FDA takes historic action against e-cigs/vaping: Why does S.O. want to allow vape and hookah lounges?
Further quotes from the same article:
"We're especially focused on the flavored e-cigarettes," said Gottlieb. "And we're seriously considering a policy change that would lead to the immediate removal of these flavored products from the market."
Gottlieb said the FDA recognized the impact this might have on adults trying to stop smoking, but said that emerging research on how flavored products encourage excessive use by young people shows action must be taken.
"I'll be clear. The FDA won't tolerate a whole generation of young people becoming addicted to nicotine as a tradeoff for enabling adults to have unfettered access to these same products," Gottlieb said.
I haven't heard about the South Orange decision. Does it have age restrictions? If so, then I don't understand the issue. Not wanting hookah and vape lounges that have age restrictions would be similar to not wanting Bunny's in town to address underage drinking.
On the other hand, if there are no age restrictions, then yes, it is a very bad move.
Bad move. May as well also have tattoo parlors and an adult bookstore.
Why does the store at the corner of Tuscan Street and Springfield Avenue (northwest corner) have a huge lawn sign on the Tuscan Street side of the property advertising vaping products?
I assumed any lounge in South Orange would be for legal-age adults only. Sort of like bars. The FDA action deals with underage use.
Based on recent evidence about the dangers of vaping, most cities and towns are wisely moving to restrict vaping. Not SO.
joan_crystal said:
Why does the store at the corner of Tuscan Street and Springfield Avenue (northwest corner) have a huge lawn sign on the Tuscan Street side of the property advertising vaping products?
Those are legal. It's like a sign for cigarettes outside a variety store.
bettyd said:
Bad move. May as well also have tattoo parlors and an adult bookstore.
Yeah, cause people who get tattoos aren't the sort we want in this area
Concerns are exploding over the newly discovered health risks of vaping. SO does not need these places and should not want them Way to go SO.
spontaneous said:
bettyd said:Yeah, cause people who get tattoos aren't the sort we want in this area
Bad move. May as well also have tattoo parlors and an adult bookstore.
No, just the parlors.
bettyd said:
spontaneous said:No, just the parlors.
bettyd said:Yeah, cause people who get tattoos aren't the sort we want in this area
Bad move. May as well also have tattoo parlors and an adult bookstore.
I don't understand the visceral reaction some people have to tattoo parlors. So the end result is okay, but the artist who does the actual tattoo is not?
South_Mountaineer said:
I assumed any lounge in South Orange would be for legal-age adults only. Sort of like bars. The FDA action deals with underage use.
Yes, the lounges would be for legal-age adults only. But we all know how underage people get into legal-age drinking establishments. It's foolish to believe there will be no spillover effect on underage kids if a vaping lounge is opened in S.O.
spontaneous said:
I haven't heard about the South Orange decision. Does it have age restrictions? If so, then I don't understand the issue. Not wanting hookah and vape lounges that have age restrictions would be similar to not wanting Bunny's in town to address underage drinking.
On the other hand, if there are no age restrictions, then yes, it is a very bad move.
"Hookah and vape lounges — along with a number of other new commercial uses — will now be permitted in South Orange Village Center after the South Orange Village Board of Trustees voted 4-3 to approve changes to the business code on Monday, August 13."
Alcohol is legal and we have places to buy it. Cigarettes are legal and sold here. I have no problem with a well run vape shop and while I don't care for tattoos I don't see why a legal thing that hurts no one should be banned.
FilmCarp said:
Alcohol is legal and we have places to buy it. Cigarettes are legal and sold here. I have no problem with a well run vape shop and while I don't care for tattoos I don't see why a legal thing that hurts no one should be banned.
Oh, stop making sense!
Why is it being allowed front and center $$$$$$$
Why are cigarettes allowed to be sold despite overwhelming proof of danger to the body caused by them ..............$$$
Who has the largest lobby in Congress and lobbyists with the most campaign money to spread around?
The ill effects of alcohol are not far behind and I make no apologies for that statement............yea I know "All things in moderation".............but moderation, which is just south of Trenton, burned down a long time ago.
spontaneous said:
bettyd said:I don't understand the visceral reaction some people have to tattoo parlors. So the end result is okay, but the artist who does the actual tattoo is not?
spontaneous said:No, just the parlors.
bettyd said:Yeah, cause people who get tattoos aren't the sort we want in this area
Bad move. May as well also have tattoo parlors and an adult bookstore.
I'm with spontaneous on this one. There is no reason to ban a perfectly legal business which, from the looks of things at the pool this summer, would be a thriving addition to the downtown area.
It doesn't have to be a grungy storefront with a flashing neon sign, which I think is the image some people have of this kind of establishment.
yahooyahoo said:
South_Mountaineer said:Yes, the lounges would be for legal-age adults only. But we all know how underage people get into legal-age drinking establishments. It's foolish to believe there will be no spillover effect on underage kids if a vaping lounge is opened in S.O.
I assumed any lounge in South Orange would be for legal-age adults only. Sort of like bars. The FDA action deals with underage use.
Yes, but ask the people who owned Cryan's if that's a good way to run a business.
mrincredible said:
spontaneous said:I'm with spontaneous on this one. There is no reason to ban a perfectly legal business which, from the looks of things at the pool this summer, would be a thriving addition to the downtown area.
bettyd said:I don't understand the visceral reaction some people have to tattoo parlors. So the end result is okay, but the artist who does the actual tattoo is not?
spontaneous said:No, just the parlors.
bettyd said:Yeah, cause people who get tattoos aren't the sort we want in this area
Bad move. May as well also have tattoo parlors and an adult bookstore.
It doesn't have to be a grungy storefront with a flashing neon sign, which I think is the image some people have of this kind of establishment.
Something like this might be a nice addition to downtown SO:
FilmCarp said:
Alcohol is legal and we have places to buy it. Cigarettes are legal and sold here. I have no problem with a well run vape shop and while I don't care for tattoos I don't see why a legal thing that hurts no one should be banned.
Alcohol and cigarettes were legal and prevalent in our society decades before the true health effects were known. Vaping/e-cigs were introduced in the U.S. about 10-12 years ago. The potential health effects are known. Yes, e-cigs are legal products and sold in various stores but why encourage use in public spaces? Cigarettes have been banned in most public spaces/bars/restaurants, etc.
yahooyahoo said:
FilmCarp said:Alcohol and cigarettes were legal and prevalent in our society decades before the true health effects were known. Vaping/e-cigs were introduced in the U.S. about 10-12 years ago. The potential health effects are known. Yes, e-cigs are legal products and sold in various stores but why encourage use in public spaces? Cigarettes have been banned in most public spaces/bars/restaurants, etc.
Alcohol is legal and we have places to buy it. Cigarettes are legal and sold here. I have no problem with a well run vape shop and while I don't care for tattoos I don't see why a legal thing that hurts no one should be banned.
Well, we know fossil fuels are bad for the environment, but we haven't banned single occupant SUVs. How far do we go?
FilmCarp said:
yahooyahoo said:Well, we know fossil fuels are bad for the environment, but we haven't banned single occupant SUVs. How far do we go?
FilmCarp said:Alcohol and cigarettes were legal and prevalent in our society decades before the true health effects were known. Vaping/e-cigs were introduced in the U.S. about 10-12 years ago. The potential health effects are known. Yes, e-cigs are legal products and sold in various stores but why encourage use in public spaces? Cigarettes have been banned in most public spaces/bars/restaurants, etc.
Alcohol is legal and we have places to buy it. Cigarettes are legal and sold here. I have no problem with a well run vape shop and while I don't care for tattoos I don't see why a legal thing that hurts no one should be banned.
I'm not saying ban e-cigs. I'm asking why should we allow vaping lounges?
Cars/SUVs haven't been banned but they are now required to meet certain fuel efficiency and pollution standards.
bettyd said:
Based on recent evidence about the dangers of vaping, most cities and towns are wisely moving to restrict vaping. Not SO.
I think you overstate. This recent article says about 20 municipalities in NJ require vape sellers to purchase special local licenses, which cost about $1,200. There are about 550 municipalities in NJ.
I have no interest in vaping and I'm sure it's unhealthy but I don't see a need for government to get involved.
Wonderful, isn't it? This concern for our children. And this is from a FDA with a Trump Republican appointee.
So unusual. Trump's appointees have shown they don't care about the environment or health concerns. But here we see an exception.
Or do we?
I'm reminded of Republican congressman Tauzin who helped push Medicare Part D through, the drug benefit program. So caring for the seniors. Or was he?
Tauzin arranged to include in the law a prohibition that that prevented Medicare Part D from negotiating drug prices. In other words, charge senior the full price. After he left office he earned 2 million a year as president of PhRMA, the pharmaceutical lobbying group.
Was his agenda helping senior or getting a new lucrative market for big Pharma, a market which could not be negotiated and then being rewarded with a 2 million a year job from big pharma.
How do we know there is no hidden agenda here? Is it possible the very lucrative nicotine patch market is hurt by vaping?
yahooyahoo said:
FilmCarp said:Alcohol and cigarettes were legal and prevalent in our society decades before the true health effects were known. Vaping/e-cigs were introduced in the U.S. about 10-12 years ago. The potential health effects are known. Yes, e-cigs are legal products and sold in various stores but why encourage use in public spaces? Cigarettes have been banned in most public spaces/bars/restaurants, etc.
Alcohol is legal and we have places to buy it. Cigarettes are legal and sold here. I have no problem with a well run vape shop and while I don't care for tattoos I don't see why a legal thing that hurts no one should be banned.
There's a cigar lounge in Union that I know of, it's the same concept as a vape lounge. No, you can't smoke or vape in any public space, but there's an exception for smoking spaces. I'm not a patron, but it's no worry to me if someone else is.
we're not going to ban nicotine. it's obvious that prohibition of drugs doesn't work. So if nicotine is going to be legal, I don't see anything wrong with licensing spaces for people to consume it.
South_Mountaineer said:
joan_crystal said:Those are legal. It's like a sign for cigarettes outside a variety store.
Why does the store at the corner of Tuscan Street and Springfield Avenue (northwest corner) have a huge lawn sign on the Tuscan Street side of the property advertising vaping products?
The signs for cigarettes are illegal but not enforced.
spontaneous said:
I don't understand the visceral reaction some people have to tattoo parlors. So the end result is okay, but the artist who does the actual tattoo is not?
I didn't understand the value of body art until George Carlin explained it to me.
Carlin: (Paraphrase but pretty accurate) I used to walk down the street and see a guy with three swastikas on his forehead, two double AA batteries hanging from his earlobes (I actually saw that in London) and a Master lock hanging from each of his eyelids. And I'd look at that guy and say to myself, "What a f......, a$$hole."
Then I heard some psychologist on the radio who explained that this stuff was good for their self-image.
So now, when I see such a character walking down the street and he's got a 50mm shell running through one cheek and out the other, I can look at that guy and say to myself,
"Now, there's a happy guy."
I'm still perplexed by South Orange's decision to allow hookah and vape lounges. Why encourage something that's unhealthy and potentially dangerous?
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/12/health/fda-e-cigarette-juul-crackdown-bn/index.html
"Concerned with an "epidemic" surge in teen use of e-cigarettes, the head of the US Food and Drug Administration announced today a "historic action" against more than 1,300 retailers and five major manufacturers for their roles in perpetuating youth access to the devices in the US."