Misogynist Curry 卐's Political Party.

[JayGoptri]

Dear @Misogynist Curry 卐,

I want to ask you a serious question:

What will the AAP (Aam Aadmi Party) do in regards to lifting the archaic and worthless ban on THR (Tobacco Harm Reduction)? You know that Curryland, (due to the same backwards politics and corruption YOU seem to always cry about) has been one of the few countries to ban a product which helps people to quit and stay off one of the most dangerous cancer causing habits ie. - TOBACCO SMOKING. So what is the AAP's stance on this HEALTH issue. I can't seem to find any public record of their position on it, but maybe you know better. Please give me your best answer. Thank you.

Read this below if you are unfamiliar with the issue:

Why e-cigarette ban in India will do more harm than good

India has taken an even more stringent option than the US by completely banning the product, while inexplicably having no extra restrictions on traditional cigarettes, which are proven to be multiple times more harmful

www.businesstoday.in

 

[Am85006]

AAP is a cuck party
Congress are dumb
BJP is based (even though i dont support them)

 

[JayGoptri]

AAP is a cuck party
Congress are dumb
BJP is based (even though i dont support them)

Yeah probably true but - I want to see what @Misogynist Curry 卐 has to say about AAP's position on this vape ban issue because it's all about corruption asan underlying issue and he champions AAP like he's their official spokesman.

 

[UnknownR]

AAP is a cuck party
Congress are dumb
BJP is based (even though i dont support them)

Agreed

 

[12 Years a Rotter]

book of indian dogs

 

[JayGoptri]

book of indian dogs

Yyyep. That shit mogs the fuck out of you don't it?

 

[JayGoptri]

@Misogynist Curry 卐 - why can't you answer a simple question about AAP's stance on this?

 

[Oroborus]

book of indian dogs

So much this

 

[JayGoptri]

He's right though isn't he? Indian dogs have gotten married to human females but he hasn't

Maybe, but I don't mean it like that. I just love my canines. But - this whole Dogpill preoccupation is pathetic. No matter how much rationality one tries to inject into the conversation it seems to crop up somewhere or the other. And - this whole dog marrying thing is a non-sequiter.


Now, when is he going to answer the question in my OP?

 

[JayGoptri]

cope

Which part?

 

[JayGoptri]

I was joking.

Ok.

On a more serious note, vaping was supposed to help smokers eventually get off their habit by providing a safer alternative but it eventually started being used normie HS students who never smoked before so I guess there could be a compelling state interest to regulate vapes

This is a complete non-sequiter and total NPC conclusion and, I'm sad to hear you repeat it.

Absolutely no studies or experiences indicate any considerably worse danger from the use of ENDS or flavoured nicotine products vs the DEFINITE cancer causing carcinoma which ciggerates cause. Science has given us data about this for over 200 years. So the answer is certainly not to ban something which is useable for smoking cessation for every adult simply because some HS dumbasses get their hands on it. And btw almost those cases were found to be USER ERROR and not product malfunction. Do you ban kitchen knives because some moron stabbed himself while cutting the corners off his sandwich?
And also the fact that some HS idiots got their hands on it DEFINITELY doesn't mean any ban or unreasonable regulation should exist for those who are responsibly using it to save their ow lives. That's Authoritarian-leftist-horseshit.

Regulations:
It was already regulated in most States as far as the U.S. is. concerned.

Secondly, I'm asking him about India and AAP political party's stand on it. Do you realize that after the ban inIndia FAR MORE youth under age 18 have gotten their hands on it from the black market? And does it make any sense to ban vaping product but to leave ciggerates on the market?

Read the article in my OP please.

 

[JayGoptri]

ok you made me write an essay


JFL You realize Tobacco companies were saying this same thing about cigarettes for virtually half a century?

This is NOT at all a good argument for why Vape should be banned as it is 10x safer than ciggerate smoke in 3 or 4 major ways. Not to mention all the disgusting type of feeling and smells it leaves.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_ZDQKq2F08


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9M9Y-7T4zX8


Those corporations (which probably control a great deal of research funding) obviously will capitalize on any ambiguity in the evidence to make bold claims that their products aren't harmful. Since e-cigarettes are relatively new to the market and comparatively little research has been done on their health effects, this could be yet another example of that.

No, you know what your problem is, you are too bound by bullshit science arguments instead of actual experience with these things. And In fact, there is absolutely ZERO evidence in oncology or medical journals that vaping will cause cancer. ZERO. There is over 300 years of research which shows that tobacco (burning of leaves and combustibles) ABSOLUTELY causes cancer. So, only an idiot would opt for an all or nothing approach, when everyone who smokes will return to smoking if they don't have Tobacco Harm Reduction on the market.

Nevertheless there are studies indicating that there might be health risks:

Bracken-Clarke, Dara, et al. "Vaping and lung cancer–A review of current data and recommendations." Lung Cancer 153 (2021): 11-20.

You don't ban something because there MIGHT be risk. There are massive risks with EVERYTHING. Doctors prescribe amphetamines for a bullshit condition called ADHD (which is just you being forced to be an asshole about your proclivities) because the world we live in promotes this type of behavior due to the fact it's so unnatural. It's bullshit. And btw, nearly all medication given for ADHD has MASSIVE negative effects on you heart health, should they be banned? Far more than a daily dose of 0.3mg of nicotine, which is the lowest vape amount that nobody ever feels the need to increase.

Tsai, MuChun, et al. "Effects of e‐cigarettes and vaping devices on cardiac and pulmonary physiology." The Journal of Physiology 598.22 (2020): 5039-5062.

I will provide you with a number of studies which say this about organic fruit and meat too LMAO. Fucking retard hippies.

Irusa, Karina F., Brian Vence, and Terry Donovan. "Potential oral health effects of e‐cigarettes and vaping: A review and case reports." Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry 32.3 (2020): 260-264.

Dentistry LMAO.

Even if your claim was correct, it would not disprove my main argument which was that non-smokers would eventually get their hands on e-cigarettes and not just those looking to quite smoking. If some danger exists (which it does, since it can cause serious medical conditions such as E-cigarette or Vaping Use-Associated Lung Injury or EVALI), then there is a net harm for this group of people.

No, it does. You're just assuming that it's a bad thing if they do get their hands on it. In fact, it's no worse than their daily coffee intake. If retards can't use something responsibly then everyone who does has to have it banned?!? That is the stupidest fucking Authoritarian-Globohomo logic ever. You think Marijuana is also bad and should be never allowed and all that right?

@Marquis de Sade ^ get a load of this.

How can science give you data on this for 200 years when e-cigarettes were only entered the market a few decades ago? .

No dumbass. I'm talking about Ciggerates! We know they cause cancer, you don't know SHIT about what vape does. When you don't know shit about what something does you don't run off and ban it. And on the contrary in the past 25 years we know that fruit flavored (Vegetable Glycerine+ Polysaccharides Glycol+ nicotine) helps save people from FAR worse habits of tobacco, it's is the exact OPPOSITE of Science based health policy to ban it !!!

Actually....

1. There's about 25 studies indicating that e-cigarette exposure is associated with an increased risk of becoming a smoker when it's given to non-smokers - considering about ~27.5% of high school students have been exposed to e-cigarettes there's a worrying trend here that justifies state action
2. There are alternative remedies for smokers to quite their habit that are just as effective (namely FDA-approved nicotine replacement therapies), indicating that banning e-cigarettes need not come at the expense of smoking cessation for smokers
   1. In fact these alternative remedies are preferable because smoking relapse is higher in e-cigarette users versus non-users.

No, because kitchen knives are much less harmful and serve an indispensable function to society.

Re-read what I wrote above.

Why not?

I already explained why ! Because it's one-size-fits-all type of thinking and it's fucking stupid to rob people of their copes because of what Science DOESN'T know about something. In fact all the science is saying exactly the opposite.

Well I mean I don't think Misogynist Curry has put that much thought into his support for AAP so calling him a "spokesperson" is a bit of a stretch but you can try and squeeze out an answer from him .

He can formulate an answer based off his dealings. He seems to claim (as a GenZ 19 year old) what is good for the education system, yet he doesn't know shit about the education system in the West or what is good & bad about it. He can certainly render a simple prediction. Because you do realize that India has a MASSIVE Lung cancer problem due to tobacco smoke and here children being able to get their hands on cigs. It's amazing any political party wants to ban something which most likely doesn't cause cancer while KEEPing something that DEFINITELY causes cancer on the market.

It's also ridiculous to even utter any words about a vape ban in such a scenario.

About your point on the black market, isn't that an entirely separate issue?

No it's not at all. Are you fucking kidding me? The number of kids who vape has gone UP because of the bans. Since the government is too retarded regulate vape, they have done a FULL BAN. This is NOT the case in 90% of other countries. The U.S. does regulate vape properly. You are not even understanding the issues man.

The answer to poor enforcement of existing laws is better enforcement of existing laws, not questioning whether the laws themselves are desirable or not.

No! This is horseshit. You are hilariously naieve. This is not at all true for THR or THC. You don't know the Science, so you don't potentially make up rules that can HURT the public more than helping them. Cancer rates in India alone have gone UP since the ban. And more people have returned to their doctor with chronic lung issues citing that their lung issues got worse after the ban and BECAUSE they had to return to smoking !

The long term studies will prove this, trust me.

You'd have to argue that enforcing an e-cigarette ban is insurmountable for this claim to have any weight.

Jesus no. India needs to learn how to regulate it just like every other country does !

No I have ADHD

Fucking GenZ is what you have. Not ADHD.

 

[JayGoptri]

ok you made me write an essay


JFL You realize Tobacco companies were saying this same thing about cigarettes for virtually half a century?


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_ZDQKq2F08


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9M9Y-7T4zX8


Those corporations (which probably control a great deal of research funding) obviously will capitalize on any ambiguity in the evidence to make bold claims that their products aren't harmful. Since e-cigarettes are relatively new to the market and comparatively little research has been done on their health effects, this could be yet another example of that.

Nevertheless there are studies indicating that there might be health risks:

Bracken-Clarke, Dara, et al. "Vaping and lung cancer–A review of current data and recommendations." Lung Cancer 153 (2021): 11-20.


Tsai, MuChun, et al. "Effects of e‐cigarettes and vaping devices on cardiac and pulmonary physiology." The Journal of Physiology 598.22 (2020): 5039-5062.


Irusa, Karina F., Brian Vence, and Terry Donovan. "Potential oral health effects of e‐cigarettes and vaping: A review and case reports." Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry 32.3 (2020): 260-264.


Even if your claim was correct, it would not disprove my main argument which was that non-smokers would eventually get their hands on e-cigarettes and not just those looking to quite smoking. If some danger exists (which it does, since it can cause serious medical conditions such as E-cigarette or Vaping Use-Associated Lung Injury or EVALI), then there is a net harm for this group of people.


How can science give you data on this for 200 years when e-cigarettes were only entered the market a few decades ago?


Actually....

1. There's about 25 studies indicating that e-cigarette exposure is associated with an increased risk of becoming a smoker when it's given to non-smokers - considering about ~27.5% of high school students have been exposed to e-cigarettes there's a worrying trend here that justifies state action
2. There are alternative remedies for smokers to quite their habit that are just as effective (namely FDA-approved nicotine replacement therapies), indicating that banning e-cigarettes need not come at the expense of smoking cessation for smokers
   1. In fact these alternative remedies are preferable because smoking relapse is higher in e-cigarette users versus non-users.

No, because kitchen knives are much less harmful and serve an indispensable function to society.


Why not?


Well I mean I don't think Misogynist Curry has put that much thought into his support for AAP so calling him a "spokesperson" is a bit of a stretch but you can try and squeeze out an answer from him

About your point on the black market, isn't that an entirely separate issue? The answer to poor enforcement of existing laws is better enforcement of existing laws, not questioning whether the laws themselves are desirable or not. You'd have to argue that enforcing an e-cigarette ban is insurmountable for this claim to have any weight.


No I have ADHD

The FDA Is Banning Juul Products. That’s Bad for Our Health.

The move is part of a concerning trend at the agency.

slate.com

Banning Vapes May Not be the Answer: Actually, It Could Make Problems Worse -- Occupational Health & Safety

Given rising evidence on vaping products, experts say banning them altogether might not fix the problem. It could drive teens to the black market and send adult smokers back to cigarettes.

ohsonline.com

 

[JayGoptri]

@Indracel