8 ms·

Federal Prosecutors Conducting Criminal Probe of Juul

230 points by mises 7y ago

ent101 7y ago
Honest question: how much of the recent pushback could be attributed to incumbents feeling threatened by Juul et al.?
- thismyrealone 7y ago
  It's all theater as far as I'm concerned. Nobody actually gives a shit about this.
- burkaman 7y ago
  The incumbents own Juul. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/19/health/juul-altria-e-cigarettes.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/19/health/juul-altria-e-ciga...
  - ent101 7y ago
    Sorry! I should've at least googled before asking that question.
- tempsy 7y ago
  The incumbents own Juul. Altria bought a 35% stake for $13b. It’s stock is down 30% since March when broad market is up 5+%.
- mikestew 7y ago
  The incumbents, some of whom own 35% of Juul? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juul#Investors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juul#Investors
- dumbfoundded 7y ago
  Maybe a better question is who would benefit from Juul failing? I'm not sure who. I don't think it's big tobacco. They need vaping to addict the next generation. Maybe vaping spend is taking away from another vice.
  - ceejayoz 7y ago
    > Maybe a better question is who would benefit from Juul failing? Public health?
    - vkou 7y ago
      Yes, but unless you tell us how we can profit from that, that's not an interesting answer.
      - ceejayoz 7y ago
        We can't profit from reducing national healthcare costs for things like lung disease?
    - slfnflctd 7y ago
      It has been proven over and over again that when you ban an addictive substance, the black market and similar-but-still-legal options will rush in to fill the void. Pushing for transparency, research and more data so adults can make better informed decisions about what to do with their own bodies is the answer. Treating adults like children who aren't mature enough to make their own decisions is not.
      - ceejayoz 7y ago
        The massive, decades-long decline in tobacco usage, particularly amongst young people, serves as a strong and highly relevant counterpoint. Restrictions on advertising, access, and efforts to increase the cost etc. have been quite effective there.
  - zippergz 7y ago
    Those of us who are annoyed by people vaping around us would benefit from less vaping. I won't claim to know or believe that Juul specifically failing would actually lead to less vaping, but it can't hurt.
    - 7y ago
- temporaryvector 7y ago
  Wouldn't it be more correct to say that any sanctions and regulations that result from this are unlikely to kill off Juul since it's pretty large already and partially owned by the incumbents and instead would make any new competition have a harder time breaking in into the market? This seems to me the same kind of thing as Facebook and Google supporting privacy regulations. Not that regulation is inherently bad, but this kind of thing seems to be a theme lately. Well, I say lately, but reading up some history, this kind of thing does tend to happen. This is, of course, still not enough of an argument against regulation, but it does tend to temper any optimism I have about regulations that I would be in favor of.
thismyrealone 7y ago
The world is burning to the ground but at least these damn kids won't have Mango flavored e-cigs anymore. What a lovely use of our resources.
- dang 7y ago
  Please don't post unsubstantive comments here.
- travem 7y ago
  > What a lovely use of our resources. Protecting kids from predatory companies selling them addictive substances? Yep that’s exactly what we should be spending resources on.
- save_ferris 7y ago
  I completely disagree, investigating vaping companies for targeting kids is absolutely worthwhile. Big tobacco was prohibited from advertising is various media for creating characters like Joe Camel, only to circumvent the spirit of the law via the internet. Vaping is killing kids, how is this not a valid use of resources?
  - xxpor 7y ago
    >Vaping is killing kids, how is this not a valid use of resources? Citation needed.
  - w3rhn2j34oh5o 7y ago
    It really isn't killing kids, and I would challenge that they are 'targeting them'. As an adult vape user, I love the fruit flavors. They are for my (adult) use only. I would never let someone under 21 get access to this. Why should I be penalized because lots of kids are breaking the law? The recent (adult) deaths from Vaping are due to black market THC cartridges filled with vitamin e acetate. It is very likely the kids are obtaining (safe) retail product, which is a failure in retail process, not the manufacturer. While it is a bad thing that school aged children are illegal acquiring Juul -- how is this different (or even worse) than Alcohol? We should investigate alcohol vendors for making tasty beverages too. Can't have flavors that adults might like... There is a combination of events occurring simultaneously that is making it hard for folks to objectively understand the problem, and if there is actually a problem at all.
holy_city 7y ago
> 28% of high school students this year said they had used an e-cigarette at least once in the past 30 days Holy smokes! If you look at data from a few years ago [1] that's more than double what you'd see for cigarette smoking (eyeballing the numbers here, the data is more granular). Is it easier for kids to get e-cigs than cigarettes? Or do they just want them more? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK294302/table/ch13.t3/?report=objectonly https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK294302/table/ch13.t3/?...
- nullbyte 7y ago
  Juuls are pervasive in modern day high school. Either you have one or your friend has one. My little sister told me that the bathrooms are basically used vape-stations between classes now, and most people have tried it.
  - saagarjha 7y ago
    Depends on the school, of course.
    - nullbyte 7y ago
      Good point. For perspective, this is happening in Southern California, LA area.
- webkike 7y ago
  1. They taste better 2. Yes, they are easier to get, for a couple reasons: once you have a juul you only need juul pods, and additionally you don't need to purchase a lighter (which you need to be over eighteen a lot of places to purchase). edit 3. They are far more discreet (you can vape in a classroom if you are in the back and it is dark) and deliver more nicotine.
  - ndarwincorn 7y ago
    Not only easier to get, but so much easier to conceal.
enahs-sf 7y ago
Given all the problems in this country, somehow this seems like not the highest priority issue.
- archie2 7y ago
  The US government is vast, and can handle more than one issue at once...
  - jMyles 7y ago
    I don't know that the evidence - especially in recent history - really supports this conclusion very strongly. At a minimum, it's probably reasonable to say that political capital is real, and selecting an issue to work on (either in the executive branch or more commonly in Congress) does indeed have costs that impair effort on other issues.
    - jakeinspace 7y ago
      What political capital? Federal prosecutors and the FDA have limited resources, of course, but I don't think this issue is preventing Congress or the White House of pursuing more pressing issues.
      - jMyles 7y ago
        Well, political capital is a two-way street; it comes in debts and credits. Dealing with statistical non-issues like this only allows the DoJ (and perhaps, to a lesser extent, the FTC, which is also named in this article as part of the investigation) to claim to be doing something, while the real issues go unresolved. The auto industry and the pharma industry, whose products kill huge numbers of kids, and who have both repeatedly taken actions in pursuit of profit without regard for the health and safety effects of those decisions, never seem to face any serious, lasting consequences. The "rash of injuries and deaths" link in the article is a 404, but let's assume they are talking about the six deaths over the past two-and-a-half years. During that same time, 30,000 people have died from opiod overdose and 70,000 have died from MV traffic. This is a distraction, and not even a convincing one. Our public lawyers, lawmakers, regulators, and consumer advocates are spending their time and resources focused on really stupid things as a way not to have to talk about real life.
paxys 7y ago
> The San Francisco company has said it never marketed to teens Says a company that: • Recruited social media "influencers" to post about Juul • Sponsored programs at schools and summer camps • Ran "youth education" and "holistic health education" programs where they told teenagers about the dangers of nicotine and (reportedly) that using their product was safe
- cgb223 7y ago
  Source?
  - tempsy 7y ago
    The source is the article this discussion is linked to.
- nullbyte 7y ago
  Is this for real? Do you have sources for the last 2 statements?
  - paxys 7y ago
    There are tons of sources for this. From the house oversight committee - https://oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/economic-and-consumer-policy-subcommittee-held-part-i-of-hearings-on-juul-s-role https://oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/economic-and... NYTimes - https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/25/health/juul-teens-vaping.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/25/health/juul-teens-vaping.... Others - https://nypost.com/2019/07/26/juul-targeted-teens-by-spending-over-200k-on-influencers/ https://nypost.com/2019/07/26/juul-targeted-teens-by-spendin... The FTC has already been investigating them for a while now as well - https://www.wsj.com/articles/juuls-marketing-practices-under-investigation-by-ftc-11567096073 https://www.wsj.com/articles/juuls-marketing-practices-under...
    - onlyrealcuzzo 7y ago
      Who decided to let Juul give a presentation at the schools? It sounds like all of those people need to be fired, too. I mean, obviously Juul is not innocent, but at the least on the schools' part, this is negligence to a point you need to fire someone.
sbilstein 7y ago
One thing that gets lost in Juul and vaping supporters is just how bad nicotine addiction is for your personal life. I recently quit nicotine a few months ago and it made a big difference for me. Nicotine withdrawal kicks in very quick which is why smokers take constant breaks. The anxiety, the grumpiness, irritability and anger you feel as a smoker when you are without nicotine will piss off your partner, make you seem difficult to friends and colleagues and generally just color your world in a dark way. Juul pods helped me stop smoking for a short period of time but I became an order of magnitude more hooked on nicotine. I work from home and couldn't go more than 15 minutes without sucking on that stupid device. I quit smoking cold turkey 90 days and it's made a dramatic difference to my mood. I no longer worry about being socially outcast or being judged for blowing vape clouds.
- lsniddy 7y ago
  i was a tobacco user for roughly ten years, equivalent of 2-5 cigarrettes a day max. The month i picked up a juul that amount effectively 10x'ed. I feel bad for all these kids who are going to leave high school with a stronger nicotine tolerance and dependence than some 40 year chain smokers.
  - draw_down 7y ago
    This is why I never tried it. I bet I would like it, a lot. And with cigarettes you have to go outside, you smell bad, etc., these things have none of those problems. It just looks very easy to get hooked on them.
    - lsniddy 7y ago
      There's no negative feedback loop to vaping, its like if you could drink with no hangovers.
      - behringer 7y ago
        *that we know about. There's a lot of people worried about long term effects and possibly even brain damage.
didericis 7y ago
A tainted, unregulated THC product killed people. That is bad. That does not mean we should immediately ban all vaping devices. There should be long term studies done on devices and juices in order to determine health effects, and there should be audits on vape juice manufacturers to make sure they aren’t putting really bad stuff in them. I don’t understand the moral panic. Marketing nicotine products to kids may be reprehensible, but marketing in general is largely reprehensible. It’s a matter of degree. Why do we decide marketing devices that have not killed people, but have just been vessels for unregulated product that have done the damage, is worse than marketing soda and sugary foods, which kill thousands, or addictive apps and social media, which damages mental health significantly, or overpriced unnecessary college educations, which cause people to go into debt for decades, or cars, which both increase debt and are a leading cause of teenage death? Most of those things are unnecessary for the majority of the population. Healthy foods, real life interactions, apprenticeships/job training programs, and public transportation are all generally better than the alternatives for the safety and financial future of young people. The moral panic happening RE vaping is how the war on drugs started. People saw something that affected the youth and tried to smash it with a big stick rather than attack it with sophistication and respect for the free decisions of the population. It didn’t work. If vaping is bad, let’s find out why/what specifically is bad, and let’s ban the stuff that killed the people that just died. Banning all of it is draconian. There is no good reason to drive well tested products that people enjoy out of the market, even if they aren’t 100% healthy. I don’t want to live in the Demolition Man future. Plus people who want to vape if products become very expensive and hard to get due to taxes, bans and overregulation will be tempted to buy the crap that isn’t tested that will actually kill them.
- gpm 7y ago
  Non THC vapes have at the very least put people in intensive care, if not killed people. It's far premature to try and claim the lack of any health effects from any type of vapes, they just haven't existed long enough. https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/vaping-london-1.5292161 https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/vaping-london-1.5292161
  - didericis 7y ago
numair 7y ago
True story: I have two very close younger friends who are practically my little brothers. They come from an established family in Hollywood, and have a very famous actor-dad. The younger brother is about 20 now, and is friends with half of the teen “influencers” on Instagram/YouTube; the older brother is about 22, and hangs with a group of LA kids who are obsessed with the movie American Psycho and dress/look the part — ironic given that their lives are a 2010s version of that book’s author’s other classic, Less Than Zero. About two years ago, I’m at a club in Hollywood when these two hand me a thick pile of paper, which looks like a legal document. I’m really confused — is someone getting sued? Is this a screenplay? Am I being asked to sign an NDA? The older brother, in his American Psycho-inspired suit, takes a puff of his vape and then whispers in my ear, “this is the funding prospectus for Juul. Our friends have been invited to invest.” I looked at the thing. It was crazy. The valuation was well over $1 billion. The growth rate was off the charts. And, looking around at that club in Hollywood, filled with kids vaping in the outdoor area, I realized the numbers made sense. But the fact that a 19 year old Hollywood kid was handing me the funding documents for this company and telling me that his friends had been invited to invest told me that there was something very, very wrong about how Juul got into the hands of all of these young people — it clearly wasn’t an accident.
- appleshore 7y ago
  Maybe you should delete this, seems identifiable.
  - uoaei 7y ago
    Shutting down an opportunity for whistleblowing against a company that knowingly preys on minors using the addictive properties of tobacco products -- because of potentially identifiable information -- seems ludicrous.
    - flattone 7y ago
      Avoiding being identified seems more like "do this but more carefully"?
    - 7y ago
rblion 7y ago
I used one for a month and some change during a long road trip. It helped me avoid smoking around the campfire, something my friend and I would do for 'old time's sake'. I'm glad I didn't use it for a long time. I had a feeling this was just as bad as smoking. I tried to tell some kids I know who are always vaping but they laughed at me with a statement like 'science bitch!'. Well, here you go.
konfusinomicon 7y ago
Could the recent smear campaign on vaping have anything to do with the upcoming release of IQOS in the US market?
musicale 7y ago
It's about time.
- bcook 7y ago
  Tell me more about your perspective.
ganitarashid 7y ago
Vaping under 18, I get it, you’re young and dumb and succumbed to peer pressure. It happened to the best of us. But vaping after 30? It’s like they’re saying: Hey I want you to take me seriously while I am willfully destroying my body in front of you. If you don’t care about yourself, you can’t be trusted to care about anything.
- simplecomplex 7y ago
  Okay. But there's a double standard when it comes to food. Why do fat people get a pass? Why is it legal to eat cheeseburgers and drink soda? The health risks from obesity are statistically just as bad as smoking. It's the leading cause of preventable death in the US. 1/3 of America is obese. It's a larger problem than smoking, statistically. I don't smoke or vape. But it's a glaring double standard. McDonalds can market to kids, lure them with toys, and people who are 300+ lbs are allowed to eat whatever they want, as much as they want. Why is it legal for parents to feed a 12 year old Cheetos and Pepsi? It's just as damaging health wise. In my city's public school there are teenagers who have gout. Yet nobody cares.
  - simplecomplex 7y ago
    Downvote all you want. The facts are the facts. Unhealthy eating is just as bad as smoking. If the government is going to regulate our personal health choices, then it needs to be consistent.
    - whenchamenia 7y ago
      You aren't wrong, just lacking in tact for hn.
  - cblades 7y ago
    Because you have to eat, and eating a Big Mac isn't unhealthy. Eating a Big Mac several times a week is. You don't have to intake nicotine, at all.
    - 7y ago
todipa 7y ago
Why can't we ban nicotine?
- simplecomplex 7y ago
  Why can't we ban sugar?
- hn_throwaway_99 7y ago
  Yeah, because prohibition always works so well.
  - dymk 7y ago
    It does - drunk driving accidents and violence caused by alcohol plummeted during prohibition.
    - twblalock 7y ago
      That was not the only outcome of prohibition...
  - otabdeveloper4 7y ago
    You're right, we should legalize murder and rape. It's not like people are going to be less horny if we make raping illegal!
- anonymousjunior 7y ago
  Why can't we ban ibuprofen? Nicotine is an extremely complex molecule which has been proven to have positive effects in the treatment of autism, as well as mild cognitive impairment, such as Alzheimer disease. Blanket statements like this are harmful to the general nature of science and show a disregard for empirical evidence. Nicotine can be utilized for positive measures at therapeutic levels and was in Phase III clinical trials with the FDA for such uses before the backing pharmaceutical firm ran out of money. I recommend you do some research on Nicotine as a compound and interactions with nicotinic receptors in the body, the pharmacology is actually fascinating.
foxhop 7y ago
Why so many comments about a ban? There isn't any mention of a ban... even if prosecuted for marketing to minors and found guilty, does not mean the product will be banned... Should Juul be found guilty they will be punished via fines, just like a tobacoo company. Of course Juul knew this and decided it was worth it because if their device went viral, which it did, they would be locked in as a market leader, which they are. All they have to do now is lawyer up and try to survive the next year or so and they are locked in. If they are fined so hard as to go out of business, the product is still not banned and you would have the next in line take the market leader position. The product is here to stay, banning the devices will be more difficult than banning marijuana (which is a loosing battle). Will Juul be a brand in the United States in 5 years? Maybe? Will we still have e-cigarettes in the United States in 5 years, definitely. If prohibition really occurs of course we will have 3d printed vapes and an even strong black market vape. I think regulation will likely occur, likely making it require a prescription, but that is still not an outright ban.
- outsidetheparty 7y ago
  > Why so many comments about a ban? New York State banned flavored e-cigarettes recently, on the grounds that they encourage kids to take up vaping; that ban wasn't specifically targeted at Juul (who saw the writing on the wall and stopped selling flavors last year) but that's the brand name everyone knows, so that's why they're catching the investigative heat now.
  - jroll 7y ago
    > Juul (who saw the writing on the wall and stopped selling flavors last year) What? Juul still sells flavors, even if you select that you live in NY or MI (also banning flavors) on the popup when you enter the site: https://www.juul.com/shop/pods https://www.juul.com/shop/pods
mathemagics 7y ago
E-cigs should be banned. Same as cigarettes of any kind. In fact, any airborne addictive substance should be blanked banned. I used to rent an apartment that had a shared ventilation system. It was a no-smoking building. My neighbors decided to ignore this. The smell would get so bad it would make your head spin. The building management did nothing, because it was hard to prove which neighbor was the culprit. I ultimately had to break the lease & move out. I don't care if you drink yourself under the table, snort meth on the regular, or whatever other self-destructive habit you choose for yourself. It's your right to be an idiot. But your rights stop the moment they infringe on my right to not part take in your self-destructive habits. No, we don't need smoking rooms. No, it's not sufficient to ban smoking in public places. None of that has prevented me from coming in contact with nicotine or weed. Just ban it outright. It's really that simple. Nicotine patches, weed cookies, etc. on the other hand? Those are fine. Go nuts. As long as you leave me out of it.
- ribosometronome 7y ago
  >In fact, any airborne addictive substance should be blanked banned. So long to baking cookies.
  - mathemagics 7y ago
    Sure, if they emit an addictive airborne substance. Thanks for clarifying.
    - cwkoss 7y ago
      Scent of fresh baked cookies is definitely an addictive airborne substance.
treebeard901 7y ago
Meanwhile, The stock prospects for the traditional big tobacco companies are going up. Guess what it does to their value after getting an entire generation hooked on vaping nicotine for a decade, then for a brief time remove all flavors but the ones you can find in traditional cigarettes, then once people switch to tobacco and menthol only, remove e-cigarettes entirely. The only option is traditional cigarettes or not smoking at that point. If it was easy to quit, we would’ve never had a need to create e-cigarettes to begin with. It’s completely evil any way you look at it.
Gatsky 7y ago
Forgive me, but I just can’t believe we are doing the cigarette thing all over again. I can’t believe it. The vendors have just read Big Tobacco’s marketing manual. The interaction of Juul with social media, what a match made in heaven of modern society’s best elements. The users are saying the same things all nicotine addicts say “I make friends! It helps me think! It’s my money!”. Imagine if you will, hearing these same arguments in the cancer clinic where I work. Symptoms of total brain failure, and paying for the privilege. Nicotine products cause only harm to society. That’s enough. Any other argument for individual freedom or benefit is moot. We should ban commercial enterprises based on nicotine. There is one moment when this is possible, which is now. Anyone who thinks that vaping reduces harm from cigarettes is dreaming. Why on earth do we want to spend the next 50 years studying vaping and understanding the risks and benefits of life long vaporised nicotine use, so that Juul’s founders can make a lot of money? If you enjoy moderate and sensible recreational use of nicotine - sorry.

230 points by mises 7y ago

ent101 7y ago

Honest question: how much of the recent pushback could be attributed to incumbents feeling threatened by Juul et al.?

thismyrealone 7y ago
It's all theater as far as I'm concerned. Nobody actually gives a shit about this.
burkaman 7y ago
The incumbents own Juul. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/19/health/juul-altria-e-cigarettes.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/19/health/juul-altria-e-ciga...
- ent101 7y ago
  Sorry! I should've at least googled before asking that question.
tempsy 7y ago
The incumbents own Juul. Altria bought a 35% stake for $13b. It’s stock is down 30% since March when broad market is up 5+%.
mikestew 7y ago
The incumbents, some of whom own 35% of Juul? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juul#Investors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juul#Investors
dumbfoundded 7y ago
Maybe a better question is who would benefit from Juul failing? I'm not sure who. I don't think it's big tobacco. They need vaping to addict the next generation. Maybe vaping spend is taking away from another vice.
- ceejayoz 7y ago
  > Maybe a better question is who would benefit from Juul failing? Public health?
  - vkou 7y ago
    Yes, but unless you tell us how we can profit from that, that's not an interesting answer.
    - ceejayoz 7y ago
      We can't profit from reducing national healthcare costs for things like lung disease?
  - slfnflctd 7y ago
    It has been proven over and over again that when you ban an addictive substance, the black market and similar-but-still-legal options will rush in to fill the void. Pushing for transparency, research and more data so adults can make better informed decisions about what to do with their own bodies is the answer. Treating adults like children who aren't mature enough to make their own decisions is not.
    - ceejayoz 7y ago
      The massive, decades-long decline in tobacco usage, particularly amongst young people, serves as a strong and highly relevant counterpoint. Restrictions on advertising, access, and efforts to increase the cost etc. have been quite effective there.
- zippergz 7y ago
  Those of us who are annoyed by people vaping around us would benefit from less vaping. I won't claim to know or believe that Juul specifically failing would actually lead to less vaping, but it can't hurt.
  - 7y ago
temporaryvector 7y ago
Wouldn't it be more correct to say that any sanctions and regulations that result from this are unlikely to kill off Juul since it's pretty large already and partially owned by the incumbents and instead would make any new competition have a harder time breaking in into the market? This seems to me the same kind of thing as Facebook and Google supporting privacy regulations. Not that regulation is inherently bad, but this kind of thing seems to be a theme lately. Well, I say lately, but reading up some history, this kind of thing does tend to happen. This is, of course, still not enough of an argument against regulation, but it does tend to temper any optimism I have about regulations that I would be in favor of.

thismyrealone 7y ago

The world is burning to the ground but at least these damn kids won't have Mango flavored e-cigs anymore. What a lovely use of our resources.

dang 7y ago
Please don't post unsubstantive comments here.
travem 7y ago
> What a lovely use of our resources. Protecting kids from predatory companies selling them addictive substances? Yep that’s exactly what we should be spending resources on.
save_ferris 7y ago
I completely disagree, investigating vaping companies for targeting kids is absolutely worthwhile. Big tobacco was prohibited from advertising is various media for creating characters like Joe Camel, only to circumvent the spirit of the law via the internet. Vaping is killing kids, how is this not a valid use of resources?
- xxpor 7y ago
  >Vaping is killing kids, how is this not a valid use of resources? Citation needed.
- w3rhn2j34oh5o 7y ago
  It really isn't killing kids, and I would challenge that they are 'targeting them'. As an adult vape user, I love the fruit flavors. They are for my (adult) use only. I would never let someone under 21 get access to this. Why should I be penalized because lots of kids are breaking the law? The recent (adult) deaths from Vaping are due to black market THC cartridges filled with vitamin e acetate. It is very likely the kids are obtaining (safe) retail product, which is a failure in retail process, not the manufacturer. While it is a bad thing that school aged children are illegal acquiring Juul -- how is this different (or even worse) than Alcohol? We should investigate alcohol vendors for making tasty beverages too. Can't have flavors that adults might like... There is a combination of events occurring simultaneously that is making it hard for folks to objectively understand the problem, and if there is actually a problem at all.

holy_city 7y ago

> 28% of high school students this year said they had used an e-cigarette at least once in the past 30 days Holy smokes! If you look at data from a few years ago [1] that's more than double what you'd see for cigarette smoking (eyeballing the numbers here, the data is more granular). Is it easier for kids to get e-cigs than cigarettes? Or do they just want them more? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK294302/table/ch13.t3/?report=objectonly https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK294302/table/ch13.t3/?...

nullbyte 7y ago
Juuls are pervasive in modern day high school. Either you have one or your friend has one. My little sister told me that the bathrooms are basically used vape-stations between classes now, and most people have tried it.
- saagarjha 7y ago
  Depends on the school, of course.
  - nullbyte 7y ago
    Good point. For perspective, this is happening in Southern California, LA area.
webkike 7y ago
1. They taste better 2. Yes, they are easier to get, for a couple reasons: once you have a juul you only need juul pods, and additionally you don't need to purchase a lighter (which you need to be over eighteen a lot of places to purchase). edit 3. They are far more discreet (you can vape in a classroom if you are in the back and it is dark) and deliver more nicotine.
- ndarwincorn 7y ago
  Not only easier to get, but so much easier to conceal.

enahs-sf 7y ago

Given all the problems in this country, somehow this seems like not the highest priority issue.

archie2 7y ago
The US government is vast, and can handle more than one issue at once...
- jMyles 7y ago
  I don't know that the evidence - especially in recent history - really supports this conclusion very strongly. At a minimum, it's probably reasonable to say that political capital is real, and selecting an issue to work on (either in the executive branch or more commonly in Congress) does indeed have costs that impair effort on other issues.
  - jakeinspace 7y ago
    What political capital? Federal prosecutors and the FDA have limited resources, of course, but I don't think this issue is preventing Congress or the White House of pursuing more pressing issues.
    - jMyles 7y ago
      Well, political capital is a two-way street; it comes in debts and credits. Dealing with statistical non-issues like this only allows the DoJ (and perhaps, to a lesser extent, the FTC, which is also named in this article as part of the investigation) to claim to be doing something, while the real issues go unresolved. The auto industry and the pharma industry, whose products kill huge numbers of kids, and who have both repeatedly taken actions in pursuit of profit without regard for the health and safety effects of those decisions, never seem to face any serious, lasting consequences. The "rash of injuries and deaths" link in the article is a 404, but let's assume they are talking about the six deaths over the past two-and-a-half years. During that same time, 30,000 people have died from opiod overdose and 70,000 have died from MV traffic. This is a distraction, and not even a convincing one. Our public lawyers, lawmakers, regulators, and consumer advocates are spending their time and resources focused on really stupid things as a way not to have to talk about real life.

paxys 7y ago

> The San Francisco company has said it never marketed to teens Says a company that: • Recruited social media "influencers" to post about Juul • Sponsored programs at schools and summer camps • Ran "youth education" and "holistic health education" programs where they told teenagers about the dangers of nicotine and (reportedly) that using their product was safe

cgb223 7y ago
Source?
- tempsy 7y ago
  The source is the article this discussion is linked to.
nullbyte 7y ago
Is this for real? Do you have sources for the last 2 statements?
- paxys 7y ago
  There are tons of sources for this. From the house oversight committee - https://oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/economic-and-consumer-policy-subcommittee-held-part-i-of-hearings-on-juul-s-role https://oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/economic-and... NYTimes - https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/25/health/juul-teens-vaping.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/25/health/juul-teens-vaping.... Others - https://nypost.com/2019/07/26/juul-targeted-teens-by-spending-over-200k-on-influencers/ https://nypost.com/2019/07/26/juul-targeted-teens-by-spendin... The FTC has already been investigating them for a while now as well - https://www.wsj.com/articles/juuls-marketing-practices-under-investigation-by-ftc-11567096073 https://www.wsj.com/articles/juuls-marketing-practices-under...
  - onlyrealcuzzo 7y ago
    Who decided to let Juul give a presentation at the schools? It sounds like all of those people need to be fired, too. I mean, obviously Juul is not innocent, but at the least on the schools' part, this is negligence to a point you need to fire someone.

sbilstein 7y ago

One thing that gets lost in Juul and vaping supporters is just how bad nicotine addiction is for your personal life. I recently quit nicotine a few months ago and it made a big difference for me. Nicotine withdrawal kicks in very quick which is why smokers take constant breaks. The anxiety, the grumpiness, irritability and anger you feel as a smoker when you are without nicotine will piss off your partner, make you seem difficult to friends and colleagues and generally just color your world in a dark way. Juul pods helped me stop smoking for a short period of time but I became an order of magnitude more hooked on nicotine. I work from home and couldn't go more than 15 minutes without sucking on that stupid device. I quit smoking cold turkey 90 days and it's made a dramatic difference to my mood. I no longer worry about being socially outcast or being judged for blowing vape clouds.

lsniddy 7y ago
i was a tobacco user for roughly ten years, equivalent of 2-5 cigarrettes a day max. The month i picked up a juul that amount effectively 10x'ed. I feel bad for all these kids who are going to leave high school with a stronger nicotine tolerance and dependence than some 40 year chain smokers.
- draw_down 7y ago
  This is why I never tried it. I bet I would like it, a lot. And with cigarettes you have to go outside, you smell bad, etc., these things have none of those problems. It just looks very easy to get hooked on them.
  - lsniddy 7y ago
    There's no negative feedback loop to vaping, its like if you could drink with no hangovers.
    - behringer 7y ago
      *that we know about. There's a lot of people worried about long term effects and possibly even brain damage.

didericis 7y ago

A tainted, unregulated THC product killed people. That is bad. That does not mean we should immediately ban all vaping devices. There should be long term studies done on devices and juices in order to determine health effects, and there should be audits on vape juice manufacturers to make sure they aren’t putting really bad stuff in them. I don’t understand the moral panic. Marketing nicotine products to kids may be reprehensible, but marketing in general is largely reprehensible. It’s a matter of degree. Why do we decide marketing devices that have not killed people, but have just been vessels for unregulated product that have done the damage, is worse than marketing soda and sugary foods, which kill thousands, or addictive apps and social media, which damages mental health significantly, or overpriced unnecessary college educations, which cause people to go into debt for decades, or cars, which both increase debt and are a leading cause of teenage death? Most of those things are unnecessary for the majority of the population. Healthy foods, real life interactions, apprenticeships/job training programs, and public transportation are all generally better than the alternatives for the safety and financial future of young people. The moral panic happening RE vaping is how the war on drugs started. People saw something that affected the youth and tried to smash it with a big stick rather than attack it with sophistication and respect for the free decisions of the population. It didn’t work. If vaping is bad, let’s find out why/what specifically is bad, and let’s ban the stuff that killed the people that just died. Banning all of it is draconian. There is no good reason to drive well tested products that people enjoy out of the market, even if they aren’t 100% healthy. I don’t want to live in the Demolition Man future. Plus people who want to vape if products become very expensive and hard to get due to taxes, bans and overregulation will be tempted to buy the crap that isn’t tested that will actually kill them.

gpm 7y ago
Non THC vapes have at the very least put people in intensive care, if not killed people. It's far premature to try and claim the lack of any health effects from any type of vapes, they just haven't existed long enough. https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/vaping-london-1.5292161 https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/vaping-london-1.5292161
- didericis 7y ago

numair 7y ago

True story: I have two very close younger friends who are practically my little brothers. They come from an established family in Hollywood, and have a very famous actor-dad. The younger brother is about 20 now, and is friends with half of the teen “influencers” on Instagram/YouTube; the older brother is about 22, and hangs with a group of LA kids who are obsessed with the movie American Psycho and dress/look the part — ironic given that their lives are a 2010s version of that book’s author’s other classic, Less Than Zero. About two years ago, I’m at a club in Hollywood when these two hand me a thick pile of paper, which looks like a legal document. I’m really confused — is someone getting sued? Is this a screenplay? Am I being asked to sign an NDA? The older brother, in his American Psycho-inspired suit, takes a puff of his vape and then whispers in my ear, “this is the funding prospectus for Juul. Our friends have been invited to invest.” I looked at the thing. It was crazy. The valuation was well over $1 billion. The growth rate was off the charts. And, looking around at that club in Hollywood, filled with kids vaping in the outdoor area, I realized the numbers made sense. But the fact that a 19 year old Hollywood kid was handing me the funding documents for this company and telling me that his friends had been invited to invest told me that there was something very, very wrong about how Juul got into the hands of all of these young people — it clearly wasn’t an accident.

appleshore 7y ago
Maybe you should delete this, seems identifiable.
- uoaei 7y ago
  Shutting down an opportunity for whistleblowing against a company that knowingly preys on minors using the addictive properties of tobacco products -- because of potentially identifiable information -- seems ludicrous.
  - flattone 7y ago
    Avoiding being identified seems more like "do this but more carefully"?
  - 7y ago

rblion 7y ago

I used one for a month and some change during a long road trip. It helped me avoid smoking around the campfire, something my friend and I would do for 'old time's sake'. I'm glad I didn't use it for a long time. I had a feeling this was just as bad as smoking. I tried to tell some kids I know who are always vaping but they laughed at me with a statement like 'science bitch!'. Well, here you go.

konfusinomicon 7y ago

Could the recent smear campaign on vaping have anything to do with the upcoming release of IQOS in the US market?

musicale 7y ago

It's about time.

bcook 7y ago
Tell me more about your perspective.

ganitarashid 7y ago

Vaping under 18, I get it, you’re young and dumb and succumbed to peer pressure. It happened to the best of us. But vaping after 30? It’s like they’re saying: Hey I want you to take me seriously while I am willfully destroying my body in front of you. If you don’t care about yourself, you can’t be trusted to care about anything.

simplecomplex 7y ago
Okay. But there's a double standard when it comes to food. Why do fat people get a pass? Why is it legal to eat cheeseburgers and drink soda? The health risks from obesity are statistically just as bad as smoking. It's the leading cause of preventable death in the US. 1/3 of America is obese. It's a larger problem than smoking, statistically. I don't smoke or vape. But it's a glaring double standard. McDonalds can market to kids, lure them with toys, and people who are 300+ lbs are allowed to eat whatever they want, as much as they want. Why is it legal for parents to feed a 12 year old Cheetos and Pepsi? It's just as damaging health wise. In my city's public school there are teenagers who have gout. Yet nobody cares.
- simplecomplex 7y ago
  Downvote all you want. The facts are the facts. Unhealthy eating is just as bad as smoking. If the government is going to regulate our personal health choices, then it needs to be consistent.
  - whenchamenia 7y ago
    You aren't wrong, just lacking in tact for hn.
- cblades 7y ago
  Because you have to eat, and eating a Big Mac isn't unhealthy. Eating a Big Mac several times a week is. You don't have to intake nicotine, at all.
  - 7y ago

todipa 7y ago

Why can't we ban nicotine?

simplecomplex 7y ago
Why can't we ban sugar?
hn_throwaway_99 7y ago
Yeah, because prohibition always works so well.
- dymk 7y ago
  It does - drunk driving accidents and violence caused by alcohol plummeted during prohibition.
  - twblalock 7y ago
    That was not the only outcome of prohibition...
- otabdeveloper4 7y ago
  You're right, we should legalize murder and rape. It's not like people are going to be less horny if we make raping illegal!
anonymousjunior 7y ago
Why can't we ban ibuprofen? Nicotine is an extremely complex molecule which has been proven to have positive effects in the treatment of autism, as well as mild cognitive impairment, such as Alzheimer disease. Blanket statements like this are harmful to the general nature of science and show a disregard for empirical evidence. Nicotine can be utilized for positive measures at therapeutic levels and was in Phase III clinical trials with the FDA for such uses before the backing pharmaceutical firm ran out of money. I recommend you do some research on Nicotine as a compound and interactions with nicotinic receptors in the body, the pharmacology is actually fascinating.

foxhop 7y ago

Why so many comments about a ban? There isn't any mention of a ban... even if prosecuted for marketing to minors and found guilty, does not mean the product will be banned... Should Juul be found guilty they will be punished via fines, just like a tobacoo company. Of course Juul knew this and decided it was worth it because if their device went viral, which it did, they would be locked in as a market leader, which they are. All they have to do now is lawyer up and try to survive the next year or so and they are locked in. If they are fined so hard as to go out of business, the product is still not banned and you would have the next in line take the market leader position. The product is here to stay, banning the devices will be more difficult than banning marijuana (which is a loosing battle). Will Juul be a brand in the United States in 5 years? Maybe? Will we still have e-cigarettes in the United States in 5 years, definitely. If prohibition really occurs of course we will have 3d printed vapes and an even strong black market vape. I think regulation will likely occur, likely making it require a prescription, but that is still not an outright ban.

outsidetheparty 7y ago
> Why so many comments about a ban? New York State banned flavored e-cigarettes recently, on the grounds that they encourage kids to take up vaping; that ban wasn't specifically targeted at Juul (who saw the writing on the wall and stopped selling flavors last year) but that's the brand name everyone knows, so that's why they're catching the investigative heat now.
- jroll 7y ago
  > Juul (who saw the writing on the wall and stopped selling flavors last year) What? Juul still sells flavors, even if you select that you live in NY or MI (also banning flavors) on the popup when you enter the site: https://www.juul.com/shop/pods https://www.juul.com/shop/pods

mathemagics 7y ago

E-cigs should be banned. Same as cigarettes of any kind. In fact, any airborne addictive substance should be blanked banned. I used to rent an apartment that had a shared ventilation system. It was a no-smoking building. My neighbors decided to ignore this. The smell would get so bad it would make your head spin. The building management did nothing, because it was hard to prove which neighbor was the culprit. I ultimately had to break the lease & move out. I don't care if you drink yourself under the table, snort meth on the regular, or whatever other self-destructive habit you choose for yourself. It's your right to be an idiot. But your rights stop the moment they infringe on my right to not part take in your self-destructive habits. No, we don't need smoking rooms. No, it's not sufficient to ban smoking in public places. None of that has prevented me from coming in contact with nicotine or weed. Just ban it outright. It's really that simple. Nicotine patches, weed cookies, etc. on the other hand? Those are fine. Go nuts. As long as you leave me out of it.

ribosometronome 7y ago
>In fact, any airborne addictive substance should be blanked banned. So long to baking cookies.
- mathemagics 7y ago
  Sure, if they emit an addictive airborne substance. Thanks for clarifying.
  - cwkoss 7y ago
    Scent of fresh baked cookies is definitely an addictive airborne substance.

treebeard901 7y ago

Meanwhile, The stock prospects for the traditional big tobacco companies are going up. Guess what it does to their value after getting an entire generation hooked on vaping nicotine for a decade, then for a brief time remove all flavors but the ones you can find in traditional cigarettes, then once people switch to tobacco and menthol only, remove e-cigarettes entirely. The only option is traditional cigarettes or not smoking at that point. If it was easy to quit, we would’ve never had a need to create e-cigarettes to begin with. It’s completely evil any way you look at it.

Gatsky 7y ago

Forgive me, but I just can’t believe we are doing the cigarette thing all over again. I can’t believe it. The vendors have just read Big Tobacco’s marketing manual. The interaction of Juul with social media, what a match made in heaven of modern society’s best elements. The users are saying the same things all nicotine addicts say “I make friends! It helps me think! It’s my money!”. Imagine if you will, hearing these same arguments in the cancer clinic where I work. Symptoms of total brain failure, and paying for the privilege. Nicotine products cause only harm to society. That’s enough. Any other argument for individual freedom or benefit is moot. We should ban commercial enterprises based on nicotine. There is one moment when this is possible, which is now. Anyone who thinks that vaping reduces harm from cigarettes is dreaming. Why on earth do we want to spend the next 50 years studying vaping and understanding the risks and benefits of life long vaporised nicotine use, so that Juul’s founders can make a lot of money? If you enjoy moderate and sensible recreational use of nicotine - sorry.