Vaping-Related Lung Injuries Declining, As CDC Confirms Vitamin E Acetate As Main Culprit (npr.org) 107
An anonymous reader quotes a report from NPR: A health-surveillance system put in place after the terrorist attacks of September 2001 has been used to pinpoint the cause of the vaping-related lung injuries that have killed 54 Americans and sent more than 2,500 people to the hospital. Using this system, researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have found that the lung injuries rose sharply in June of this year. Dr. Anne Schuchat, the CDC's principal deputy director, says this sharp spike strongly points to a single culprit for most of these cases: vitamin E acetate, an additive found in illicit cannabis-containing vapes. Emergency-room doctors in Wisconsin first noticed an outbreak of these lung injuries in June. They alerted state and federal health officials, who quickly started investigating the extent of the outbreak as they looked for what could be causing it.
It was important to understand the timing of the outbreak as part of this investigation. Health officials wanted to know when exactly the problems first cropped up, and whether they had missed many cases before those initial reports. That's why they turned to the surveillance data, collected from more than 3,200 emergency rooms from most states. They found a gradual increase in emergency-room visits among people who vaped or used e-cigarettes, starting in January of 2017. Narrowing their search to people under the age of 35, they detected a sharp spike in June of 2019 -- the same time that the doctors in Wisconsin reported their first cases. The number of cases climbed from June into September, when they peaked. They have since declined, but the CDC still reports about 100 cases a week, and the death toll continues to tick up.
It was important to understand the timing of the outbreak as part of this investigation. Health officials wanted to know when exactly the problems first cropped up, and whether they had missed many cases before those initial reports. That's why they turned to the surveillance data, collected from more than 3,200 emergency rooms from most states. They found a gradual increase in emergency-room visits among people who vaped or used e-cigarettes, starting in January of 2017. Narrowing their search to people under the age of 35, they detected a sharp spike in June of 2019 -- the same time that the doctors in Wisconsin reported their first cases. The number of cases climbed from June into September, when they peaked. They have since declined, but the CDC still reports about 100 cases a week, and the death toll continues to tick up.
Time to legalize nationwide and regulate (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Insightful, because this is literally the behavior that killed people during Prohibition.
Re: (Score:3)
The revenue it seems isn't so big in many cases, and the legal sale isn't outpacing illegal sales. Maybe this clears up over time as things settle, but there are some significant barriers in the market. You need permission to open a store in most places where it's legal, the feds still consider this illegal and there's a lot of nervousness over this, and the banks refuse to do business with cannabis related companies (fear of the feds) so it's a cash economy.
Re: (Score:2)
Washington state last year made $367 million off weed sales, almost 1% of their total budget. That's a hell of a lot of money. And all those issues with nervousness and banks goes away if you legalize it at the federal level, which is the what the OP wants.
Re: (Score:3)
Washington state last year made $367 million off weed sales, almost 1% of their total budget. That's a hell of a lot of money. And all those issues with nervousness and banks goes away if you legalize it at the federal level, which is the what the OP wants.
The devil, as always, is in the details.
How is the sale & distribution of vegetable glycerin, propylene glycol, and nicotine when, with the possible exception of nicotine which not all vapers use, are widely used in food flavorings, commercially baked goods, and much more? It would be like attempting to have the government control, track, and tax baking soda or table salt like tobacco products. Glycerine you know is used extremely widely and commonly, and have you ever picked up a bottle of food flavori
Re: (Score:2)
So what you're saying is that fully legalizing it and regulating it akin to tobacco and alcohol would make the stores, the feds and the banks a lot less nervous?
Re: (Score:2)
Entirely correct, however it should be noted that this started happening here in Massachusetts, among people buying things from legal (according to the state) dispensaries. This means that at least one manufacturer with a regulated and tested industrial process was doing this. The results were pretty interesting, whether you think of them as good or bad. Our governor quickly instituted a moratorium on the sale of all vaping products, throwing many new and small businesses into disarray or ruin overnight. Fr
Re: (Score:2)
This is actually an argument for legalize + regulate. Imagine if there were those THC vapes available, but entirely in the black market. The governor would have had zero ability to prevent their sale.
Sin tax as a concept should dissapear (Score:3)
Sin taxes are bad. They are only a minor barrier for the poor, while the rich are not affected at all.
What is sin after all, and who defines what it is and why?
Why would consuming a plant have to cost me extra taxes because I'm doing something bad?
Is not flying on a vacation much worse for the world and the climate? The kerosine is even tax free!
Re: (Score:2)
It's fair if the state is using that money to pay for health care for people who get sick. The amount of alcohol and tobacco you consume is going to be somewhat correlated to how much you're going to cost your state health system down the track. So sure, ingest stuff that makes you sick, nobody should tell you not to, but those people end up costing other taxpayers money, so taxes on those subtances are fair.
Re: (Score:1)
are our values skewed? (Score:4, Insightful)
Ok, apologies if this is off topic, but can someone 'splain something to me? A nearby city has completely banned vaping and all associated paraphernalia, in reaction to 54 Americans (total) dying and 2,500 in hospital. Yet they give out syringes to heroin junkies, who have a death rate of 15,000 per year in the US and some significantly large number of hospitalizations. Not to mention, also leaving syringes littering the streets.
I'm totally baffled at the logic. Could someone help this make sense?
Re: are our values skewed? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe because vaping competes directly with a product that generates large sums of tax revenue while heroin creates a permanently dependent underclass?
Nah, couldn't be that.
I think you're onto something. But how do the people making these decisions justify them in a way that regular people can accept? I don't see any tactic that would work, other than avoiding the question altogether.
Re: are our values skewed? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Think of the children!!
Ok I didn't want to make this argument, because "think of the children" is so incredibly overused. And abused. But (argh... wince.) an argument could be made that the city not giving out free fits would reduce the number littering the street near the Saturday market downtown, which would arguably reduce the likelihood of some kid sticking themselves or their sister with one.
That (the above) was not my point. My point is, "think of the children" could be argued in either case. So how do politicians get a
Re: (Score:2)
"So how do politicians get away with this crap?"
You let them? Nay, you encourage them. If you instead went out and lynched a few politicians who did this sort of thing, the next batch would think twice before doing something that might get them killed.
Instead y'all just sit around drink (very watered down) beer and whine. Your overlord's know this fact, so they can do whatever they please secure in the knowledge that there will be zero repercussions and they can do as they please whether you like it or n
Re: (Score:1)
So how do politicians get away with this crap?
Because people keep voting the idiot Leftists back in? That's the only explanation I see for Seattle anyway. I'm constantly baffled by that argument that giving an alcoholic a bottle of Scotch is enabling and cruel, while giving a heroin junkie a needle (or free Narcan injections) is brave and stunning Harm Reduction.
Re: are our values skewed? (Score:1)
Fighting Russian Nazis. There's one hiding under your bed right now - and he's vaping!!
Re: (Score:2)
Fighting Russian Nazis. There's one hiding under your bed right now - and he's vaping!!
C'mon, I know that's not true. Because were that true, there would be great gouts of white stinky vapor jetting out from under my bed.
I think he's behind the couch.
Re: (Score:3)
But how do the people making these decisions justify them in a way that regular people can accept?
Most people don't think that far. I was having breakfast in a diner the other morning and a lot of people were talking about impeachment and some of what was said was flat out ridiculous. One person thought that meant Trump was already being removed from office and another person thought that even if he wasn't convicted in the Senate trial that he wouldn't be able to run again in 2020. I'm not going to pretend to be an expert on those matters, or most things really, but most people just tend to go along wit
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, great points.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm totally baffled at the logic. Could someone help this make sense?
Moral panic. Just like opioids, where the vast majority of people who've died are the ones who are using illicit substances for the sake of escapism.
Re: are our values skewed? (Score:3, Interesting)
Needle exchanges reduce the incidence of hepatitis and HIV infection, for one. Anyway, the opiate problem in this country is mainly prescription drugs. Heroin and fentanyl are a problem, yes, but the RXs are what most opiate addicts are addicted to. This vaping backlash thing is like the "crack epidemic" of the 80s all over again, mostly driven by the media and politicians.
Re: are our values skewed? (Score:5, Insightful)
Needle exchanges reduce the incidence of hepatitis and HIV infection, for one. Anyway, the opiate problem in this country is mainly prescription drugs. Heroin and fentanyl are a problem, yes, but the RXs are what most opiate addicts are addicted to. This vaping backlash thing is like the "crack epidemic" of the 80s all over again, mostly driven by the media and politicians.
I understand about the reduction of hepatitis and HIV infection. I don't disagree with the intent, although I don't think the risk of all those used hypos lying around on the street is properly understood.
My point was that we can ignore a death rate several orders of magnitude *per year* greater than the number of vaping deaths since vaping was invented, just as the cost of society. But a tiny handful show effects from vaping, an order of magnitude less than the yearly number of bathtub deaths for instance, and everyone loses their minds.
I'm reminded of this cardiomyopathy epidemic we're having in the pet community. 119 casualties out of 89.7 million dogs, or .0001% of the population, with the mechanism not clearly understood, and wow, normally rational people will scream at you (personal experience) if you don't promise to change your dog's diet RIGHT NOW.
It's like, as a society, we've lost all understanding of what the term "edge case" means. When you bring up statistics, you get the "just one dog is too much" argument, which I'm positive was also used with vaping ("just one kid"). I point out that if you're concerned about "just one dog" you might consider adopting "just one dog" out of a kill shelter. Then I get yelled at again.
I'm convinced that schools are deliberately not teaching statistics and managed risk anymore, so that the population can be swayed by story telling over statistics. Facts with no useful context. Edge cases.
Re: are our values skewed? (Score:3)
I'm not sure about the deliberate part, but I agree that people should learn statistics, and it's sadly not taught in schools, not even basic probabilities, really.
I went to college and graduate school for Psychology, and so I learned boatloads of statistics, linear regression, multivariate analysis, principle components analysis, etc, and I'm very glad I did, despite ending up in a career where's it's not needed so much. So much of science and our understanding of society and nature rests upon it. Imo, it
Re: (Score:2)
See, I haven't had nearly the education you've had, but I try at least to understand basic logic. I try to spot common logic traps and dismember them. (Are people having these symptoms because they're engaged in this behavior, or are they engaged in the behavior because they're having these symptoms? Or is the behavior in question a harmless side-effect of the actual root cause? Or is it a complete coincidence, like the relationship of divorces to margarine consumption?) And I try to recognize and illu
Re: (Score:2)
you're gatekeeping logic! this is a safespace! stop mansplaining!
Re: (Score:2)
I graduated high school in the 1970s and they weren't teaching statistics then, so I'm not sure what you're on about. It wasn't even an elective course.
I'm more disappointed that in much of the country they're not even teaching evolution now, which is necessary for any student that wants to go into biology or medicine.
Re: (Score:2)
People are not rational. With the huge pushback against tobacco/cigarettes that has been happening for decades now, it is not surprising that outright banning of vaping, regardless of the facts, is the "natural response". If you wanted to live in a rational world with rational people, you chose the wrong planet.
Re: are our values skewed? (Score:5, Informative)
Heroin and fentanyl are a problem, yes, but the RXs are what most opiate addicts are addicted to.
But they're also the opiate involved in a large majority of overdose deaths, and the large majority of rx-only opiate deaths involve combining them with alcohol/benzos.
Worse, the epidemic of ovedose deaths was a purposefully chosen public policy. Overprescribing created a large number of addicts, and we responded by kicking them, and legitimate pain patients along with them, out of the medical system with no support, right as fentanyl was becoming more common on the streets. That's what drove deaths to epidemic levels, forcing people onto a far, far deadlier product. Meanwhile the number of people killing themselves as they were in severe chronic pain and suddenly found themselves cut off from the meds that let them live a normal life also went through the roof.
There was a serious problem with prescription drugs, in typical US drug policy fashion we took that problem and drastically increased how many people died from it, with untold suffering by the collateral damage of people who actually needed those meds. Media and politicians also played a big role here.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
They took the RXs away, so now it's on to much more dangerous things for all the addicts that can't get their script anymore.
Re: (Score:3)
Because we don't want people sharing needles, that ends up creating a worst outcome. Also, needles and syringes are extremely easy and cheap to get. But people sharing the same vaping pen, that's fine (as far as we're aware).
Not that I agree with that vaping ban either, banning vaping pens, but not cigarettes, that doesn't make too much sense to me either.
Re: (Score:2)
I know, right??
Re: (Score:2)
I'm totally baffled at the logic. Could someone help this make sense?
Giving clean needles to heroin addicts provably reduces the risk of death and the transmission of diseases. This is something that the medical community has come to agree on over time. Regardless of your (or my) opinions on helping addicts, doctors generally tend toward trying to prevent people dying wherever possible.
On the other hand, politicians are more likely to try to appear decisive*. If they also sound like they know what they're talking about, so much the better.
What happened here was simply a knee
Re: (Score:2)
"unlikely that any of these bans have been implemented yet"
I don't know from personal experience. I don't vape. But the guy in the cubical across from me does, several times during the work day. (It's kinda annoying.) When the ban was announced a couple weeks ago, he took a day off and went through all the shops he could in a day, buying up product the day before it was taken off the market. Again, I don't vape so I only have second-hand information, but it appears that bans have been implemented in at
Re: are our values skewed? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It is only the opposite of what you would expect if this is your first time paying attention to what they do instead of what they say.
Point.
Re: are our values skewed? (Score:1)
"in some of the most reactionary Progressive areas, which is exactly what one would expect"
FTFY
Re: (Score:2)
"in some of the most reactionary Progressive areas, which is exactly what one would expect"
FTFY
Also point.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Simple: They think (against all reason) that people can just stop vaping. For heroin, they have data so solid saying people cannot just stop that they cannot simply claim differently. Hence the base problem is that these people are deeply stupid and will hurt others as long as that is an option.
Re: (Score:2)
I only have one data point, but many many years ago, during a very bad time in my life, I roomed with a heroin addict. (Although I didn't partake myself.) I observed him quitting cold turkey. When he came out of it, I asked him what it felt like. He said it's not like they show in the movies -- the screaming and thrashing and stuff. It's more, he said, like having a bad case of the flu for several days. Observing what he went through, that seems about right.
Again, only one data point, but I would ques
Re: (Score:3)
Your friend was fortunate that he had such a small habit, and yes the screaming and thra
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, good information, and just goes to show, living with an addict doesn't make one an expert. I agree on the psychological aspect -- it's something alcoholics (there are some in my family) and totally addicted smokers (likewise) also go through. But probably not to the same extent.
I think the degree of addiction varies also. I'm the son of a raging alcoholic, who's sister was also a raging alcoholic, (and I'm told there is a genetic component to that type of addiction) yet I can drink or not drink and n
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
bribes
Funny you should mention that. I'm absolutely convinced (although I don't yet have proof) that in the case of cardiomyopathy, (see earlier post) bribes from large companies producing mass produced Chinese crap, who feel threatened by smaller companies producing higher quality, local products, is precisely what's going on.
In the case of vaping, it would be... bribes from tobacco companies?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, understood. So why ban vaping?
(And I'm asking as a person who's really irritated by the practice. But I grudgingly admit, it's a valid question.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with you.
Re: (Score:2)
(the current surge in opioid deaths are mostly due to pill abuse)
That's just not true. It's due mostly to the heroin+random fentanyl analogs in street drugs. We didn't have to force all the people that started abusing pills out of the medical system and onto that deadlier alternative, but that's US drug policy for ya... take something dangerous, and specifically choose the response that will create the absolute maximum number of deaths and the most suffering.
Should be 'the current surge in opioid deaths are mostly due heroin/fentanyl abuse caused by a deliberate harm-m
Re: (Score:2)
It's called HIV which affects more than the people sticks a needle in themselves. At least try to think things through before regurgitating the same tired crap you read all over the internet.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, please hold your ire for just a minute. The place where the city's Saturday Market is held once a week happens to be near a sheltered area (under an overpass) where a lot of addicts hang out. And so, there's the usual litter and human waste in the area, which includes enough discarded "fits" that you can find one on the ground without looking too hard. Personal observation, not tired crap from the internet. Can we rationally discuss the risk associated with these "free" needles lying about? Not som
Re: (Score:2)
It has nothing to do with risk. It has to do with control. If you ban "shooting up" you get a bunch of slaves that are junkies with all those attendant problems, and they are not good labourers in your gulag. If you ban "vaping" you get a relatively good crop of slaves that will make you lots of money when you put them to forced labour in your gulags.
So you see, that is what it really boils down too. Just follow the money.
Re: (Score:2)
Because not handing out the syringes will cause even more deaths? A clean needle is better than reusing your junkie friend's needle. Yes, it's a politically charged issue, usually opposed by the same people who believe that free condoms in schools leads to more sex.
Re: (Score:2)
The syringes cause less of those junkies to die than otherwise would. There's little the state can do to stop them from using heroin, since the law obviously hasn't managed to do it despite heroin being very illegal, but they can curb the more risky behaviors associated with illicit injectable abuse in general.
Re: (Score:2)
Heroin: Existing problem. No amount of prohibition has made it go away, so all we can do is attempt to reduce the damage.
Vaping: new product just on the market that turns out to be harmful. There's a chance this can be nipped in the bud.
Re: (Score:1)
Vaping: new product just on the market that turns out to be harmful. There's a chance this can be nipped in the bud.
This is wrong on many levels. Are you deliberately framing this incorrectly to serve an agenda, or are you just ignorant? It's not new, it's not 'vaping' that's hurting people, and as far as we can tell VG&PG&Nicotine is pretty damn safe in the grand scheme.
Re: (Score:2)
Yet they give out syringes to heroin junkies
Completely different public health crisis. They don't give out syringes to heroin junkies for anything to do with heroin or heroin related deaths. They do it to prevent the spread of blood born diseases.
Lots of statistics on how this lead to a massive reduction in the spread of HIV : https://www.citylab.com/equity... [citylab.com]
A heroin junkie fucking themselves up is cheap. Some (heroin junkie or otherwise) contracting HIV is expensive, burdensome on the health system and infectious.
Re: (Score:2)
The logic is harm reduction. Heroin (ab)users will share needles if they have no access to new ones with a high likelihood of spreading diseases among them however giving out syringes isn't a recruitment tactic, people will not start to use heroin because of that. Vaping however is something people can just try out as we all know it's perfectly safe and only creates water vapor/s. If there's something unknown that is starting to kill an increasing amount of people it's logical to try to stop that as long as
I'm not worried about my kid shooting up (Score:2)
It's extremely unlikely with my kid's upbringing that they'll turn to heroin. I have good insurance so they'll probably not be part of that 35k. But I can't stop some rando from going nuts at
Question (Score:2, Troll)
Why is the CDC doing a study on vaping deaths while they're not allowed to do studies on gun related deaths because the gun deaths aren't a disease? Last time I looked, vaping isn't a disease either and it most certainly isn't killing anywhere near the amount of people guns are.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The CDC want to collect statistics: what is killing us, what is harming us, where are the diseases coming from, and so forth. All those statistics points to areas to consider for prevention, and will highlight when there's a spike in rising occurances. Note that the CDC also tracks statistics on automobile deaths.
Re: (Score:2)
"Shooting people is not an addiction."
Well, yes, it most certainly is. There are many different forms of "serial killers" that are addicted to killing. Some of them were addicted to shooting people.
Re: (Score:2)
Given that this started with no known cause, it's pretty obviously fair, at that point if not in general, to classify what was happening to some peoples' lungs as a disease. Once we had more information, we were in a position where with any normal consumer product, this would be more of an FDA or CPSC kind of thing. But the CDC was already involved, and there's intersection with a subclass of the product that isn't even legal, so what even *should* happen, let alone what would/will happen, is kind of a big
That's ok (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
You were not even built.
It is as stupid as being against cooked food.
Surely there are more intelligent reasons to be against something that caused a bunch of injuries and deaths.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. The implied intent is missing.
The type of evolution that would fit would be "directed evolution," the idea some Deists have that their Deity created evolution and guides it.
Otherwise, evolution isn't building anything. It doesn't have agency. "Evolution" is a label placed on a result. The whole concept of "trail and error" is totally different than what happens in evolution. Things live, and life tries to continue living and breeding, there is no "trial and error" involved. There is no intent, as impl
Re: (Score:2)
The whole concept of "trail and error" is totally different than what happens in evolution.
Oh we could talk about this all night. I could easily write a wall of text on this subject. But to simplify - where I say "trial", I mean a mutation, and where I say "error", I mean a gene or mutation is wiped out - for whatever reason. The reason doesn't matter, what matters is it was removed from the pool. But as for success and failure - I don't agree. Mutation is either neutral, beneficial or harmful. Many mutations are disea
Re: (Score:2)
Pedantry. I'm certainly no creationist. If you want to argue minutiae go ahead.
I stopped reading here, because why would anybody go on? You don't care about the details and consider words with clear, narrow meaning to be pedantry. How could you hope to contribute?
Re: (Score:2)
I stopped reading here
And I stopped reading here.
Re: (Score:2)
We were not built to breathe water.
Hence I am against drowning.
Re: (Score:2)
OP's statement would be closer to, although still not really the same as, "hence, I am against bottled water." I think that's probably kind of the point you were making, but like... nobody thinks drowning is harmless.
Vaping is so broadly defined, you're doing it now (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You could always have a glass of water. That WILL kill you. After all, everyone that is dead drank at least one glass of water in their lifetime. Ergo, drinking water is the leading cause of death. Come to think of it, becoming alive was the leading cause of death. After all, everyone who "became alive" also "became dead". If they had not "became alive" then they could not have "became dead" ... so therefore "becoming alive" leads irreversibly to "becoming dead".
Re: (Score:2)
Because the P wasn't always there, and "CDC" has better mouthfeel.
The real reason it happened (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
is there a simple detection method for the acetate content?
or, if not, at least some way to filter it out, like with heating ?
Re: (Score:2)
I have seen plenty of hashish which is basically hashish mixed with black paint and dried to a similar consistency.
God knows what smoking paint does to your lungs, but thankfully where I live there are plenty of places you can go to buy quality stuff legally.
Who would have thought ... (Score:2)
CDC Confirms Vitamin E Acetate As Main Culprit
Re: (Score:2)
Except that isn't the particular damage that was being caused, or it would've been happening to more vape users in the years before the rise of marijuana-containing cartridges. All vaping involves that particular risk, but that risk is evidently low compared to the specific injuries, similar to chemical burns, that were caused by using Vitamin E to thicken diluted marijuana vape oil.
Simple questions about Vitamin E Acetate (Score:2)
Can somebody supply some basic information, as the news stories don't seem to have this:
1. What is the purpose of adding Vitamin E Acetate to cannabis vapes?
2. Does that purpose only apply for cannabis vapes? Why is it not added to other types, or is it?
3. Why do only illegal operations add it? Was it known to be dangerous already?
4. Considering illegal operations probably add all kinds of shit, why is this additive so common?
Re:Simple questions about Vitamin E Acetate (Score:5, Informative)
Can somebody supply some basic information, as the news stories don't seem to have this:
1. What is the purpose of adding Vitamin E Acetate to cannabis vapes?
It’s a thickening agent.
2. Does that purpose only apply for cannabis vapes? Why is it not added to other types, or is it?
it only applies to cannabis vapes. It’s added because pure cannabis extract is as thick as cold honey, it looks solid unlike highly concentrated nicotine vape fluid which is basically just as runny as the thinning fluid. Thinning agents need to be added to vape cannabis and common thinning agents are harmless. Criminals cut extract (dilute it) far more than normal, but if you use thinning agent the end product is super runny and obviously fake. These idiots added lipids that give you fatal pneumonia to make it look thick and potent again.
3. Why do only illegal operations add it? Was it known to be dangerous already?
Because fooling your customers into thinking they are buying a potent product when it’s just poison filler is as profitable as it is criminal. It’s sheer idiocy to use as a thickner, these aren’t educated people
4. Considering illegal operations probably add all kinds of shit, why is this additive so common?
Because it’s cheap and you can buy it anywhere and very short term it’s a way to fleece customers with a knock off product while making thousands or tens of thousands of dollars per week.
Re: (Score:2)
Added by illicit sellers to cut their product. It was never approved for use or found in use by legal vaping products.
Re: (Score:2)
Good discussion on Freakonomics Radio (Score:2)
There is a good discussion about vaping on Freakonomics Radio [freakonomics.com] - why it may be a good thing vs the alternative, how lack of regulation has caused a surge in vaping among young Americans, and how the recent medical cases seem to be related to black market cannabis products. TLDR; vaping is overall good if done right (in the sense of better than nicotine addicts dying from cigarettes), it has not been done right in the US (but better in e.g. UK where vaping has not become a trend amongst the young), and bannin
Vaping Illiness = Jake Leg (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Not enough of them evidently as they're still a bane on society. When enough of them die and the quality of our society improves, then we have a win.
You're showing both bias and a questionable ability to discern cause and effect. Maybe society would be better off with less like *you*.
Maybe if you had *any* idea how many 'quality' professionals use cannabis regularly and yet still manage to contribute positively to society you wouldn't say such idiotic things, but I doubt it.
Somtime the old ways are best (Score:2)
The last time I consumed THC, (admittedly about 10 years ago), I vaped it. I put some premium bud in a device that looked kind of like a soldering iron with a tube on one end, set the temperature via two buttons and a small LCD display, and enjoyed - no liquids of unknown provenance and composition required. Sure, it's possible I inhaled some pesticide - but that probably would have been the case even if I had smoked it. Vaping was way easier on my lungs than smoking - and I somehow doubt the weed would hav
Pretty sure lung related vaping injuries... (Score:1)
We knew this months ago! It was Honeycut! (Score:2)