Edit: It hit me that over the next few decades they are probably going to invent some really nasty things to put in vapes, like they did with cigarettes (that were made to be a lot worse than the "mere" nicotine and smoke inhalation of tobacco smoking), so don't read this in 20 years thinking that people in the past thought whatever they're doing in the future is safer that cigarettes, it could eventually become worse for all we know.
Also, at least in the US, the vehicles (solvents) are unregulated, as are the heating devices (I have been told by some vaping friends that they like the "toasted" effect at the end of a long pull, which is the polymer heating, fracturing, and crosslinking. Ugh.
PEG is a common vehicle; some molecular weights are so safe they aren't even regulated (called GRAS -- "generally regarded as safe") and some are quite toxic. If you were making the drug delivery device for some pharmaceutical your delivery system would be closely regulated to make sure both drug and vehicle were safely administered at all times. But these drugs are not regulated and neither are their delivery systems. You can sell whatever the hell you like.
It's similar to tattoo inks -- some are OK some are really bad (like copper or sooty inks), but all the FDA can do is post some web pages rather than require safe inks.
To be clear I find this absolutely horrifying. As someone with chronic respiratory limitations, it is distressing to see people damage themselves this way. It is their right, but you can't make me like it.
My aunt smoked heavily, she always said "I might as well enjoy my life, even if there are fewer years of it" or something like that. The problem with that is that you lose capacity to enjoy life and then you generally die horribly. I know there are exceptions to this - smokers with no severe impairment - but they are relatively few.
> I have been told by some vaping friends that they like the "toasted" effect at the end of a long pull, which is the polymer heating, fracturing, and crosslinking. Ugh.
I'd be very interested in reading more about this. Do you have any info on hand? Thanks.
I have no idea if any of this is true, but an argument you might hear is that companies that make some profit can capture the agencies to make a lot of profit, while companies that don't make any profit can't exist. So, you could defend absolute bans even while admitting they are excessive if you don't have faith in the system to keep a more nuanced policy stable.
