News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
the whole point of the FDA taking over cannabis is the same as nicotine vaping
shut down the industry with over regulation that sounds positive on the surface
If that was their goal with vaping, it's been a spectacular failure. So I say they should go for it.
no it has not been a failure
the government was able to shut down most of the vape companies
some of them were very up to code being made in clean rooms good enough to make pharmaceuticals
now we have big tobacco vapes mixed in with shoddy products
have you talked to industry leaders such as business owners of some of these vape companies?
nicotine and cannabis industry is in shambles due to bad policies and laws
no wonder look at the right leaning conservatives that keep getting voted in with the latest one having a prosecutor as a vice
cannabis being rescheduled and not legalized is a trojan horse designed to make the people feel complacent and happy with only extreme regulation and the disappearance of sustainable, innovative products being the end result
I see people vaping all over the place. If their goal was to shut down the industry, that sounds like a failure to me.
This also sounds like a failure of their goal:
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/04/ftc-issues-third-report-e-cigarette-advertising-sales-us
Generally, profits of an industry the government is shutting down don't go up.
Sure the industry is gaining money, but you're ignoring specific company shutdowns and restrictions that shaped the industry out of the hands of certain players. There have been a lot of regulatory fingers in the pie, particularly above state level, that weren't aimed at making the populace safer but instead at making those companies unable to produce or sell their most popular products. There's also a lot of legal language bites like "e-cigarette" and "open container" that are seeing non-uniform interpretation in legal states, across vape legislature and cannabis legislature alike.
Draconic legislature isn't quite turning the country into a hellscape for consumers, sure. But it's clearly a possible side effect that isn't being considered, especially as states are beginning to take it upon themselves to start outlawing studied hemp-derived cannabinoids (like delta8/10 or THC-P or THC-A) that are provided for under the 2018 farm bill.
Tl;Dr while the industry is growing, it's clear it has enemies with legal power and that's the crux of the complaint.
Okay, but this is what OP said:
The vaping industry has not been shut down, it's growing, as I demonstrated. So, again, if that was their goal, it was a spectacular failure.
Cool restatement. Did you actually read what I posted instead of snipping that post though? I acknowledge it isn't working, but you can CLEARLY see intent of decisions there skewed toward market control of a new industry, especially based on the similarities (Product control focused on appeal, not risk) of legislature brought forward compared to previous concerns
I wasn't quoting you, I was quoting what OP said and why I responded to it the way I did. OP claimed the goal was to shut the vaping industry down. I showed why that wasn't true. It's not my fault if you responded to me with some unrelated point.
You don't understand my point and you wanted to dunk on someone, it's cool. Keep posting every 2 minutes without actually reading, I'm sure the karma is good for something dude
Since your point was unrelated to mine, the only thing I don't understand is why you replied to me about it.
Seems like if they wanted to shut it down, rescheduling it first would be an unnecessary step since it's currently schedule one.
It will be a messy transition, as the article points out. But I doubt the point is to shut it down. Especially considering the political climate around cannabis and the messaging from the White House.
but rescheduling allows them to add regulations just like when this happened to ejuices
Unlikely. The public and political agendas are just the opposite for the two substances: most people support the expansion of cannabis products and oppose the expansion of nicotine products.
safe effective nicotine consumption were generally supported by the public too and was being ingrained in the culture in movies and tv
now it is combustible cigarettes with alcohol being heavily promoted again as well in television and film
if the US does not stop voting in senile past retirement age religious right leaning presidents who view any alteration in the citizen's conscience it might not ever change or get better
What evidence do you have that there is such a thing?
the synthetic nicotine being produce is done with green chemistry meaning no heavy metals used in synthesis
with the nicotine being lab made no ground pollutants such as lead and other heavy metals are present just like fake vanilla extract which most seasoning coming from India with polluted soil
also less soil less environmental impact
the ingredients have gotten safer over time as well also leading to changes in other industries
hugely better product both health and environmental and all around
not to mention not have the ill effects of second hand smoke
my own lung capacity was around 80% and dropping during the years was consuming combustible nicotine and cannabis products but now is above 90% had my lungs checked by a doctor
lightyears healthier
None of that has to do with your claim, and it is also more claims instead of evidence.
Where's your evidence that there is a safe level of nicotine consumption?
Nevermind this, see my reply to squid below. I was operating under the wrong view that nicotine by itself is not cancer causing.
Safer is not safe.
I agree, it's safer. But how can we know it's safe below a certain amount for lifelong vapers when there hasn't been enough time to do a long-term study?
Wouldn't (and I say this as a long-term cannabis vaporizer myself) putting anything into the lungs on a regular basis other than air be inherently unsafe long-term?
Nothing is 100% safe. Which is why harm reduction is an important part of the conversation when discussing drug addiction.
Water is safer than tea. Tea safer than coffee. All three can in theory kill you if consumed in large enough quantities.
Anyway, I figured I would dig around more on vaping instead of just glancing at the top search result.
And, I take what I said back. Nicotine by itself causes cancer. Tobacco just makes it more likely.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9222281/
I don't disagree with you on the "safer" thing at all, but OP said that it was "safe."
But this has become moot anyway based on your research.
Yeah, my bad for glancing at the top search result before I made my long-winded post above lol.
Hope you're well, Mr. Squid.
No better than I have been in over a year, but we're working on it. Thanks.
Sorry to hear that. My mental health is finally on the mend. Giving myself permission to be myself for the first time in my life, really.
Hope things get better for you soon :)
That's great! Good luck to you!
Thanks!
As flying squid helped me see, safer doesn't mean safe.
Nicotine alone can cause cancer and while vaping is 'safer' than tobacco, in that it's less carcinogenic, it is still a carcinogen. And because of the ROA, vaping is actually more addictive than cigarettes.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9222281/