vapes harmless
They’re much less harmful than cigarettes. But we don’t know long-term stuff, especially with all the different product blends that exist. But I agree, it should be legal to vape where it’s legal to smoke.
Comment on Vietnam introduces tougher penalties on e-cigarette and heated tobacco use
LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 months ago
Jesus that’s messed up
kungen@feddit.nu 2 months ago
LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 months ago
Yeah your statement doesn’t contradict mine, as far as we know they are harmless. But we also know really well too, these things have been studied up and down since the 90s and still nothing was really found.
The *blends" thing idk about, the only ingredients out there that go into vape juice are VG, PG, nicotine and flavouring, there aren’t any legal variations on that, this is usually pretty well regulated in the first world.
athatet@lemmy.zip 2 months ago
“As far as we know they are harmless”
Doctors in old timey days giving people cocaine for their babies toothache.
Triumph@fedia.io 2 months ago
They didn't exist in the 90s.
SupraMario@lemmy.world 2 months ago
PG has been pumped through hospitals hvac since the 50s because of its antibacterial abilities. Basically they do it to help curb MSRA infections. We very well know what PG does to us, vaping isn’t much different.
LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 months ago
- Close enough tbqh. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_cigarette
krooklochurm@lemmy.ca 2 months ago
Just because we don’t know the long term stuff doesn’t mean there is harmful long term stuff.
Doesn’t mean there isn’t either.
That’s the thing about not knowing.
The evidence on the short and near term stuff does suggest it’s orders of msg tide safer than smoking though.
Which doesn’t mean harmless.
LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 months ago
Harmless means absence of harm. That we don’t know of any harms does indeed not mean there aren’t any harms to be eventually known.
Therefore, as far as we know it is harmless. Hence why I said so. That would be understandable to commenters ITT if they knew how to read.
And additionally, in my personal opinion - it makes plain sense that the longer we study vapes, yet find no harms, the probability increases that they are indeed harmless.
Or at the very least I believe they are no more harmful than the harms caused by our existing standards for e.g. air pollution, in that vaping causes no excess deaths, but may do so if we had cleaner air and lower base rates of lung disease to which vaping may be some contributing factor.
I’m not an expert nor do I think the above two paragraphs constitute a fact, and I’m more than happy to change my view given sufficient reason, however I also dont think things for no reason or purely because it serves me or brings me some sort of comfort of a lazy mind. Frankly I doubt I would stop using nicotine even if I knew vaping was directly harmful in some way no more than I would stop using alcohol already knowing that it is incredibly harmful (not that I drink alcohol but that’s besides the point).
My reasoning for this is that even with the extremely primitive understanding of both the scientific method and the human body (not to mention technology for the analysis of it), cause and effect around tobacco-caused illnesses was known since the 1700s.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_effects_of_tobacco
You can check the sources yourself, but for example:
Overview of the history: …wiley.com/…/j.1440-1843.2003.00483.x
Here’s from the 1800s: …utexas.edu/…/Nicotiana_tabacum-notes.html
Here’s a note of observations between the late 1800s to 1920s
SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 2 months ago
I don’t know about them being harmless, but they’re way less harmful than cigarettes.
It’s a perfect is the enemy of good kind of thing. Less people are smoking cigarettes, which is good. But they are using vapes so it isn’t perfect. So let’s make some laws to make things perfect!
Either the law isn’t followed and people still vape, or it is “successful” and people go back to smoking cigarettes. People are going to do things that are bad for them. Better to have them do the lesser of two evils.
krooklochurm@lemmy.ca 2 months ago
I was with you until your brick-stupid take on porn.
LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 months ago
That’s just an example.
I do find myself subconsciously judging pornography creators and consumers, but I would never express such a thing nor act upon it as if it’s the truth.
I’m not so stupid as to think that just because of a personal distaste in my subjective preference that it is somehow objectively bad or harmful, much less that any action should be taken based on something as vague as my own vibes. I’m not a bigot, and I try my best to not trust my “gut” and to think rationally instead.
That, to me, is simply being rational, something that is in short supply nowadays.
thatsnomayo@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
Image
unknown@piefed.social 2 months ago
Isn’t that Kyle Rottenhouse? This reads like you’re on Rittenhouse’s side with an anti vaping on babies view.
So not only is your meme dumb and using a picture of a violent far right idiot as the supposed ‘correct’ side of this strawman, you are also a shitty parent for apparently not moving your own baby out of someone’s vape cloud and instead starting a fight with a loser blowing vape clouds on a baby.
LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 months ago
It’s a meme ya dunce. I think it’s meant to be edgy. And I don’t think it’s glorifying vaping, it looks like typical /r/drugscieclejerk
unknown@piefed.social 2 months ago
Bro I’m not anti vape and I didn’t think the meme was glorifying vaping either.
I was calling the maker/user of the meme an idiot for all the shit you think you just explained to me. Like you literally just paraphrased my comment and called me the idiot for ’not getting it’.