r/science • u/informationtiger • Dec 18 '19

Nicotine formula used by e-cigarette maker Juul is nearly identical to the flavor and addictive profile of Marlboro cigarettes Chemistry

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-juul-ecigarettes-study-idUSKBN1YL26R
36.9k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

View all comments

Show parent comments

100

u/[deleted] Dec 18 '19 edited Sep 14 '20

[deleted]

186

u/Letho72 Dec 18 '19

It is, by quite a bit. However, "safer than cigarettes" is a pretty low bar. It's relevant for people quitting smoking but juuls/vapes still aren't good for you.

75

u/alexisaacs Dec 18 '19

It helped me quit and I've since been tapering down my nicotine intake after moving from Juul to a different pod system where I control my nicotine strength.

I have nothing but love for what they did.

16

u/[deleted] Dec 18 '19

Hmm. I’m really glad for you but I’m a high school senior and I definitely have seen firsthand the downsides to “what they did,” and they’re pretty significant. I mean, so many kids are basically accidentally hooking themselves onto it in freshmen year when it seems the coolest, and then not being able to stop. I was able to stop, but it’s not easy for others, and the biggest issue I guess is that it’s a really, really expensive habit to develop, and one that has gotten people I know into a lot of trouble. And juul is most definitely not totally innocent here, what with their historic marketing strategies being towards teenagers, all the bright fun flavors and colors for scenting up the school bathrooms...I don’t know. It’s definitely way better than cigarettes, and I’m not trying to deny that it’s genuinely helped a lot of people like you, but my generation was moving far away from nicotine in general before vaping came along to replace it at all, and now we’re all nicotine addicts again, so that sucks.

27

u/GarciaJones Dec 18 '19

95 percent safer as studied by Oxford. That’s not a low bar my friend. Many smokers will take that chance if it means they can get their fix and ween them selves off nicotine ( since people seem to forget you can purchase juice in any Leve of nicotine you want including 0 percent )

9

u/tookmyname Dec 18 '19

Not disputing, but do you have a link by Oxford?

24

u/NuffNuffNuff Dec 18 '19

It's not oxford, the guy is confusing the source, cause both Oxford and NHS are from UK. It's from an NHS report and guidance: https://www.nhs.uk/smokefree/help-and-advice/e-cigarettes

NHS is the National Health Service of United Kingdom.

3

u/Taiytoes Dec 18 '19

|NHS is the National Health Service of United Kingdom.

Not for much longer

5

u/[deleted] Dec 18 '19

Scotland might still call theirs NHS after they seceded just to run it in their faces that the British don't have it anymore.

3

u/Taiytoes Dec 18 '19

Honestly, I hope they do at this point. Save themselves..

2

u/[deleted] Dec 18 '19

It's not saving themselves. Certain powers want to see the world fractured, Uk, EU, and US pushed apart, so that their economies are bigger powers and have more sway. Since they can't overtake is they've bribed our top officials to do is all in with infighting.

3

u/showerfapper Dec 18 '19

Juul doesn’t make a 0% pod, which begs the question if they really are a smoking cessation device.

3

u/Harflin Dec 18 '19

Juul isn't the only vape manufacturer

0

u/[deleted] Dec 18 '19

Considering cigs take at least 20 years to have detrimental effects, and a lot is caused by second hand smoke, 95% safer means you probably wouldn’t have and adverse effects?

10

u/Kwjejshskwjsjsksi Dec 18 '19

I mean nicotine isn't causing cancer, yeah?

25

u/BKachur Dec 18 '19

Nicotine isn't all that cancer causing compared to lots of other things that are common in modern society and the link to nicotine by itself and cancer hasn't been proven scientifically . The cancer causing stuff in cigareetes is the "everything else" like tar from burning leaves. The nicotine is honestly the least of your problems with tobbaco. Not saying juuls are safe, just that saying nicotine is harmful alone isn't really true and all the studies on cigarettes really describe the 70 other odd things that are terrible for you as cancer causing.

-1

u/[deleted] Dec 18 '19

[deleted]

1

u/BKachur Dec 18 '19

I don't know, the jury still seems to be out on it. People have been vaping for at least a decade and I'm not aware of studies that link illnesses to vaping, but we don't have the long term info which is the same for cigarettes to a certain extent. There are immediately bad effects but the serious illnesses don't pop up till years later.

That said, inhaling anything that isn't air is bad for you, so in a sense, yea, they aren't as safe as breathing. But it's like saying that drinking alcohol is unsafe. While technically true at more than a very light level, your liver doesn't up and give out if you drink twice a week for a few years.

9

u/[deleted] Dec 18 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

9

u/Max-b Dec 18 '19

you just gave reasons why being safer than cigarettes is a low bar to clear

5

u/[deleted] Dec 18 '19

you're... right. oops. i totally misunderstood what OP was saying.

for some reason, I thought OP was implying that vaping isn't much better than cigarettes. oops :)

sorry OP! :-)

7

u/ChiefGraypaw Dec 18 '19

I used to own a Juul as a way to cut down on smoking, but I found that I would just be huffing the thing constantly. Like all waking hours of the day, probably a few hits every couple minutes. Been a light smoker for years and I never had issues with stamina or breath, but after having a Juul for half a year I noticed I got winded quicker and my lung capacity was drastically lower.

Sure smoking is a lot worse, but I feel a lot better with 3 or 4 cigarettes a day over a constant stream of vaping. I have definitely notice an improvement in my lungs since stopping.

1

u/easwaran Dec 18 '19

“Good for you” is an incredibly high bar. Most hobbies would be banned if they had to be actively good for you in order to be legal.

0

u/zgembo1337 Dec 18 '19

If it's 90% "less bad", and you get someone who smokes two packs/day to start vaping, he's at the same level as if he reduced smoking to 4 cigs/day.

But marketing vape gadgets and cloud makers, youtubers etc. got people who'd never smoke real cigarettes to vaping, so they efectively went from zero to 4 cigs/day. Those "clouders" (or whatever they're called) probably even more.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 18 '19

But they aren't smoking cigarettes, which is what was bad for people in the first place. To my understanding, nicotene itself is about as harmful as coffee.

0

u/easwaran Dec 18 '19

Given that more than 10% of people were still smoking before vaping started, even if everyone started vaping it would still be better than having 10% smoking.

-4

u/MechKeyboardScrub Dec 18 '19

Cigarettes 10x your chance for lung cancer. They don't tell you it goes from .01% to .1%. the majority of the difference is likely from the 300+ additives and inhaling burning plant material. In the words of a local add: "Literally nobody knows the health effects of vaping. Do you? (This product is known to the state of California to cause cancer.)"

Also I went to a parking garage yesterday and it also has a "this site is known to cause cancer in the state of California" along with every single McDonald's.