- cross-posted to:
- globalnews@lemmy.zip
- cross-posted to:
- globalnews@lemmy.zip
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/1425359
Archived version: https://archive.ph/1Iraz
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20230814002229/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-66448563
Ah.
Of course I see the difference. The fact that cigarettes are dangerous to your health is so screamingly obvious that I didn’t even think that was something we needed to tell each other.
My point is that nicotine makes it much harder to stop vaping or smoking once you decide you want to. That’s what I meant when I said “the product/delivery method is irrelevant”, and why I started my comment with “regardless of the health effects”.
It doesn’t matter how the nicotine gets into your system. It messes with you anyway. Regulating specific products is like playing an endless game of whack-a-mole. The industry will keep finding different ways to get you hooked.
We’ve tried regulating tobacco, so they found a nicotine delivery system that doesn’t rely on tobacco. Let’s attack the addiction problem at the source - regulate the nicotine. That way, when they come up with something new (like an energy drink or something) the existing laws still apply. The slow-moving government doesn’t have to play catch up. Consumers stay protected.
Nicotine addiction is not a PROBLEM though, no more than caffeine addiction. The problem is when the only legal way to get caffeine is by a cocktail of red bull and arsenic.
Nicotine is not the issue. The delivery method is the whole problem.