Lung Damage From Vaping Resembles Chemical Burns, Report Says (nytimes.com) 146
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The New York Times: The lung damage in some people who have become ill after vaping nicotine or marijuana products resembles a chemical burn, doctors from the Mayo Clinic reported on Wednesday. Their findings are based on samples of lung tissue from 17 patients around the country whose biopsy specimens were sent to Mayo to be examined under the microscope by experts in lung pathology. Two samples came from patients who died. The findings were published on Wednesday in The New England Journal of Medicine and involved samples from 13 men and four women whose ages ranged from 19 to 67. About 70 percent had a history of vaping marijuana or cannabis oils. Eleven were in Arizona, five in Minnesota and one in Florida.
Medical investigators have been unable to identify exactly what is causing the lung damage, or even how many harmful substances are involved. They do not know whether the source is the liquids being vaped, or a toxin released from the materials used to make vaping devices. It is also unclear whether some devices used in vaping may be defective. But Dr. Brandon T. Larsen, a surgical pathologist at the Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, Ariz, said the Mayo researchers saw no signs of oil accumulating in the lung tissue. Instead, they saw many immune cells called macrophages with what he described as "the fine, foamy-looking appearance that is characteristic of chemical injuries." "So maybe we need to look more closely at the chemical compounds, and not just oils, but the chemical constituents, to figure out which ones are injurious," Dr. Larsen said. "All 17 of our cases show a pattern of injury in the lung that looks like a toxic chemical exposure, a toxic chemical fume exposure, or a chemical burn injury," said Dr. Brandon T. Larsen, a surgical pathologist at the Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, Ariz. "To be honest, they look like the kind of change you would expect to see in an unfortunate worker in an industrial accident where a big barrel of toxic chemicals spills, and that person is exposed to toxic fumes and there is a chemical burn in the airways."
Dr. Larsen likened the injuries to those seen in people exposed to poisons like mustard gas, a chemical weapon used in World War I.
Medical investigators have been unable to identify exactly what is causing the lung damage, or even how many harmful substances are involved. They do not know whether the source is the liquids being vaped, or a toxin released from the materials used to make vaping devices. It is also unclear whether some devices used in vaping may be defective. But Dr. Brandon T. Larsen, a surgical pathologist at the Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, Ariz, said the Mayo researchers saw no signs of oil accumulating in the lung tissue. Instead, they saw many immune cells called macrophages with what he described as "the fine, foamy-looking appearance that is characteristic of chemical injuries." "So maybe we need to look more closely at the chemical compounds, and not just oils, but the chemical constituents, to figure out which ones are injurious," Dr. Larsen said. "All 17 of our cases show a pattern of injury in the lung that looks like a toxic chemical exposure, a toxic chemical fume exposure, or a chemical burn injury," said Dr. Brandon T. Larsen, a surgical pathologist at the Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, Ariz. "To be honest, they look like the kind of change you would expect to see in an unfortunate worker in an industrial accident where a big barrel of toxic chemicals spills, and that person is exposed to toxic fumes and there is a chemical burn in the airways."
Dr. Larsen likened the injuries to those seen in people exposed to poisons like mustard gas, a chemical weapon used in World War I.
A honest question... (Score:2)
Re:A honest question... (Score:5, Informative)
Both, according to the journal article. Also, have some quotes.
All patients had bilateral ground glass and/or consolidative opacities on imaging (Supplementary Figure S1)
[...]
The pathogenesis of vaping-associated acute lung injury remains poorly understood, but much attention has been given recently to the possibility that this may represent a form of exogenous lipoid pneumonia.Indeed, lipid-laden macrophages have been found in bronchioloalveolar lavage fluid from patients with vaping-related pulmonary illness4,13, and one 9 case was reported to show a histologic pattern of “lipoid pneumonia”7, although a review of the illustrated histopathology reveals cholesterol clefts but no interstitial lipid droplet accumulation associated with a foreign body-type histiocytic reaction as would be expected in exogenous lipoid pneumonia.Notably, none of our cases showed histologic features of exogenous lipoid pneumonia, calling into question the diagnostic utility of identifying lipid-laden macrophages or performing oil red O staining on bronchioloalveolar lavage fluid as a marker of vaping- associated lung injury, as has been proposed4,13.
[...]
Although none of the individual histologic findings in our cases were specific, foamy macrophage accumulation and pneumocyte vacuolization were universal findings and could be useful diagnostic clues in an appropriate clinical context.This pattern closely resembles the type of changes that are characteristic of toxic reactions to medications (especially amiodarone) or noxious chemical fumes, suggesting a similar mechanism of injury.While it is difficult to discount the potential role of aerosolized lipid accumulation in this injury, no cases showed coalescence of lipid into large droplets as occurs in exogenous lipoid pneumonia.This is notable, as water-insoluble oil droplets tend to have high interfacial tension that facilitates droplet coalescence, and even fine emulsifications of insoluble oils and water will eventually phase separate with time and form larger oil droplets14.Our observation is also concordant with the recently reported absence of typical radiologic findings of fat accumulation in the lung that would be expected in exogenous lipoid pneumonia5.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Beer seems better from bottles too.
Re: (Score:2)
Years ago before Mexican coke wasn't as known and appreciated in the US as it is now some friends and I got a hold of a few bottles and did a taste test between it and the US version and we poured both into their own separate glasses. In all of our experience Mexican coke still tasted way better,
You will find the same thing is true for candy in regards to the real sugar making a difference. Around where I live at least, if you go into a natural food store like Whole Foods you can find candy bars that are ba
Re: (Score:2)
I like the Ghirardelli extra dark chocolate (80%+ cacao) for the same reason. They've got all of 5-6 ingredients in them, the first 2 of them are chocolate and cocoa butter, and the 3rd is real sugar. When 95% or more of your candy is made up of that stuff, damn is it good.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, Ghirrardelli makes a good product.
Re: (Score:2)
Years ago before Mexican coke wasn't as known and appreciated in the US as it is now some friends and I got a hold of a few bottles and did a taste test between it and the US version and we poured both into their own separate glasses. In all of our experience Mexican coke still tasted way better
I think that test needs both the Mexican and US bottled Coca Cola (cane sugar vs corn syrup actually) to have been in glass bottles. Its not simply what you are drinking out of. Plastic may affect the taste during bottling, transportation, storage, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Coca Cola is available both in glass (1L crimped cap and 1.5L screw.on plastic cap, though 1.5L is in and out of the market all the time) and plastic (500, 1500, 2250 and 3000mL) bottles in Argentina.
Glass bottled coke tastes different, and both plastic and glass bottles contain HFCS instead of sugar. Some people say glass coke tastes "better". I don't know, I drink the "Light" version... but the light version varies from one bottling plant to another. I do taste a difference between Coke bottled in Buenos
Re: (Score:2)
Based on my experiences with candy I'm confident enough in my friends and I's conclusions with soda. Especially given the relative importance of this.
Re: A honest question... (Score:2)
I do not know, but what I can say with certainty is I have purchased brands of vape cartridges (Bloom Farms notably, Jetty less so) that taste like burning plastic or chemicals when you turn the heater up above the lowest setting, which you must do to activate the vaporization.
Needless to say, I no longer purchase those brands.
Re: (Score:2)
This report is inaccurate|out of date. It has been discovered that bootleg THC vaping cartridges [nbcnews.com] contain pesticides (namely a fungicide) that when heated|burnt produces hydrogen cyanide.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, fuck you too.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
There are real reasons some people vape cannabis.
To get high?
Re: A honest question... (Score:2)
If you wanna get high, you are probably consuming with devices like bongs or dabbing needle. Vaping doesn't get you high like flower does. Something is lost in the translation.
I vape all day. But when I smoke a blunt or dab is when I remember what getting high felt like.
Re: (Score:3)
There are real reasons some people vape cannabis.
Not really. Medicinal has less destructive methods of delivery.
Re: (Score:2)
Only if you have a problem that can be solved with an ointment. Many people get no positive effects from edibles.
Re: A honest question... (Score:2)
That's pseudo-scientific bullshit. Merinol (pill) doesn't do shit for most ailments treated by cannabis, and neither do topicals. The science is settled. The medical industry really, really, really wanted to grab this market and tried for years to medicalize a patented form of cannabis they could profit from. In the end, the efficacy never held up to growing herbs in your back yard.
Re: (Score:2)
That's pseudo-scientific bullshit. Merinol (pill) doesn't do shit for most ailments treated by cannabis, and neither do topicals. The science is settled.
LOL, settled. As if topicals are the only alternative to smoking.
Re: A honest question... (Score:2)
Oh, please do tell us the medical delivery mechanism which isn't topical, smoking, or vaping, keeping in mind medical professionals discount edibles due to dosing difficulties.
Re: (Score:2)
There are real reasons some people vape cannabis.
Not really. Medicinal has less destructive methods of delivery.
Inhalation is both fast acting and effective. Pills are not so good when the symptom being treated is nausea.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm probably a bad person (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
I carry a large garbage bag around with me for those situations. After being told some variant of "it's just vapor", I pull the bag over their heads and tie the string - helpfully letting them breathe "just the vapor" for a minute or two until they can tear the bag off their heads.
Re: (Score:3)
No you don't.
Re: (Score:2)
You're right - it's just a 2-gallon ZipLoc Freezer Bag.
Re:I'm probably a bad person (Score:5, Funny)
In the old days, a squirt gun made short work of obnoxious smokers. Now you need an EMP.
Re: (Score:2)
Defib paddles also work.
Re: (Score:2)
In the old days, a squirt gun made short work of obnoxious smokers. Now you need an EMP.
You need a bigger squirt gun.
Re: (Score:2)
These days, doing something like that will likely result in you getting your lights punched out, if not worse.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, a squirt gun still works, with same results!
Might be even more spectacular results depending on the water resistance of the vaping device.
Re: (Score:2)
your problem is with the people
not the activity
don't lump together all of those who vape.
do you wish all drivers crash and burn because some of them behave dangerously?
Re: (Score:2)
Small minority vape to give up on smoking, which is good, and then will slowly wean off of vaping. The majority however seem to be people just wanting nicotine in a cool new method. It's a shame that the many are making a bad name for the few.
Re: (Score:2)
The majority however seem to be people just wanting nicotine in a cool new method.
Unless you're just mad that they found a way to keep on with nicotine without the cancer and tar, what's wrong with that?
The real problem is the small minority of vapors who are also jackasses blowing their vape in people's faces. Before there was vaping, they were the smokers who blew smoke in your face.
Re: (Score:2)
Not true, I know people who never blew smoke in people's faces because they knew about second hand smoke and the basic rules of etiquette. Then after starting vaping instead, they felt nothing wrong with vaping in their cube or exhaling the vapor while talking to someone face to face. They've bought into the belief that it's 110% safe.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm guessing when they were smokers, they didn't smoke in their cubes at all because smoking wasn't allowed. Who knows what they did when they did smoke.
In any event, some percentage of people who like anything at all will be jackasses.
Re: (Score:2)
Small minority vape to give up on smoking, which is good, and then will slowly wean off of vaping.
I don't think it's good to transition to vaping if you're trying to give up smoking. Quitting cold turkey is the only way to really quit smoking. It really sucks for like two weeks to a month and then all of a sudden cigarettes don't matter.
Nicotine gum, vaping, patches, etc. are ineffective precisely because you're maintaining the addictive relationship. In the years before I successfully quit smoking I tried all sorts of weening techniques. The most important thing is the proper motivation and the mental
Re: (Score:2)
I think the gum isn't a bad way to go. It does satisfy physical cravings, but it's not as satisfying as an overall experience.
I found that over time I just kind of quit chewing the gum after a month or so because it was a nuisance, but the number of pieces I chewed a day dropped off, too, to the point where I no longer did it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nicotine is more toxic and has no objective benefits for most people. The LD50 of nicotine is about 1/2 gram, about as much as in 45 cigarettes
Most people can benefit from the increase of alertness available from caffeine. The LD50 of caffeine is about 13 grams, equivalent to 80 or so cups of coffee. Water in coffee will kill most people faster than caffeine.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: I'm probably a bad person (Score:2)
Those people are not vaping cannabis. The harmful effects seem mostly relegated to those who vape cannabis.
Probably because cannabis is way more expensive and so there's a booming black market.
Really, you're feeling schadenfreude at their poverty. Are you a Republican by chance?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Congratulations. You encountered an asshole.
Around here if you tried to vape in a bar (unless it is a vape bar) the reaction would be the same as lighting up a cigarette... You would be asked to leave. "You can't do that in here, man. Take it outside."
So, Black Market Vape Juice is Dangerous? (Score:3, Insightful)
All of these injuries were sustained after vaping on black market chinese vape juice bought from shady sellers online.
I find it amazing that we are supposed to be shocked by this, and are punishing legitimate, safe vape juice makers, and banning vaping altogether, over a handful of injuries caused by unregulated, unsafe, unknown, and unverifiable sources.
Nicorette has a vape product. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nicotine is one chemical out of a family of similar chemicals. Different brains (people) have different "needs" for these chemicals, so quitting is different for each person. On top of whatever a person's physiological needs are, there are also psychological factors. An electronic cigarette can be a big differencemaker here, as it provides reasonably convincing psychological continuity for those who need it, either because of long-formed habits, or to avoid a two-front war while dealing with the physical
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So... much like alcohol?
Re: Nicorette has a vape product. (Score:2)
Alcohol is fun. It's an entheogen.
Nicotine has no such benefit.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He didn't propose a "drug war," he just pointed out how stupid vaping nicotine is.
Grown ass adults can choose to vape or smoke or whatever they want to do. But it's still stupid and there's no reason to get all offended when someone points out how stupid it is.
Ambiguous sources (Score:5, Informative)
Both manufactured prepackaged vape pods and open access tankstyle vaporizers were used by subjects
This seems to suggest there so far lacks a common denominator for source across the people injured by these things. I was looking for this in particular because I had a discussion with a colleague about this and he suggested that these people are all being harmed by adulterated fluids that they were putting into their e-cigarettes. That said, there are a lot of users using the main stream product who are not ending up in the hospital.
Re: Ambiguous sources (Score:2)
Just because it's a pre-packaged pod doesn't mean it wasn't a refill. Do people know which cartridges are hard to refill (Pax, for example) and which are simple (Juul, for example). If you are buying Juul pods, there's not much you can do to know if it's from the manufacturer unless your state has solid packaging regulations and you avoid unregulated markets like Weed Maps.
The fact that this is happening in Arizona and not California does not surprise me. This is the fault of state regulators not properly e
Re: (Score:2)
This is the fault of state regulators not properly ensuring a safe market.
I think the genie might be out of the bottle on this one unfortunately. If people know how to refill the pods or get around them, then convincing them to only use the more expensive branded ones won't be easy. Add to that the interest in putting alternative mixes into the devices and you get the thriving markets we're seeing. I suspect the interest in regulating the market is pretty low, the likely compliance would be lower yet, and the concern from the most vulnerable users even more so.
Spice all over again (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Here in Massachusetts we have legal pot shops whose products have to be assayed by a specially licensed lab for their strength and to show absence of contaminants like pesticides. When you purchase either marijuana or marijuana-based products like edibles it will be clearly labelled as to its species, cultivar, and the amount of THC and CBD it contains. As a side effect this makes it convenient to price shop between marijuana stores. The pot shop price per gram in the $15-$20/gram range -- higher than th
Hydrogen cyanide (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
If that was the reason, those who smoked the same marijuana treated with the same fungicide, would have been subject to the same effect (or worse), and well before vaping became common.
Re: Hydrogen cyanide (Score:2)
Not necessarily. The oil extraction process may very well concentrate the fungus residue. Or the oil substrate may spread living fungus around in a manner which makes it able to continue growth. Or the fungal residue may interact with a chemical in a solvent. Or...
Re: Hydrogen cyanide (Score:4, Interesting)
Maybe due to tapwater? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Maybe due to tapwater? (Score:2)
COCl2 is not mustard gas, but rather phosgene. If it was so easy to produce phosgene, people would drop dead while extinguishing fires with tap water.
And as the sibling AC comment noted, you don't extract THC using water..
Re: (Score:2)
Is it really a surprise? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Except tens of millions are vaping major commercial product with no problems whatsoever, while millions of smokers of tobacco drop like flies each year.
Vaping saves lives, overall.
True: Vaping is better! But it robs state $! (Score:2)
Many states took out loans against their big tobacco settlements and now tobacco sales are dead and the debt payments are NOT being made. Vaping doesn't pay in so we must attack it until we can get back that lost $$$. (FYI, I don't smoke anything.)
Why are we freaking out over some idiots smoking/vaping stupidly? Many things KILL far more people each year.
My theory is that it's misunderstanding without likely anybody to blame other than our corrupt government failing to work for the people; we know it doesn
Re: Is it really a surprise? (Score:2)
You know "air" has a fuzzy definition that changes from place to place and it generally consists of hundred of chemicals, most of which are harmful when consumed in improper quantities.
Re:The relentless onslaught against vaping continu (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
"Big Tobacco hates vaping"
Not even close. Pretty much every tobacco company has some investment in the vaping industry.
Re: (Score:2)
"Big Tobacco hates vaping"
Not even close. Pretty much every tobacco company has some in the vaping industry.
Considering that Big Tobacco's competitors are nearly all a collection of small businesses with relatively limited resources compared to Big Tobacco, heavy regulation will kill off most of their competition while leaving Big Tobacco standing. Even if vaping is banned Big Tobacco will still be there with the traditional tobacco products. It's a win-win for Big Tobacco.
Another factor is State governments and something called the Master Settlement Agreement negotiated in the late-'90s between States and Big To
Re: (Score:2)
"Big Tobacco hates vaping"
Not even close. Pretty much every tobacco company has some investment in the vaping industry.
The first round of Big Tobacco produced e-cigs were crap. Any smoker would give one a try, throw it out, and go right back to Marlboros. Then the independent market started gaining ground with devices and liquids that were pleasing.
Round 2, enter Juul. 10x the nicotine as any other e-cig variant, nice fruity flavors, and flashy marketing to attract the youth crowd. Owned by Big Tobacco of course. Could it be they are trying to shift to new markets, or trying to get the product banned entirely? Can't
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Big Tobacco hates vaping
Big Tabacco IS vaping. They are only trying to shut out the competition through tight regulations.
Legal, taxed and regulated (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Outside of Trump and some Third Way Democrats nobody's talking about banning it.
Big tobacco...?
Re: (Score:3)
Big Tobacco (at least Altria) owns a huge stake in Juul. They may not want cannabis taking away their market, but they don't want to get too hasty.
Re: (Score:2)
I am sure they are fine with vaping becoming illegal if it means taking some of the cannabis market with it.
I am also sure that they would have deliberately done this if they did not just have to wait. Money is money and there are a lot of private and public interests which do not want cannabis or vaping to be legal.
Re: (Score:2)
It is also a very small group. The whole panic about this is extremely exaggerated. Even if this rate keeps up, the dangers of vaping are much, much lower than those of smoking. And it is likely that some specific risky practice, vaping device or vaping fluid will eventually be identified and the problem will go away entirely.
Re:Legal, taxed and regulated (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if this rate keeps up, the dangers of vaping are much, much lower than those of smoking.
I don't see how you can conclusively make this statement. This is the problem I see with vaping—everyone jumped on this bandwagon because it's supposedly so much safer, but it will take a long time with many people vaping to make this conclusion. The fact that there is so much variation in vaping (oils, vaporizers, etc.) means that conclusions are even more difficult to draw.
Considering that this has literally killed people, I don't see why it's an exaggerated concern. It's not like vaping is some medicine and these are side effects we are investigating. Vaping has no purpose whatsoever. It's all risk no reward.
I understand, I smoked for like fifteen years. Once you're addicted to nicotine it's tough to quit. When I see old friends who never quit smoking it's sad—they've aged faster than I have and one even has emphysema already. With vaping, even if there are less particulates, it's still HOT VAPOR entering your lungs. There's no upside, only downsides, just like smoking.
Re: (Score:2)
"Cigarette smoking is responsible for more than 480,000 deaths per year in the United States, including more than 41,000 deaths resulting from secondhand smoke exposure" https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/da... [cdc.gov]
Do you still not see it?
Incidentally, "hot vapor" is not a problem, or people would be dying from steam-baths and saunas. They do not.
Re:Legal, taxed and regulated (Score:4)
"Cigarette smoking is responsible for more than 480,000 deaths per year in the United States, including more than 41,000 deaths resulting from secondhand smoke exposure" https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/da... [cdc.gov]
Do you still not see it?
That neither proves nor disproves your case. Most people who die from smoking have been regularly exposed for decades before the health effects really become obvious and deadly. Those effects, unfortunately, are hard to reverse once they're evident.
Vaping is still a very new phenomena. It may prove to be as deadly, or deadlier, than smoking over decades of regular use -- but we have real evidence that it's killing and injuring people right now as well. Few, if any, 19 year olds die from smoking-related injury or illness, but they're clearly being injured by vaping.
Incidentally, "hot vapor" is not a problem, or people would be dying from steam-baths and saunas. They do not.
It all depends on what your vapor is made of. Mercury vapor would be rather harmful if inhaled. The vapor exiting a power-plant's turbine would be pretty harmful as well. It's just water vapor, right? -- extremely hot water vapor that will melt your lungs.
Re: Legal, taxed and regulated (Score:2)
Smoking almost never kills someone in their teens or early twenties. There's zero reason to believe vaping will not kill more people with longer use. We do not have any relevant studies of sufficient size to think otherwise.
The consumer market is now by far the largest study of vaping ever done. And it's looking like - in the short term - vaping is evidently more dangerous than smoking.
Re: (Score:2)
Smoking almost never kills someone in their teens or early twenties. There's zero reason to believe vaping will not kill more people with longer use.
Vaping has been around worldwide for well over a decade, yet there have been no reports of these sorts of illness/death except in the US. And it only happened suddenly in the last few months to a small number of people. If it were vaping itself at fault there would have been problems from the beginning and it would be worldwide.
This is motivated by State taxes and tobacco settlement payments, Big Tobacco, and Big Pharma. This is a gaslighting campaign.
Strat
Re: Legal, taxed and regulated (Score:2)
New ailments get discovered in clusters once the problem hits wide in the media. How do we know there weren't previous unexplained deaths that pathologists were labelling idiopathic? The very fact that it becomes reported means we're more likely to spot incidents.
Re: (Score:2)
Your paranoia does nothing to help find the actual problem.
I've heard claims that it's become a practice in some cliques to use vaping to achieve higher body concentrations of active chemicals than is possible with smoking. -- There are a lot of hypotheses out there, no good conclusions yet.
Re: (Score:2)
And it's looking like - in the short term - vaping is evidently more dangerous than smoking.
That's an incorrect logical conclusion based on what we know.
There are millions of people vaping, and we've got samples from 17 who had issues showing that they seem to be getting chemical burns. That says nothing about the safety of vaping as a whole, unless you can make the argument that they are representative of the millions of vapers out there. Since you can't do that, the only logical statement is that we do not know about the safety of vaping, long or short term.
Talking to people who vape, there are
Re: Legal, taxed and regulated (Score:2)
There are many more millions of smokers, none of whom are dying at 17 years old. As a matter of public health policy, you need to examine your Bayesian priors. If your priors suggest vaping is safer than smoking, but it turns out - in the short term - vaping is EVIDENTLY more harmful than smoking, then you need to examine if your prior (vaping is safer) is based on a sophistry and not science.
Sure, it's probably black market cartridges. Moonshine wasn't safe either. But as a matter of public policy, it cert
Re: (Score:2)
There are many more millions of smokers, none of whom are dying at 17 years old.
Citation please.
You don't seem to understand that there's a difference between the delivery mechanism (vaping/smoking something rolled) with what you're inhaling. If you smoked arsenic cigarettes instead of tobacco cigarettes you'd also be dying. Yet I think you'd agree that if we had a small epidemic of arsenic laced cigarettes we wouldn't be talking about how cigarettes kill you dead instantly. We'd be smart enough to talk about *what* was being smoked, not how it's being delivered.
At this point we don't
Re: (Score:3)
There's a very simple solution to this: Stop inhaling random chemicals from dubious, unregulated companies trying to make as many quick bucks as possible.
Re:Agenda 21, getting desperate now... (Score:4, Insightful)
There's a very simple solution to this: Stop inhaling random chemicals from dubious, unregulated companies trying to make as many quick bucks as possible.
Can't we just let Darwin sort it ou?
Other ways to find vast amounts of death people? (Score:2)
We're not living in the WO-II era where we can just vape thousands of people to see what the results are.
And who's going to throw in the first Godwin in this discussion?
Re: (Score:2)
We're not living in the WO-II era where we can just vape thousands of people to see what the results are.
And who's going to throw in the first Godwin in this discussion?
Due to the somewhat anonymous nature of online pseudonyms, we can't be sure without the expenditure of more time and energy than we're likely to spare, but he (statistically likely /. gender inference) walks like you, and posts like you...
Re: (Score:2)
Cute? Idk. But, adorkable has been bandied about.
Re: (Score:2)
Given that vaping is a patt off of cigarettes... (Score:2)
Also, CIGARETTES! Not tobacco!
Completely and utterly different product.
Tobacco isn't really addictive. Cigarettes, on the other hand, are literally as addictive as Heroin(TM). Due to the "additives".
And people found out, that while it is brutal and almost impossible, to switch from cigarettes to nothing, it is trivially easy, to switch from cigarettes to vapers, getting rid of the "additives", then reduce the dosage slowly (halving it every time), until you smoke homeopathic dosages (aka: nothing), and then
Re: Given that vaping is a patt off of cigarettes. (Score:2)
That's bullshit. I know plenty of people rolling their own cigarettes with unadulterated tobacco, and they're all addicts. People get addicted to American Spirit (very low additives) just as readily as they do Marlboro. The tobacco is addictive. If you don't think it is, you sound like an addict who has it real bad.
Re: Vs (Score:2)
If the 1920s are any indication, then no we can't ban cigarettes.