Schumer calls FDA chief to ban e-cigarette flavors
submitted 5 months ago by dcjogger from (mytwintiers.com)
[–]Ian 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 5 months ago (8 children)
Not viewable from Europe, but I assume the title says it all?
As both a smoker and a vaper, I support this. Why candy flavoured vapes?
[–]sanchostache 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - 5 months ago (2 children)
Because I'm an adult and get to choose what I put in my own body. Fuck off.
[–]Ian 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 5 months ago (1 child)
Are you OK with people shooting heroin?
[–]sanchostache 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - 5 months ago (0 children)
Yes. Do I support people doing it or condone it? No. Just their choice.
[–]VantaFount 0 insightful - 1 fun0 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 1 fun - 5 months ago (4 children)
Because the best flavor in the world is the one that can keep a person from going back to smoking or dipping. This might be a tobacco, a mint/menthol, a bakery flavor, fruit flavor, or yes even a candy flavor. In my shop we offer 91 such flavors because not everyone is going to like what you or I like.
[–]Ian 0 insightful - 1 fun0 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 1 fun - 5 months ago (3 children)
Its not about personal preference.
I've had very positive experiences with vaping as a replacement for smoking, but as long as vaping is only "less dangerous than tobacco but we don't really know" it should be a tool in the treatment of nicotine addiction, not a permanent solution.
With bakery flavours, fruit flavours and such there's reports of non-smokers taking up vaping, in large parts due to the exotic flavours.
That's not a direction I support.
[–]34679 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 5 months ago (1 child)
There's nothing wrong with more people finding more joy in life. Until you can show otherwise, there's no reason for anyone to get upset.
I'm certain that what we'll find with the recent "vape lung" hysteria is a pesticide or fungicide with a boiling point near THC. All of the cases I've read about mention THC vapes as a possible cause. Some growers will use any chemical they can get their hands on to save their crops, especially as the price drops as it has been due to to legalization and they get more desperate for revenue.
Extraction with solvents will take any chemicals present along with the cannabinoids and concentrate them into the hash. For vaping, the extract is further processed by fractional distillation, which separates out a substance's various constituents by virtue of their differing boiling points. Any chemicals present with a boiling point similar to THC will end up in the THC fraction. So what we have is a super concentrated extract of THC and some unknown harmful chemical with a similar boiling point that was present on the unprocessed cannabis. Needless to say, super concentrated extracts of pesticides and fungicides should not be ingested.
[–]Ian 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 5 months ago (0 children)
There's nothing wrong with more people finding more joy in life.
There's nothing wrong with more people finding more joy in life.
I agree, but it wasn't what I said. What you're doing is setting up a straw man and attacking that instead of my argument, it's a common tactic and I ain't gonna argue against happiness and joy.
[–]VantaFount 0 insightful - 1 fun0 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 1 fun - 5 months ago (0 children)
That's not a direction I support either. I've told people as much when they come in on their 18th birthday to get their first legal vape. But I'm also not one that believes in banning things to protect people from their own choices.
[–]dcjogger[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 5 months ago (0 children)
Our overlords don't even have a good reason for the nanny police state anymore. Toothpicks must be outlawed to protect the environment. Rope must be banned for safety. Baseball hats must be outlawed because they are ugly. Insurance must be mandatory to protect the insurance industry. Flagpoles must be banned to protect property values.
Why not just put Americans in prison when they're born?
Americans hate freedom with a passion.
[–]dcjogger[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 5 months ago (0 children)
Does anyone get the feeling that Americans will be wearing Mao suits and giving Nazi salutes soon?
There was a time when Americans believed in freedom.
The US is dying from a million cuts. Part of the reason the USA is a nanny police state now is that whenever there is a problem, the kneejerk reaction in the US is to call for a new law.
Nanny state laws are not the best solution, however. Nanny state laws lead to more laws, higher fines, and tougher sentences. Thirty-five years ago, DWI laws were enacted that led to DWI checkpoints and lower DWI levels. Seatbelt laws led to backseat seatbelt laws, childseat laws, and pet seatbelt laws. Car liability insurance laws led to health insurance laws and gun liability laws. Smoking laws that banned smoking in buildings led to laws against smoking in parks and then bans against smoking in entire cities. Sex offender registration laws led to sex offender restriction laws and violent offender registration laws.
Nanny state laws don't make us safer, either. Nanny state laws lead people to be careless since they don't need to have personal responsibility anymore. People don't need to be careful crossing the street now because drunk-driving has been outlawed and driving while using a mobile phone is illegal. People don't investigate companies or carry out due diligence because businesses must have business licenses now.
The main point of nanny state laws is not safety. The main purposes of more laws are control and revenue generation for the state.
Another reason laws are enacted is because corporations give donations to lawmakers to stifle competition or increase sales.
Many laws are contradictory, too. Some laws say watering lawns is required, while other laws say watering lawns is illegal.
Many nanny state laws that aim to solve a problem can be fixed by using existing laws. If assault is already illegal, why do we need a new law that outlaws hitting umpires?
Do laws even work? Heroin is illegal, but do people still use heroin?
Nanny state laws are not even necessary. If everything was legal would you steal, murder, and use crack cocaine? Aren't there other ways to solve problems besides calling the police? Couldn't people educate or talk to people who bother them? Can't people boycott businesses they hate? Couldn't people be sued for annoying behavior? Couldn't people just move away? Even if assault was legal, wouldn't attackers risk being killed or injured, too? Do people have consciences? Having no laws doesn't mean actions have no consequences.
If there is no victim, there is no crime.
We don't need thousands of laws when we only need 10.
Should swimming pools be banned because they are dangerous? Hammers? Bottles? Rocks? Energy drinks? Pillows?
Where does it end?
If one state can have self-serve gas stations, why can't every state have them? If sodas were legal 20 years ago, why can't they be legal now?
Freedom is not just a one way street. You can only have freedom for yourself if you allow others to have it.
Control freaks might get angry when a neighbor owns three indoor cats, but what did the neighbor take from them? Why should this be illegal? Is outlawing cats something a free country should do? Doesn't banning everything sound like the opposite of liberty?
Instead of getting mad at people who like freedom, why don't people realize that freedom is a two way street?
If you allow others to paint their house purple then you can, too.
If you allow others to own a gun then you can, too.
If you allow others to swear then you can, too.
If you allow others to gamble then you can, too.
Good men don't need laws. Bad men won't obey laws.
Who wants to live in a prison?
Think. Question everything.
Americans are whistling down to the concentration camps.
use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. sub:pics site:imgur.com dog
sub:pics site:imgur.com dog
advanced search: by author, sub...
~5 users here now