What are people’s thoughts here? I could understand removing all the lolly flavours and regulating like other tobacco products. I am an ex-smoker but I personally feel like this is govt over-reach. That might be an out-dated mindset of my time & generation (genX), however. So I’m interested to get some insight into how the broader population view this issue, particularly the younger generations, in both an overall opinion, but also in regards to such govt controls of recreational substances vs an individual’s right of freedom to choose.

  • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Oh but don’t they?

    People who don’t do cardio might be more likely to have a heart attack while driving, or otherwise drive at a lower level of alertness (cardio improved cognitive performance and slows decline) hence increasing their chances of hitting someone.

    Or perhaps they cost the state more in health (tbh probably like smokers they cost less but this is the common justification for the sin tax on smoking) which damages your ability to get your health issues attended too.

    People drinking alcohol are more likely to engage in violence, and do actually pose a risk to people around them statistically.

    Obvs this stuff is reaching, but so is most of the health stuff on vaping so far (most harm demonstrated is due to ‘popcorn lung’ which is basically a result of lack of regulation meaning a certain flavour got used despite this known side effect) and the point is we need to consider degrees.

    We live in a society and there aren’t super clear boundaries on what we ought to be able to do. The current proposed law, which again I’m broadly in favour of, does massively fuck up by placing vapes under the TGA. That means they need to be regulated as medical devices which means unless you can show a vape has a medical reason to be on the market it wont be approved.

    Since that will never happen (except, maybe as a cessation tool but the TGA will have high standards of evidence) this is still a ban on vaping, just the long way round. Note how CBD is legal and OTC except there are no approved CBD products for OTC.

      • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        What is the immediate health effect of a nearby vaper? Like seriously I actually don’t know of any solid evidence. In it’s most basic formulation it is literally just a fog machine.

          • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            For both of our convenience I would really appreciate it if you just listed the specific concerns you had in mind, along with a primary source.

            If a primary source is too much because you believe something is “common knowledge” (e.g. asking for a primary source on why to look both ways before crossing the road is a bit pedantic) a relevant Wikipedia page about the immediate health concern would be fine.

            Let’s exclude popcorn lung (diacetyl damage) for aforementioned reasons.

            I’d also like to ask, are you concerned about fog machines which also make a vapour of vegetable glycerine? Or are your concerns limited to flavour compounds and trace nicotine exposure?

                  • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    6 months ago

                    That is a separate issue. I’m trying to understand what their specific health concerns are, why it is they feel any amount of vaping represents an antisocial immediate health hazard distinct from say driving while unhealthy, tired or whatever or taking drugs known to increase violent tendencies like alcohol.

                    There is something they feel is different and I’m trying to unpick what it is. Like is there a specific chemical they believe even trace vaping exceeds safe limits of? a class like VOCs but are they also afraid to be around a stove etc? Is it fear of lack of regulations meaning unknown contamination could be present? Is it lack of precedent of characterised harms? (e.g. standing next to a stove while cooking seems about as unhealthy as being near most* vapes but we tend to be comfortable with poorly ventilated stoves and not with vapes because stoves are boring).

                    They unfortunately seem to thing my curiosity represents some hostility, despite having stated that I am in favour of regulation and basically just have a couple of quibbles with this law ¯_(ツ)_/¯