FDA says -- Juul Illegally Claimed That Its Products Were Safer than Cigarettes.

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

nakedfrog

Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
48,029
1,572
126
Dosage, dosage, dosage. Toxicity is entirely meaningless without considering dosage. Literally everything is toxic in sufficient doses. That's showing that you need huge, direct dosages for PG to show negative effects. And yeah, I absolutely think something can be entirely safe to breathe in low concentrations with no problems while being toxic in large dosages or injected directly into your bloodstream.
You mean, like oxygen? :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhatoseAlpha

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
25,015
806
126
if 30 year olds are dying from vaping its not safer then smoking. Sorry. We knew this years ago btw. The fda is clearly shit...


Industrial inhalants
There are many industrial inhalants that are known to cause various types of bronchiolitis, including bronchiolitis obliterans.[15]

Industrial workers who have presented with bronchiolitis:


  • nylon-flock workers[14]
  • workers who spray prints onto textiles with polyamide-amine dyes[14]
  • battery workers who are exposed to thionyl chloride fumes
  • workers at plants that use or manufacture flavorings, e.g. diacetyl butter-like flavoring [7][14][16]
popcorn lung was named for the flavoring manufacture. Its the same oil people are vaping. We live in a hellscape...

Ummm ...
Diacetyl is found in the vapor created by some electronic cigarette flavors, however the chemical is present in less than 1% the levels found in cigarette smoke; therefore cigarette vaping has been determined not to contribute to the disease
 

Dulanic

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2000
9,533
150
116
Juul is owned by Altria -- formerly known as Philip Morris. It would be very odd for the company to sabotage its own business (and spend billions of dollars on an acquisition) by portraying vaping as dangerous. If anything, wouldn't it want to portray vaping as safer so that it still has a business even when cigarettes fall flat?

Vaping is bad for you even without additives and drugs. Juul, for example, includes nicotine; if it's harmful in a regular cigarette, it's harmful in an e-cig. Other vapes include chemicals like diacetyl (which produces "popcorn lung") and formaldehyde. You hear about fewer incidents because vaping as a phenomenon is still much newer, with fewer people practicing it and most vapers yet to suffer long-term effects.

I'd add that the media likely focuses on vaping because it's on the rise and still has some unknowns. Cigarette smoking, for the most part, has been on the decline; everyone knows it's bad for you. It's well-worn territory that doesn't need to be covered again.
Can see they learned their lesson the 1st time.... I mean who cares if you end up getting fined $2 if you made $100 right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: dank69

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
27,025
587
126
If we cut away all the BS and go right to the bottom line -- no amount of supposed reports that dont exactly say eCigs are safe or harmful is going to stop eCigs from being banned!! Why?
Because it appears as if the publics health is at stake and local and statewide officials want to head off another fiasco like the cigarette fiasco!!
Cigarettes are harmful and it doesnt matter if it is your body!! eCig will be eventually banned!!
At least as we know them now!!
I`m out....
 
Last edited:

allisolm

Elite Member
Administrator
Jan 2, 2001
22,904
779
136
eCig will be eventually banned!!
At least as we know them now!!
According to Trump, the FDA is going to ban the sales of all flavored ecigs in about 2 weeks.

Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azaran announced that newly proposed enforcement policy would require flavored e-cigarette companies to take their products off the market.

"It'll take several weeks for us to put out the final guidance that will announce all the parameters around the enforcement policy, and then there will likely be about a 30-day delay to effective date, as is customary," Azar said. But "at that point all flavored e-cigarettes other than tobacco flavor would have to be removed from the market."

 
  • Like
Reactions: JEDIYoda

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
96,892
11,681
136
Considering that I've tried nicotine myself and could easily quit -- definitely not -- and research confirms it.

Um, dummy.

This study looks at dopamine-release as a form of what they classify as class-"whatever" addictive substances, like opiates.

Nicotine doesn't work that way (As discussed in your paper), it works in a different way. This doesn't make it less addictive (they never make this claim that you want to make in your post--they don't defend it, that's for sure). In fact, when you take into consideration dosage (extremely important), nicotine really runs ahead of the field as lifetime-addictive class.

"I tried nicotine...don't care."

Oh, you tried a thing, eh? What, you think people are snorting one line of cocaine and going apeshit bonkers for the rest of their lives after that? Meth? Crack? Heroine? lolno. For one thing...a lot of those are not going to be anyone's first drug. It certainly isn't.

This study looks at how nicotine alters brain chemistry (which it does, in reversible, but also very serious ways), in quite a different way than what opiates do.

Do science better, my friend. This is not a good look.
 

Maxima1

Platinum Member
Jan 15, 2013
2,553
422
126
Um, dummy.

This study looks at dopamine-release as a form of what they classify as class-"whatever" addictive substances, like opiates.

Nicotine doesn't work that way (As discussed in your paper), it works in a different way. This doesn't make it less addictive (they never make this claim that you want to make in your post--they don't defend it, that's for sure).
It's obvious you didn't read it.

"Our data suggest that MAOIs contained in tobacco and tobacco smoke act in synergy with nicotine to enhance its rewarding effects. "

In fact, when you take into consideration dosage (extremely important), nicotine really runs ahead of the field as lifetime-addictive class.

This study looks at how nicotine alters brain chemistry (which it does, in reversible, but also very serious ways), in quite a different way than what opiates do.

Do science better, my friend. This is not a good look.
If it doesn't have the MAOIs, it isn't nearly as addictive. What do you not get? You're reading those moronic statements for public consumption that have as much scientific value as their inane classification of marijuana with the hard drugs.


"It seems very safe even in nonsmokers," he said. "In our studies we find it actually reduces blood pressure chronically. And there were no addiction or withdrawal problems, and nobody started smoking cigarettes. The risk of addiction to nicotine alone is virtually nil."


Cigarettes and other forms of tobacco contain the addictive drug nicotine. Other components, either naturally occurring in tobacco or additives that are intentionally added during the manufacturing process, may add to the addictiveness of tobacco products. As such, these components can make cigarette smokers more easily and heavily dependent.

Efforts to regulate tobacco product dependence are emerging globally. Additives that increase tobacco dependence will be prohibited under the new European Tobacco Product Directive.


Conclusions
Some e-cigarette users were dependent on nicotine-containing e-cigarettes, but these products were less addictive than tobacco cigarettes. E-cigarettes may be as or less addictive than nicotine gums, which themselves are not very addictive.

Oh, you tried a thing, eh? What, you think people are snorting one line of cocaine and going apeshit bonkers for the rest of their lives after that? Meth? Crack? Heroine? lolno. For one thing...a lot of those are not going to be anyone's first drug. It certainly isn't.
I'm not sure what your point is here. I'll note though that genetics play a role (around 40-60% depending on drug) and that could be a reason why I only find it significantly lower than the public hysteria over it (still just low-moderate at best for the quicker methods of delivery), but if your point is about gateway drugs, that's BS.

Edit: I'm not dumb and think I should have been hooked on the first try, btw. lmao. No. I was taking it for about 2 months as a nootropic. One thing I got a kick out of was that it made me dream much much more (I hardly ever dream).
 
Last edited:

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
27,025
587
126
regardless Tobacco smoking and or vaping are not good for you!1 Regardless how addictive they are!!
 

sportage

Diamond Member
Feb 1, 2008
7,478
471
126
No matter what they say, this stinks to high heaven.
How many have died from vaping and how many from tobacco use? Or, of a gun shot wound?
The absolute fact is.... vaping breaks the tobacco addition.
And vaping is much safer than tobacco.
And this onslaught of attacking vaping is not of their real concern nor any government agency actually caring about your health., this is a dark conspiracy. Why, and from exactly whom is still an unknown, but I still point the finger at the tobacco industry.
I know three people personally that quit tobacco for vaping, and they never went back to tobacco.
Two of the three not only quit tobacco, but soon quit vaping as well. All they needed was that break from tobacco addition by turning to vaping, then the vaping eventually petered out.
Is the issue with giving up tobacco for vaping, followed by giving up vaping as well why companies are all in a panic?
Whatever it is, it is quite clear a conspiracy is going on.
So they claim what? 100 people harmed from vaping? And the media shows scary pictures of people in hospitals.
How about also showing all the people in hospitals shot by guns and killed by bullets every day?
And why does Trump not ban bullets too?
And why is not the national health organization concerned about bullets killing people, daily?

Seriously, the collusion and the conspiring and the non stop 24/7 news coverage should be a clue that something is not right with this assault on vaping. WAY out of proportion.
And the inconsistency of attacking one issue while totally ignoring so many others way more dangerous to the general population at large just proves my point.
Sure, ok.... go after vaping, but first also ban all tobacco products AND the manufacturing of all bullets.
If the concern is not consistent, then you know this whole thing stinks to high heaven.
Someone has an agenda, an agenda so powerful it consumes the media and now the president as well.
And we all know that such lopsided attention can mean only one thing.... Someone is losing a lot of money and someone wants to make a lot of money. They don't care about health, they only care about the money and the power.\
Why else would Donald Trump get involved?

We're being played folks. And it's not the first time.
 

Viper1j

Platinum Member
Jul 31, 2018
2,058
748
96
It's going to be a hoot watching the fur fly when they take the vapes away, and everyone goes back to Marlboros and Newports. Except for those few of us, that bought our vape pens early. Think I'll go get5 more new batteries today.
 

Maxima1

Platinum Member
Jan 15, 2013
2,553
422
126
No matter what they say, this stinks to high heaven.
How many have died from vaping and how many from tobacco use? Or, of a gun shot wound?
The absolute fact is.... vaping breaks the tobacco addition.
And vaping is much safer than tobacco.
And this onslaught of attacking vaping is not of their real concern nor any government agency actually caring about your health., this is a dark conspiracy. Why, and from exactly whom is still an unknown, but I still point the finger at the tobacco industry.
I think a lot of it has to do with the government wanting their sin tax to fill the void of the tobacco cash they were use to. They've already manipulated the public into believing that nicotine is really horrible, so it makes it that much easier.

It's very telling though that this is singled out over 6 deaths in a decade when there are far more things that would be on the list before vaping got its turn.

 

Bitek

Diamond Member
Aug 2, 2001
7,696
1,749
136
Uh, why the fuck was a Juul representative in a school?
Hey kids, try opiates! The safer version of heroin!
FDA approved. Science stuff. Totally safe!

We take cash, credit, crypto or venmo. Place your order now.
 

Bitek

Diamond Member
Aug 2, 2001
7,696
1,749
136
Making medical claims, gotta provide medical proof. Absolutely falls under the purview of the FDA. Juul needs valid scientific evidence. Simple (in reality - complicated) as that.
Yep. They are potentially in for a world of hurt if they want to try and persist with the medical claims.

What's not clear to me yet if this is truly part of a crackdown on an industry that's gotten completely out of control.

Regulating they medical claims is one issue, second is how much the FDA will step in to rein in the manufacture of these products to ensure safety.

There are clearly not any controls on the additives and flavorings that are being added and it's put lives at stake.
 

Viper1j

Platinum Member
Jul 31, 2018
2,058
748
96
TIL that chemical molecules have genes. :D

But yes, Caffeine is horribly addictive. ...in my earlier days doing lab work, we actually worked with purified caffeine and nicotine (survivability studies or something with insects. Not really drug relevant, those were just the tools). Those things are effing potent. The nicotine especially was quite vile when mixed with the standard food that we used, and heated it up. I think a shotglass of that stuff would be enough to kill a human.
Thanks for the correction. I meant 3 MOLECULAR differences between caffeine and cocaine. There was a time when cocaine was legal in this country by the way, it was the prime ingredient in "Coca"-Cola. It wasn't until it was declared illegal, that caffeine was used as a substitute.

Same thing with opium, It was available, over-the-counter, no prescription required. although back then, it's brand name was "Laudanum".

1568298816542.png

Laudanum is a tincture of opium containing approximately 10% powdered opium by weight. Reddish-brown and extremely bitter, laudanum contains almost all of the opium alkaloids, including morphine and codeine. Wikipedia
 
Last edited:

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
27,025
587
126
Coca-Cola (Coke) had cocaine in it, in varying amounts, from 1886 – 1929. At the time cocaine was legal and treated as a medicine. Coca-Cola didn’t invent using the coca plant in drinkable products (coca wine was also popular), it’s just the one product with its history and name firmly rooted in it. In short, Coke used to have coke in it.[1]


From 1900 – 1929 opinion turned against cocaine, but Coke continued to use trace amounts of cocaine and “spent” coca leaves to maintain its flavor and trademark. Today Coca-Cola uses caffeine rather than cocaine.
 

nakedfrog

Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
48,029
1,572
126
Thanks for the correction. I meant 3 MOLECULAR differences between caffeine and cocaine.
That's still a meaningless measurement, there's one molecular different between carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide. Or water and hydrogen peroxide.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
27,025
587
126
That's still a meaningless measurement, there's one molecular different between carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide. Or water and hydrogen peroxide.
None of this matter, it is all a diversion from the real problem and YES there is a problem!
 

nakedfrog

Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
48,029
1,572
126
None of this matter, it is all a diversion from the real problem and YES there is a problem!
Yes, sensationalized media and characteristic disproportionate response for the sake of looking like we're doing something about it.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
27,025
587
126
Yes, sensationalized media and characteristic disproportionate response for the sake of looking like we're doing something about it.
So lets "pretend" that what you say is true! Had they done thids way abck when cigarettes were claimed to be safe and we knew they were not safe, how many lives might have been saved? How many people might not have had to live with medical conditions caused by cigarettes?
You want the powers that be to waiting until a true epidemic is upoin us and it is too late to save the lives of many people?
Just because you claim things are being sensationalized that smacks of somebody who is a vaper being in denial.......sorry but if it saves one life it is worth all the sensationalism in the world!!
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
27,025
587
126
Ok so help me here. 6 people die and the fake-president bans certain e-cigarettes and flavors to protect the children. 38 people die this month alone, in mass shootings and we are offering thoughts and prayers and talking about strengthening background checks. He starts off by saying “we have a problem , people are dying, children are dying from e-cigarettes.” Are you freaking kidding me!?!
TAKE THE GUNS. TAKE ALL THE GUNS. TAKE THE GUNS NOW!!!
 

nakedfrog

Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
48,029
1,572
126
So lets "pretend" that what you say is true! Had they done thids way abck when cigarettes were claimed to be safe and we knew they were not safe, how many lives might have been saved? How many people might not have had to live with medical conditions caused by cigarettes?
You want the powers that be to waiting until a true epidemic is upoin us and it is too late to save the lives of many people?
Just because you claim things are being sensationalized that smacks of somebody who is a vaper being in denial.......sorry but if it saves one life it is worth all the sensationalism in the world!!
Meanwhile, tobacco is still legal...
Are you really going to sit there and tell me this isn't being sensationalized?
Honestly not sure why I'm bothering, I know you're easily wound-up and prone to hysterics.
 

Oyeve

Lifer
Oct 18, 1999
20,874
303
126
Ban wine coolers and all flavored booze. I swear, if politicians smoked weed and vaped and smoked cigarettes it would be cheap as hell. But they drink so drinking is ok. No bans on booze since prohibition.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY