The history of the "gateway" argument demonstrates ANTZ are desperate

[DrMA]

Interesting new post by Dr. Rodu on the origins and significance of the "gateway" nonsense now increasingly peddled by ANTZ.

«This should sound strikingly familiar to vapers (e-cigarette users) and tobacco harm reduction advocates. As they did with {censored plant}, prohibitionists make the gateway claim against e-cigarettes in the near-total absence of “definitive and convincing evidence” of harm.»

http://rodutobaccotruth.blogspot.com/2014/10/gateway-claims-aimed-at-e-cigarettes.html

 

[Nate760]

"Event A happened. Event B happened. Therefore, Event A caused Event B."

Imagine how much more productive human discourse would be if everyone (particularly those with advanced scientific degrees) could wrap their heads around the fact that the above is never a valid line of reasoning.

 

[DC2]

"Event A happened. Event B happened. Therefore, Event A caused Event B."

The "Health, Safety, and vaping" subforum would be quite a bit smaller and much less interesting?

 

[Kent C]

Their "gateway rationale":

Someone likes to parachute.

Therefore, parachuting is a gateway to jumping out of a plane without a parachute.


-----

And also, why isn't Nicorette and Nicotine patches gateways to smoking?? Hmmm?

 

[AndriaD]

I can almost go along with the idea of {that other stuff} being a gateway to {other worse stuff}; it did prove to be the case, for me. But for some teenager, who's vaped some yummy custard, or cookie/cake/pie flavor, or blueberry muffins, or banana nut bread... to try cigarettes for the first time? They will probably go BLEAHHHHH!!! if not outright retch at the taste, and never try it again, nor have the slightest interest in trying it again!

Nobody likes the taste of tobacco unless they're already a confirmed smoker. In which case, e-cigs are a gateway... OUT of smoking!!

Andria

 

[DC2]

As for me, I'm sure there is a "Gateway Effect" for some things.
But certainly not vaping to smoking.

That's just totally absurd for too many reasons to bother listing.

I tried all kinds of things when I was young, some of which I'm still willing to try again.
But none of them turned into a Gateway (for me) to anything else.

I chose to try them because I wanted to, not because something else made me want to.
But I don't discount that the "Gateway Effect" could be very real for some.

But again, not for vaping to smoking, which as previously noted is freaking absurd.

 

[DrMA]

As for me, I'm sure there is a "Gateway Effect" for some things.
But certainly not vaping to smoking.

That's just totally absurd for too many reasons to bother listing.

I tried all kinds of things when I was young, some of which I'm still willing to try again.
But none of them turned into a Gateway (for me) to anything else.

I chose to try them because I wanted to, not because something else made me want to.
But I don't discount that the "Gateway Effect" could be very real for some.

But again, not for vaping to smoking, which as previously noted is freaking absurd.

And that's why "gateway" is an absurd and ridiculous proposition. Teens try stuff because they like to try stuff in general, not because they tried other stuff. IMO, there is zero validity to any "gateway" argument for any human behavior.

 

[Kent C]

As for me, I'm sure there is a "Gateway Effect" for some things.
But certainly not vaping to smoking.

That's just totally absurd for too many reasons to bother listing.

I tried all kinds of things when I was young, some of which I'm still willing to try again.
But none of them turned into a Gateway (for me) to anything else.

I chose to try them because I wanted to, not because something else made me want to.
But I don't discount that the "Gateway Effect" could be very real for some.

But again, not for vaping to smoking, which as previously noted is freaking absurd.

Exactly matching our nature as rational and volitional beings. Free will to decide to try, reason and free will to decide not to (sometimes), and reason to decide whether one likes the effects in taste or otherwise. Free will to continue or not. Some people will say that some things will 'defeat' free will. I'm not one of those people. There is a difference having a choice and exercising that option.

 

[AndriaD]

As for me, I'm sure there is a "Gateway Effect" for some things.
But certainly not vaping to smoking.

That's just totally absurd for too many reasons to bother listing.

I tried all kinds of things when I was young, some of which I'm still willing to try again.
But none of them turned into a Gateway (for me) to anything else.

I chose to try them because I wanted to, not because something else made me want to.
But I don't discount that the "Gateway Effect" could be very real for some.

But again, not for vaping to smoking, which as previously noted is freaking absurd.

I do kinda get what they mean with a "gateway effect" for a lot of that other stuff; once you have taken one small step, it's much easier to take another, and another, and... so on until you wind up in rehab. But from vaping to smoking? That's not logical or sensible or in any way realistic. One taste of tobacco after someone is accustomed to vaping? They will hate it so badly, they might throw up or just grind it out immediately in pure disgust. I've never seen a single person take their first hit on a cigarette and smile in delight, it's always been quite the opposite, and I remember very clearly wishing that cigarettes tasted better -- I loved the "cool" factor, I was just one of those wayward kids that wanted to be "bad" -- but the taste was so awful, I almost didn't persevere with smoking enough to become hooked -- but I guess that for some people, it doesn't take a lot of that chemical mayhem in the brain to cause addiction.

Andria

 

[Davey59]

Mother's milk..... it leads to EVERYTHING!

Gateway this and that, good lord.

People will be people and will do what they think they want to do at any given time regardless. I think the taboo stigma of many things makes them even more attractive to some.

The worst is when their is so much hype about something being bad that isn't and the young people discover that it is not and will later not believe it when it is. The boy who cried wolf comes to mind.

 

[Towmotor]

And also, why isn't Nicorette and Nicotine patches gateways to smoking?? Hmmm?

They are gateway products.......every time I used them I was smoking cigarettes within a month.

 

[Kenna]

Don't be silly. Nicorette & Nicotine patches are not nicotine delivery systems. Oh, wait...Nicorette & nicotine patches are not hand held devices.... uhhh....puffing or something.

 

[USMCotaku]

There are substances "ahem" that can logically be called a gateway... The user of substance a becomes so used to it that they no longer get the high that their body "needs" by this point, and look for substance b to fill the need.... This has been proven, it happens, to deny it is a bit silly. However, nicotine doesn't work this way, you don't really need more and more nicotine to get your fix, and if someone feels like they need more, they go to whatever delivery method they use, they don't go looking for something else to fill the need. To make those claims is just as silly as claiming there is no gateway substances.
Sent with one hand, the other is busy vaping.

 

[catlady60]

The only gateway e-cigs bring on is the gateway from cigalikes to egos to mods--and, for some of us vapers, to high-wattage APVs.

 

[supertrunker]

The friendly governments of the world are just benevolent doormen watching out for the health of the people they serve - trying to save them from themselves!



T

 

[Nate760]

There are substances "ahem" that can logically be called a gateway... The user of substance a becomes so used to it that they no longer get the high that their body "needs" by this point, and look for substance b to fill the need.... This has been proven, it happens, to deny it is a bit silly.

I think you're misconstruing the rationale (for lack of a better term) that underpins the typical "gateway" argument. There is always the implication in such arguments that, since the use of Substance A typically precedes the use of Substance B, no one would use the latter if the former didn't exist. This is complete and utter nonsense, it always has been, and it always will be.

 

[AndriaD]

I think you're misconstruing the rationale (for lack of a better term) that underpins the typical "gateway" argument. There is always the implication in such arguments that, since the use of Substance A typically precedes the use of Substance B, no one would use the latter if the former didn't exist. This is complete and utter nonsense, it always has been, and it always will be.

Very true. To me, though, a gateway effect just means that once you take step A, then step B isn't too far or too hard, then step C is just right there, etc etc etc. I really might not have gotten into some of the {worse other stuff} if I hadn't done the {other stuff} first, it would have been too scary. Baby steps like that make it a lot less scary. This is the kind of thinking in an addict's mind -- I've been one probably since I was 13 yrs old, and I remember feeling like that... "well I did so-and-so and it didn't kill me, maybe I'll try this too". It's like we're looking as hard as we can for the thing that WILL kill us.

It might not affect non-addicts this way; I really couldn't say, because truth to tell, I probably was an addict ever since my mom started giving me benadryl elixir (elixir meaning alcohol-based) when I was probably 3 or 4 yrs old. I do know I literally craved alcohol, long before I ever drank it "recreationally."

Andria

 

[Nate760]

Very true. To me, though, a gateway effect just means that once you take step A, then step B isn't too far or too hard, then step C is just right there, etc etc etc. I really might not have gotten into some of the {worse other stuff} if I hadn't done the {other stuff} first, it would have been too scary. Baby steps like that make it a lot less scary.

This is just as much a function of a social climate in which abstinence/prohibition is promoted instead of responsibility/moderation. When you tell young people something is dangerous and taboo, many of them will want to try it simply because it's dangerous and taboo. It often has less to do with the appeal of the thing itself and more to do with the reaction it's going to create with adult authority figures. When I was a kid, I was willing to do pretty much anything if I thought there was a good chance it would horrify my parents and teachers. If there was some ridiculous moral panic going on, I took that as an invitation to do the thing that was the object of it. Not because I necessarily had any interest in doing the thing, but just because the grown-ups were, in effect, handing me a stick and begging me to poke them with it.

 

[DrMA]

That's right on the prohibition vs moderation issue. What's the first thing any human (big or small) would do when you tell them "do not push the red button!"

 

[jwbnyc]

That is a great talking point.

Their "gateway rationale":

Someone likes to parachute.

Therefore, parachuting is a gateway to jumping out of a plane without a parachute.


-----

And also, why isn't Nicorette and Nicotine patches gateways to smoking?? Hmmm?