"Second, the magnitude of the public health harm caused by tobacco use is “inextricably linked” to nicotine addiction. 75 Fed. Reg. 69,524, 69,528 (Nov. 12, 2010). “The pharmacologic and behavioral processes that determine tobacco addiction are similar to those that determine addiction to drugs such as heroin and cocaine.” Id. The power of nicotine addiction is perhaps best illustrated by the failure rate of individual cessation efforts. In 2004, for example, “although approximately 40.5 percent of adult smokers reported attempting to quit..., only between 3 and 5 percent were successful.” Id. at 69,529. The tobacco industry has long appreciated the importance of nicotine addiction to their sales. In an internal 1972 memo, one company acknowledged that “a tobacco product is, in essence, a vehicle for the delivery of nicotine”—a “potent drug with a variety of physiologic effects”—and that the “industry is then based upon the design, manufacture, and sale of attractive forms of nicotine.” 146 Cong. Rec. H1849 (Apr. 5, 2000) (statement of Rep. Ganske) (quoting an R.J. Reynolds memo)."
This is really clever.
What is not said is that combustion and tar are the real problems.
Which they are.
After reading the above quote supposes that "nicotine addiction" is the cause real cause of all the problems of smoking.
But its not because Philip Morris now sells the iQUOS - which heats tobacco to below combustion temperature so there is presumably fewer health issues - is new on the market this year.
Hmmm.... Must be no worse than smoking.
Oh wait - Philip Morris's market is currently in decline - 5% a year. Guess they need vaping to go away (see below).
No burning - no problem!
Third on the FDA list is this:
"Third, the tobacco industry has long depended on recruiting underage users who become addicted before age 18. Congress found that, despite laws prohibiting the sale of tobacco products to minors, the “overwhelming majority of Americans who use tobacco products begin using such products while they are minors and become addicted to the nicotine in those products before reaching the age of 18.” Legislative Finding 31, Pub. L. No. 111-31, § 2, 123 Stat. 1776 (2009). Congress additionally found that “[a]dvertising, marketing, and promotion of tobacco products have been especially directed to attract young persons to use tobacco products, and Case 1:16-cv-00878-ABJ Document 42-2 Filed 08/16/16 Page 19 of 102 these efforts have resulted in increased use of such products by youth.” Legislative Finding 15; see also United States v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 449 F. Supp. 2d 1, 572 (D.D.C. 2006) (the “central purpose of the tobacco companies’ image advertising is motivating adolescents to smoke”), aff’d in part, 566 F.3d 1095 (D.C. Cir. 2009). "
Again the alternative is left out.
If mom or dad vapes and its "less risk" (according to the FDA itself) why doesn't the FDA want children to also engage in less risky behavior?
Apparently having little Johnny smoking is better than vaping - even though its less risk.
How disingenuous is all this?
No one smokes in my house any more out of six adults. Four children are no longer exposed to "combustion" smoking.
Yet there's apparently a big problem with this...
The bottom line here is that the FDA knows vaping works better:
In 2011, according to this WSJ article, the NRT (gum, patches, etc.) market was "$835 million market in annual U.S. retail sales of over-the-counter smoking-cessation aids."
The 2014 vaping market according to Wells Fargo? Two billion ($2,000,000,000) more than twice the size of the NRT market.