Banning Flavored E-Cigarettes Has Nothing to Do With the Hazards of Black-Market Cannabis Products
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and other prohibitionists continue to conflate the two issues.
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and other prohibitionists continue to conflate the two issues.
As the popularity of e-cigarettes has exploded, smoking rates among high school students have reached record lows.
By dramatically reducing the harm-reducing alternatives to conventional cigarettes, the plan is likely to result in more smoking-related disease and death.
The billionaire busybody is pushing bans on the flavored e-cigarettes that offer a harm-reducing alternative to smoking.
That's the opposite of the fear underlying the FDA's crackdown on e-cigarettes.
The sexiest discoveries are often the ones not found in the actual study.
The city is favoring the most dangerous form of nicotine delivery over a potentially lifesaving alternative.
Plus: Six-week abortion bans are proliferating, extremism as excuse for censorhip, Soylent made a snack bar
Years of mealy-mouthed, misleading, and mendacious statements by activists, government officials, and journalists have taken a toll on the truth.
Even as the FDA continues to crack-down on vaping, it appears ready to allow snus to be sold as what it is: a safer alternative to smoking.
The upshot could be more smoking-related disease and death.
When and wherever public health conflicted with personal freedom, Gottlieb advocated for the former.
Those who continued to smoke cut their cigarette consumption in half.
A randomized clinical study adds to the evidence that e-cigarettes are far less hazardous than the conventional kind.
After a harm reduction advocate slammed a hardy but misleading factoid, users who retweeted his message complained that they had been shadowbanned.
Past-month vaping did not predict experimentation with cigarettes in a large sample of teenagers.
One survey shows cigarette use holding steady, while another shows it continuing to fall.
Sen. Richard Burr raises an interesting point about onerous regulation, but his argument is baffling.
Rep. Richard Creagan declares cigarette sales the moral equivalent of slavery and murder.
Global food police want to treat meat and sugar products like tobacco.
In the name of fighting "the epidemic of youth e-cigarette use," Jerome Adams wants to raise prices and ban indoor vaping.
Is e-cigarette use by teenagers a public health disaster or a public health boon?
Misguided health police are cracking down on e-cigarettes.
The Food and Drug Administration can't ban cigarettes outright. But the agency appears to be planning a workaround.
Even among teenagers, efforts to prevent underage e-cigarette use may do more harm than good.
If the FDA does not try to reduce underage vaping, Gottlieb says in a Reason interview, congressional intervention could wreck the industry.
The new rules arguably violate the law that gave the agency authority to regulate tobacco products.
The health burden on adults who continue smoking far outweighs the risks for teenagers who vape.
The FDA's decree will make vaping less appealing and less accessible to smokers interested in switching.
The company's plan to prevent underage vaping, which includes limits on constitutionally protected speech, goes beyond what the FDA is expected to require.
The new rule, aimed at preventing underage consumption, threatens public health by making vaping less appealing and less accessible to adult smokers.
Food and Drug Commissioner Scott Gottlieb's claims about an "epidemic" of underage vaping are hard to evaluate without access to the survey results he cites.
On the upside, agency promises to review over-the-counter drug rules, approve more new drugs, and liberate French dressing.
A new Public Health England report suggests the U.S. has fallen far behind in taking advantage of this harm-reducing alternative.
The senator's claim is based on some highly implausible assumptions.
FDA regulations aimed at discouraging underage vaping may also deter smokers from switching.
The agency is willing to sacrifice the lives of adult smokers in the name of preventing adolescent vaping.
In this sample of nearly 19,000, moving from smoking to vaping was much more common than the reverse.
Bans like San Francisco's hurt smokers by making the potentially lifesaving switch to vaping less attractive.
This will hurt innocent people. It may harm legal businesses. And it won't actually work.
What if the e-cigarette features that appeal to teenagers also appeal to grownups?
Everything we do entails risk. The question is our tolerance for it.
FDA took unconstitutional action when it made electronic cigarettes subject to the Tobacco Control Act (even though they contain no tobacco), lawsuits argue.
An FDA-sponsored report confirms the harm-reducing potential of vaping yet worries, implausibly, that it will boost adolescent smoking.
Keeping up with New York regulations is enough to shut down some businesses.
Past-month cigarette use by high school seniors has fallen by 73 percent since 1997.
Reason is an independent, audience-supported media organization. Your investment helps us reach millions of people every month.
Yes, I’ll invest in Reason’s growth! No thanksEvery dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.
Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interestedSo much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.
I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanksPush back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.
My donation today will help Reason push back! Not todayBack journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.
Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksBack independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksYour support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksYour donation supports the journalism that questions big-government promises and exposes failed ideas.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksDonate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks