Here's another one, just posted:
Many people have found vaporizers to be a powerful smoking cessation tool. Those who have switched have lowered their blood pressure, improved respiratory health, dramatically cut their risk of contracting lung cancer, and improved their lifespan. They are no longer a detriment to non-smokers, reeking of stale smoke and ash. People have improved their lives, and what sort of publicity has this gotten? Complete, unwarranted negativity. It seems as though media and local governments have fought fervently to restrict the use and availability of such products. For what reason, I cannot fathom.
There are millions of ex-smokers using these products. Most have tried nicotine gum, nicotine patches, nicotine lozenges and/or nicotine inhalers, all to no avail. Many have also tried hypnotism, cold turkey, counseling and prescription drugs such as Welbutrin and Chantix. I did. None worked.
Smoking causes lung cancer.
vaping is a non-carcinogenic alternative to smoking. In effect,
vaping prevents lung cancer.
So, imagine there was a low cost cure for cancer developed in, say, Tibet. The medicine must be vaporized and inhaled. And further imagine that public health organizations, funded largely be Big Pharma, proclaimed that there is “insufficient evidence” as to its efficacy and safety, noting that it “may” or “might” or “could” cause long term harm.
Information spreads about the new medicine by word of mouth and social media and increasing numbers of cancer victims start using the medicine. They inhale it in bars, parks, offices and sports arenas. Internet forums spring up with tens of thousands of members, all stating that the drug from Tibet has cured their cancer after all other forms of treatment had failed.
Public health organizations publicly wring their hands, proclaiming that it is not FDA approved, that kids might get their hands on it, drink it and die, even though there is no evidence that this has actually ever occurred. They worry that it could “re-normalize” smoking if cancer victims are seen inhaling the medicine in public.
The press publishes these alarmist pronouncements, writing, “This drug could be harmful to little children. There have been reports of poisonings,” while dismissing the testimonials of tens of thousands of cancer survivors as “mere anecdotes.”
States and municipalities ban public inhalation of the life saving vapor. Henceforth, cancer victims will have to go outdoors to take their medicine, huddled with cigarette smokers like lepers in designated smoking areas, inhaling carcinogenic (supposedly) second hand smoke.
Entrepreneurs spring up, marketing the medicine in different flavors and developing sophisticated delivery devices. Word is spreading and more and more cancer victims are inhaling the medicine. The FDA decides this is intolerable and promulgates regulations requiring that each iteration of the medicine and delivery devices secure pre-marketing approval with elaborate testing and extensive submissions. Public health organizations submit comments campaigning for even more stringent requirements. Inquiries to poison control hotlines (e.g., “I spilled a drop of this on my little girl and an hour later she sneezed. Will she die?”) are reported as “poisonings.” Fear spreads among the populace that the cure may be worse than the disease. Public health organizations proclaim that FDA approved drugs are “proven effective,” whereas the medicine from Tibet is not. The FDA adopts stringent regulations and most of the manufacturers and retailers drop out of the market. Consequently, fewer and fewer cancer victims try the medicine and more and more die.
That's the path you've chosen with your proposed regulations.
