are failures?

 

[Endor]

Today I talked with a highschool aged girl who is a dual user but mostly smokes. Her mother, who also smokes, was in on the conversation. The way a lot of kids get cigarettes is to steal them from parents who smoke. (My parents didn't smoke.) The girl told me lots of kids are vaping in her school. Some are dual users. A big theme seems to be kids using vaping as a form of rebellion. There are suspensions because of vaping but it sounds like the suspended vapers would be making some other kind of trouble or already are. I bet kids who want to vape in peace are succeeding. But may be most of the vaping is a social statement and if it wasn't vaping it would be something else.

I was smoking in highschool days and was never caught or confronted about it. In the Spring time we smuggled squirt guns into the building and staged ambushes and big shootouts in the stairwells. I was never caught doing that either.

Thanks for sharing this. Nothing is more interesting to a high school adolescent than something they aren't supposed to have (or do).

Back in the early and mid 1980s, smoking was already on its way out of favor, with public health starting their heavy anti-smoking propaganda. As teenagers, we smoked because we weren't supposed to.

We also drank alcohol because we weren't supposed to. Half the fun of drinking was finding the liquor stores that would sell to minors, typically by allowing you to sneak in through the back so a cop driving by didn't see a bunch of 15 year olds walking out with a twelve pack. It was all so covert, rebellious, giving the middle finger to authority and laws... good times.

Nothing has changed. Vaping has been demonized, so some kids will vape just because of that. The kids you mention probably dual-use because its a double-whammy of rebellion ("Look, I smoke AND vape!").

 

[Endor]

If the FDA is so worried about the "kids" picking up smoking, aren't they admitting that their "educational" products/programs all these many years are failures?

The FDA (and ANTZ) will claim that the education programs don't work because of the siren song of the Big Evil Tobacco Companies(tm) to hook youngsters on nicotine addiction. "Woe is me, it's a constant uphill battle to keep the cheeldren off nicotine!"

The truth is... A certain percentage of the population is prone to risky activities, hence a certain percentage of the population will always smoke. That includes teenagers. Even if you look at the statistics, the number of smokers in this country has been pretty steady for many years....at least until vaping came along.