The Elephant in the Room

[DancingHeretik]

The reason BT is going into selling ecigs is that smoking has decreased for the first time in decades, most likely due to vaping. No, I do not believe vaping leads to smoking by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[six]

Sadly, I think most on here think it is ok for children to vape...

It's a parenting issue, not a 'make a bunch of laws to be able to levy fines and exert power over others' issue. - Kid vaping = none of my business.

And the "marketing to children" nonsense is a straw man. I have seen no one marketing vaping to children. Flavors don't equal marketing to children.

 

[Ryedan]

So, I see a lot of vapers pointing out the flaws in the reasoning and misperceptions of those opposed to e-cigarettes. However, I really don’t see people talking about the issue that a lot of critics bring up; minors and vaping. I spend a lot of time in shops and checking places out. I have seen many people under 18 vaping and trying to buy e-cigs. Most of the shops in my area are fairly ethical and won’t sell to minors without ID. Even so, I have seen parents who are willing to make these purchases.

I think that the opponents of vaping may have some legitimate points in this matter. My evidence is anecdotal, but I’m willing to wager that there will be studies that show that a number of children are starting to vape. Now, I don’t believe that these products are marketed towards children. Also, I don’t believe that e-cigs are the root of the issue. The fact is that none of us started smoking by accident. We all started smoking for our own reasons, no matter how misguided (I thought that it would make me look cool). The coming generations will continue to do these things for their own reasons, regardless of the existence of e-cigs.

Still, there is going to be a growing population of children vaping. Perhaps the percent of young people who will start using tobacco products will be greater with the advent of vaping. Additionally, there is growing population of adults who have started vaping who never smoked, so I don’t doubt that there is a certain allure to vaping. I’m just curious how other people feel about this. Any comments, thoughts, or death threats are greatly appreciated (I’m kidding about the death threats).

It will be very interesting to see how underaged vaping plays out over time. Yes, it happens and we all know that. I would like to think it does not happen a lot, but I have no stats on it. I would also like to think that the kids who vape are the ones who probably would have been attracted to smoking so it's keeping them away from that, but again I have no stats on it.

I feel that vaping nicotine is not particularly addictive. Smoking has other chemicals involved with nicotine which IMO cause it to be so addictive to a lot of people. I also know of no one who started vaping and then switched to smoking.

I support laws that make it a crime to sell vape products to kids. IMO that is in everyone's best interest just like with cigarettes and alcohol.

 

[pamdis]

So, if there were serious long term complications and 15 percent of the population started to vape now, only to find out 10 years from now that it's a big problem, you would approve because the small group of teenagers that would benefit from their ability to legally buy e-cigs?

Since about 15 percent of teens smoke, I would say yes. I think saving actual smokers from known effects is a good trade off for possible non-smoking vapers maybe suffering from an unknown future.

 

[Plastic Shaman]

I don't think it's inconsistent. I just don't think a law is needed.

Is there a law prohibiting my 10 year old from drinking coffee? Prohibiting my 5 year old from having a paintball gun? There are a lot of things that I can decide are bad for my children that I don't need a law telling me to stop them from doing it.

On the other hand, do the current laws stop minors from smoking, drinking, drugs, tattoos? At some point, a child becomes old enough that neither parents nor laws are going to stop them. Hopefully, by this time, parenting has done it's job to help them make good decisions. But despite our best efforts, they make bad ones anyway. How is a law going to make any difference?

Well, I think we should clarify that the policy reasons that we make laws against minors smoking or drinking are really different than why some people might not want their children drinking coffee. It's really hard to compare them. Coffee might have some minor detriments, but noting on the level of drinking and it's not really addictive on the level of smoking.

To answer your question, laws are deterrents. They make things harder to do. Obviously people are going to do it either way, but laws are meant to reduce the occurrence of such actions. By your reasoning, all laws are irrelevant because people are going to break them. Furthermore, laws banning the sales of such things not only make it harder for children to purchase, but it gives a disincentive for people to sell to them.

 

[Plastic Shaman]

Since about 15 percent of teens smoke, I would say yes. I think saving actual smokers from known effects is a good trade off for possible non-smoking vapers maybe suffering from an unknown future.

Alright, let me clarify my point. Let's say it was 15% more than normally would have started smoking. So, if your number is correct, then 30% of the population.

 

[pamdis]

Well, I think we should clarify that the policy reasons that we make laws against minors smoking or drinking are really different than why some people might not want their children drinking coffee. It's really hard to compare them. Coffee might have some minor detriments, but noting on the level of drinking and it's not really addictive on the level of smoking.

To answer your question, law a deterrents. They make things harder to do. Obviously people are going to do it either way, but laws are meant to reduce the occurrence of such actions. By your reasoning, all laws are irrelevant because people are going to break them. Furthermore, laws banning the sales of such things not only make it harder for children to purchase, but it gives a disincentive for people to sell to them.

I would agree with you there. Possibly we disagree on the detriments of vaping that rise to the level of needing any deterrent.

 

[pamdis]

Alright, let me clarify my point. Let's say it was 15% more than normally would have started smoking. So, if your number is correct, then 30% of the population.

I say let's deal with it in 10 years when we know.

 

[Plastic Shaman]

It will be very interesting to see how underaged vaping plays out over time. Yes, it happens and we all know that. I would like to think it does not happen a lot, but I have no stats on it. I would also like to think that the kids who vape are the ones who probably would have been attracted to smoking so it's keeping them away from that, but again I have no stats on it.

I feel that vaping nicotine is not particularly addictive. Smoking has other chemicals involved with nicotine which IMO cause it to be so addictive to a lot of people. I also know of no one who started vaping and then switched to smoking.

I support laws that make it a crime to sell vape products to kids. IMO that is in everyone's best interest just like with cigarettes and alcohol.

I would like to think that only children who will smoke will vape, but I doubt that that's realistic. Unlike smoking, vaping doesn't stink, make you cough, or cost a fortune. It tastes good, it's fun for a lot of people, is part of a whole subculture that sees it as some more than a cessation device, and is often believed to be healthier than smoking. Now, I have no idea how healthy it is, nor does anyone else at this point, but I think that there is the possibility that it could be bad for you and I think that there is a strong possibility that more people will be drawn into it than smoking.

 

[Plastic Shaman]

Pamdis, I don't disagree that vaping will probably not be as bad for a person as smoking. If we look at things on a spectrum of potential risk, it surely falls in between smoking, which is really bad for you, and coffee, which is probably fairly benign. But, I think, because of the nature of constantly inhaling food additives that were never intended to be inhaled, it is probably on the more dangerous side of things. Because of that, I think it would fall into a category that we would want to control. I have a hard time beliving that waiting for a decade to find out is a good idea.

 

[Ryedan]

I would like to think that only children who will smoke will vape, but I doubt that that's realistic. Unlike smoking doesn't stink, make you cough, or cost a fortune. It tastes good, it's fun for a lot of people, is part of a whole subculture that sees it as some more than a cessation device, and is often believed to be healthier than smoking. Now, I have no idea how healthy it is, nor does anyone else at this point, but I think that there is the possibility that it could be bad for you and I think that there is a strong possibility that more people will be drawn into it than smoking.

Well, people have been vaping since 2007, so we already have seven years of history to fall back on and there are no indications yet of problems. I started in early 2012 and that was one thing that helped sway me in favor of switching from smoking.

Yes, it could turn out to have health risks that we don't know of yet, but there should be that buffer in the system. It is also I believe fairly easy to stop vaping, much easier compared to stopping to smoke, so once risks are identified people should be able to stop vaping if they chose to do so. I think in a little while we will know how many people that didn't smoke start vaping and be able to compare those numbers to how many fewer people than anticipated started smoking and so get a handle on things. Until then it's anyone's guess how big, or small that number will be.

 

[FlamingoTutu]

I'm not against them enacting a law to only sell to 18 year olds. More and more places are doing it and some raising it to 21. By the time it was legal for me to buy cigarettes, I had already been trying to quit them for several years. If I'd vaped, I could have just quit. How long do you think vaping will hold the interest of a 13 year old? It would be nice if they would stop with the headlines that underage vaping is rampant when the question is, "Have you tried an ecigarette in the past 12 months."

 

[VNeil]

If we are going to restrict Vaping in any way among adults, for the sake of "The Children", then we need to review every product sold and similarly restrict them because children will always have access to all products, one way or another.

"For The Children" is an argument used when no other rational argument works. It plays on emotions, not rational logic. It is used solely to justify restricting the rights of adults. As was mentioned previously, it can be argued children should not consume caffeine, but a 10 year old can walk in any store and buy a can of coffee. Children should not have uncontrolled access to many over the counter drugs and medicines, but I am not aware of any restrictions on them (except NRT products!). Yet restricting sales to those over the age of 18 isn't good enough? I call BS.

I am a parent with 2 children, When they were children they were my responsibility, I didn't expect society to restrict the rights of adults due to any shortcomings in my ability to raise them properly. .

 

[Ryedan]

The reason BT is going into selling ecigs is that smoking has decreased for the first time in decades, most likely due to vaping. No, I do not believe vaping leads to smoking by any stretch of the imagination.

No, smoking has been going down reasonably steadily since 1965 in the US by an average of 0.5% per year. My gut feel is it's hard to determine from the available statistics how many smokers have actually switched to vaping lately.

 

[Plastic Shaman]

If we are going to restrict Vaping in any way among adults, for the sake of "The Children", then we need to review every product sold and similarly restrict them because children will always have access to all products, one way or another.

"For The Children" is an argument used when no other rational argument works. It plays on emotions, not rational logic. It is used solely to justify restricting the rights of adults. As was mentioned previously, it can be argued children should not consume caffeine, but a 10 year old can walk in any store and buy a can of coffee. Children should not have uncontrolled access to many over the counter drugs and medicines, but I am not aware of any restrictions on them (except NRT products!). Yet restricting sales to those over the age of 18 isn't good enough? I call BS.

I am a parent with 2 children, When they were children they were my responsibility, I didn't expect society to restrict the rights of adults due to any shortcomings in my ability to raise them properly. .

I've got to disagree. There is a rationale to the argument. The average human's prefrontal cortext, the part of the brain that controls decision making, doesn't fully develop until around 25. Now, there is a huge problem with how we decide to apply laws and which things to keep away from children, but we do need to make some laws when the act or product is dangerous enough that we don't want a child deciding that for themselves. It would be nice if all parents were responsible or if they were all able to control their children, but that isn't the case.

 

[Ryedan]

It would be nice if all parents were responsible or if they were all able to control their children, but that isn't the case.

Now, that's a completely different issue and I'm not going to get started on that. Trust me, we're all better off this way and I get to avoid an unplanned vacation from ECF

 

[Plastic Shaman]

Now, that's a completely different issue and I'm not going to get started on that. Trust me, we're all better off this way and I get to avoid an unplanned vacation from ECF

I agree, but my point is that it's not realistic to say that we shouldn't pass any laws that restrict children from certain acts.

 

[VNeil]

I've got to disagree. There is a rationale to the argument. The average human's prefrontal cortext, the part of the brain that controls decision making, doesn't fully develop until around 25. Now, there is a huge problem with how we decide to apply laws and which things to keep away from children, but we do need to make some laws when the act or product is dangerous enough that we don't want a child deciding that for themselves. It would be nice if all parents were responsible or if they were all able to control their children, but that isn't the case.

You are missing the point. I am not against laws to restrict sales to minors. Although I do believe that perhaps coffee should be similarly restricted since caffeine and nicotine have more in common than not, but that is a side issue we should not go down.

The point I *AM* making is that we should not restrict these products when sold to adults, The "Elephant" argument is not about restricting sales to minors. It is about restricting sales to adults in order to prevent incidental use by minors evading the laws restricting sales to them.

 

[towelie]

your kid, your problem...generally speaking.

a law banning vape products to minors? already exists...no nicotine to minors.

i find it supremely ironic the makers of vuse ecigs are using this very argument to attempt to ban "open system" competition through the fda...as if the fda has the authority to ban a flashlight, vegtable glycerine, nicotine, flavor extracts or any combination thereof.

 

[Maiar]

If an underage person wants to vape as an alternative to smoking then that's the parents decision to make and they can purchase it for their kid if they want. I have zero issue with that. I also have no problem with it being advertised as an option for youth that smoke. But like buying something online, parents permission required. This would facilitate conversations between kids and parents. I just don't like the idea that any kid, who may or may not smoke, could have easy access to something that contains a highly addictive substance. I'm up in Canada, and every local shop I've seen here won't even let anyone under 18 into the stores. I'm fine with that too. I can speak from experience though, if vaping had been an option when I started smoking I would have picked it over tobacco to start. Because nicotine is awesome. I imagine a lot of kids would probably do the same. I would have.