Vaping apps getting removed from App Store amid health concerns

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 36
    As others have said, this is absurd. There hasn’t been a single death this past summer due to nicotine eliquid. This is based on bootleg THC cartridges cut with Vitamin E acetate. 

    I’ve vaped for 8 years now, started at 18mg nicotine, last 5 years it’s been 3mg and 1.5 mg nicotine. Haven’t smoked a cigarette in 8 years. Ever. 

    9 years ago my oxygen sat level was 91. 2 months ago it was 97. My lungs, in the words of my doctor, are as clear and clean as a non smoker. 

    It’s both funny and sad how much power the media has in forming the way people think about things. As an Apple user since 1984, I consider myself someone that can think for myself. I research, I weigh, then decide. Which is why I just ordered a $6009 MacBook Pro 16”, loaded to the gills and not a $300 PC laptop. 

    Dave Foster - Apple User & Vaper - SMOK MAG P3, KILO BLACK SERIES BIRTHDAY CAKE EJUICE. 

    #WeVapeWeVote 
    cat52
  • Reply 22 of 36
    Was about to say the the same thing.  The nicotine content allows in America is far higher that that allowed in the UK.  Also vaping of cannabis is very different and is allowed for medical use. 

    Having age restrictions is fine. 

    As someone from the UK I find it very strange that a few studies into the harmful effects of vaping causes the complete ban of the sale of vaping products in some areas and action on a national level, yet school shootings and toddles killing their parents hasn’t led to significant change in gun control laws. 

    Apple are free to allow or block any content they choose and I can I I understand their reaction to the high-profile cases of vaping related illness and huge numbers of underage users that the US are currently experiencing.  I’m just disappointed that the whole situation is based on a misunderstanding of the actual issues and potential risks posed to the public.

    I agree fully with StrangeDays’ point that decisions need to be made using science based evidence – The issue with the US regulations and bans is that they’re not being based on science, certainly not a State level:  They appear to be based at best on political populism rather than evidence-lead health policy.

    I say this as a public health professional and ex-smoker who previously vaped, and also as a resident of the UK.  The Government here has based its intervention to vaping on evidence which has been peer-reviewed by health practitioners and professionals, which has resulted in actively encouraging smokers to switch to vaping as part of a harm-reduction strategy, being at least 95% less harmful than smoking tobacco. 

    Let’s be clear – this position is in the UK Government’s interest:  Fewer smoking related illnesses means fewer overall referrals to NHS services, which in turn means a saving in the cost of delivery; and that is a net saving, even when considering the loss of tobacco tax revenue that results from fewer smokers (vaping products are taxed at the standard VAT rate).  This in itself reaffirms the UK Government’s belief in vaping as a form of harm reduction and is one of the rare cases where both their financial- and the wider public health-interests overlap. 

    The situation in the US is very different, particularly in the nature and marketing of available vaping products, and reasonable legislation to mitigate any potential harm is clearly needed.  There are two separate issues at play and there are distinct:  (1) Underage vapers are attracted to the exceedingly high-strength yet smooth-vaping salt-nicotine in ‘pod’ style systems, which are strong enough to give a rush or buzz (50-70 mg/ml in some pods, when the legal limit in the EU is 20 mg/ml, and evidence that flavours are not major factor can be found even from US studies); and (2) the illicit sale of THC containing pods which have been cut with Vitamin E acetate, which is causing  serious or sadly even fatal injuries in users.   

    There are more complexity to these two issues than I can outline here (this post is long enough already!), but in simple terms they are both based in criminality being the same as underage alcohol drinking and drug dealing respectively.  Regulation and enforcement is needed to tackle them, but this must be applied without discouraging or preventing smokers from switching to a less-harmful habit.

    Despite the many scare stories the media presents – many potentially based on bias big-Tobacco or big-Pharma funded US research – vaping is without question significantly less harmful than smoking and has become the most successful method of smoking sensation we have available.  It is likely not risk-free, but millions of ex-smokers have been vaping for around a decade now and we have only in the last few months seen health issues in a relatively small number of recently-started vapers?  This shows that the problem is clearly not a fundamental problem with traditional nicotine vaping and something new has happened, now all but confirmed by the CDC.

    I fear Apple may regret this decision in the future once the evidence in the States has shaken out and expect that we haven’t seen the last of vaping apps in the App Store.

    Public Health England – Vaping in England: an evidence update February 2019


    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 23 of 36
    volcanvolcan Posts: 1,799member
    The more vaping deaths the better. The world is overpopulated anyway. Darwin's law in action. Idiots pollute the gene pool. Good riddance to vapors.
  • Reply 24 of 36
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,454member
    This affected me... 

    I purchased a PAX 3 device. You can put whatever you want in it: loose leaf or oil. It came with an app to adjust temperature settings, which is needed when switching between the two. I can't smoke, as it hurts my bronchial tubes. I can vape CBD though, which I do so with loose leaf or oil depending on which I need and what is on sale. This helps reduce inflammation for Acute Compartment Syndrome I am prone to get after a race. It's either that or aspirin (thins the blood to help alleviate ACS), and large amounts of aspirin isn't good for the liver or kidneys. 

    Again, they pulled an app that isn't even related to the vaping pandemic that is going on. This is for a device that can be configured multiple ways, and one of the reasons I chose the device I did was for those configurations. Luckily I still have the app on my phone, but what happens if I lose my phone? Do I now have to buy an Android device just to use my $250 device? I think they overstepped a bit, as this device wasn't designed to "bLoW pHaT cLoUdS y0". It is a device used for medical CBD and THC, and isn't meant for this craze vaping world they went after. I'm conflicted because I think being vocal about what is happening in that world is a good thing, but ruining devices people already purchased is another.
  • Reply 25 of 36
    Serious overreach by Apple and the government. It seems Washington cares more about vaping than they do children in school getting murdered in their schools. Hysteria is ruling here and Apple is going along with it. The problem is with illegal and black market products. Making it illegal will result in more deaths and huge opportunity for criminal cartels and organized crime.The hysteria is being applied across the board and of course the media and politicians left, right and in between are using it to sell their particular flavor of BS. One of the comments above provided a bunch of links to articles from very dubious sources and he claimed it was based on science. He referred to the Daily Mail. Aren't they the ones that said Princess Diana had 16 heads?
    JaiOh81
  • Reply 26 of 36
    So stupid. What are they going to remove next? Food Network app because they feature recipes for high calorie foods? Car apps because cars are bad for the environment and can cause accidents/deaths? Stupid.
    High-calorie meals are not inherently harmful to human health. For example I’m very active, and require a high caloric intake for continued athletic performance. So this analogy doesn’t work with inhaling toxic chemicals, which is inherently harmful. Likewise with cars, where accidents/death are circumstantial and not inherent simply by driving. Your analogies don’t work.

    A better analogy would be tobacco apps. Tobacco is both legal and inherently harmful to health. Does Apple allow tobacco apps in their store? 
    I think you miss his point. Part of it is being responsible for your own behavior. Should medical marijuana users be deprived of their ability to use these apps to control their medicine and dosing because of illegal black market products that can be used with these apps? I am unaware of any properly certified and safety tested products that are part of this.
  • Reply 27 of 36
    entropysentropys Posts: 4,128member
    sdw2001 said:
    dysamoria said:
    I came here to watch the free-market crazies spew outrage and disgust at “regulation”...
    Why is supporting a free market "crazy?"  
    Because sometimes the free market lets people do things other people don’t want them to do. That reduces the thrill these other people get from being authoritarian. Can’t have that.
    cat52
  • Reply 28 of 36
    Are fast food apps next? If not for those I'm sure I would be an international super model.  

    cat52
  • Reply 29 of 36
    Not a fan of smoking or vaping, but at least I agree people should be free to choose and that includes the freedom to choose things which may harm them, as long as they are informed of the harm beforehand or understand there are unknown risks.
  • Reply 30 of 36
    spice-boyspice-boy Posts: 1,450member
    So stupid. What are they going to remove next? Food Network app because they feature recipes for high calorie foods? Car apps because cars are bad for the environment and can cause accidents/deaths? Stupid.
    Don't know but you could interview the parents of the teens who recently died from vaping illnesses and ask them which apps should be removed. 
  • Reply 31 of 36
    spice-boyspice-boy Posts: 1,450member


    Despite the many scare stories the media presents – many potentially based on bias big-Tobacco or big-Pharma funded US research – vaping is without question significantly less harmful than smoking

    That isn’t without question at all. My links above and others you can find are making the case that the long term heart disease issues are the same, possibly worse. 

    “A study by researchers at the Smidt Heart Institute at Cedar-Sinai in Los Angeles found that vaping can be more harmful to the heart than tobacco. [...] [Be] very careful and not to fall for the promises that e-cigarette producers make suggesting that e-cigarettes are healthy alternatives to cigarette smoking because we're just learning now that e-cigarettes might actually be just as harmful as tobacco cigarettes or even more harmful."

    This is a topic-rated cardiologists group, #3 rated in the nation. Not funded by tobacco companies, lol, who btw are buying up vape companies. 

    https://www.cedars-sinai.org/programs/heart.html

    ....anyway yes I agree that using science and research should be the basis of govt policy. But the pipe dream of ecigs being healthy alternatives to traditional smoking is not looking good. 

    Back to Apple — do they allow tobacco apps? I really don’t know. 
    Thank you for posting this: We need to welcome all research that allows us to better understand the real risks associated with vaping as an emerging technology and I look forward to seeing the peer-review following its presentation, although I note that it appears to have contradictory results compared to a VESUVIUS study also undertaken this year at Dundee University; this project has been on going on 2017 afaik: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-7690361/Vaping-better-heart-tobacco-scientists-prove.html (I was looking for their earlier study that is often referenced by PHE and the British Heart Foundation, but found this press release about updated work, full report not yet published).

    The point is that we’re talking about the unknown long-term effects of vaping that demands further research and discussion; This is the ‘5%’ that’s left from being at least 95% less harmful that smoking tobacco.  Anyone who describes vaping as ‘healthy’ is not understanding the context of the harm-reduction message.

    Vaping is without question less harmful than smoking.  There is also without question some risk to vaping which needs to be quantified, as your study into one health aspect suggests and why people who have never smoked shouldn’t vape.  But the health effects of tobacco are well known, including killing up to half the people who regularly use it.  The number of adverse health effects tobacco smoking contributes to is too long to list here...  I’m not trying to be confrontational, but to suggest that vaping can hold a candle to that level of pathology, particularly with the amount of research scrutiny that the vaping category is under with little evidence being produced to support the claim, is the pipe-dream.

    As I said in my first post, I understand Apple’s dilemma - I believe they don’t allow tobacco orientated apps in the Store either, so I can see the case for excluding those related to vaping as well, particularly in the current climate of controversy in the States.  But I again fall back on the advice presented by the PHE in their Vaping in England report, that careful consideration must be given to actions that may create barriers, discourage or otherwise prevent people from switching from smoking tobacco to vaping... The potential positive impact for public health could be comparable to the invention of running water and inside plumbing!

    Edit: Spelling and Grammar 
    Not sure I know of anyone that dies from smoking cigarettes the first year they started using them. We've been here before, another huge industry does research into possible health affects from their product and hides it as the tobacco industry did for decades, or no research was conducted and somehow the FDA fails to enforce research or the launch of vaping devices. 

    Unfortunately it's all about profits and little thought goes towards how will my product one which produces vapors which come into direct contact with one of most vital organ are lungs. 
  • Reply 32 of 36
    flydogflydog Posts: 1,119member
    tylersdad said:
    This is ridiculous. The vaping products that are causing problems are vape cartridges. They've pulled the apps for several dry herb vaping devices. These devices take dry cannabis and heat it so that it produces vapor, not smoke. It is a far healthier way of consuming, since no solids get into the lungs.

    Since these apps are missing, these $300+ devices are worthless. For instance, the Firefly app was one of the apps that were pulled. The Firefly has no user interface on the devices. It's controlled 100% by the app. These can no longer be used. By the way, the Firefly was developed by a couple of ex Apple execs.
    You are absolutely clueless. The vapor from e-cigarettes contains carcinogens, nicotine, formaldehyde, and lead, among other toxic chemicals. It might not be as dangerous as inhaling smoke, but using the word “healthier” in the context of vaping is absurd. 
  • Reply 33 of 36
    flydogflydog Posts: 1,119member

    hentaiboy said:
    A better analogy would be tobacco apps. Tobacco is both legal and inherently harmful to health. Does Apple allow tobacco apps in their store? 
    Alcohol is also both legal and inherently harmful to health.

    And yes, Apple allows alcohol apps in their store.
    https://itunes.apple.com/ru/app/ipuke-the-drinking-game/id596393583?mt=8
    That’s not an “alcohol” app, it’s a drinking game. And no, alcohol is not inherently harmful to health when used in moderation. 
    edited November 2019
  • Reply 34 of 36
    spice-boy said:


    Despite the many scare stories the media presents – many potentially based on bias big-Tobacco or big-Pharma funded US research – vaping is without question significantly less harmful than smoking

    That isn’t without question at all. My links above and others you can find are making the case that the long term heart disease issues are the same, possibly worse. 

    “A study by researchers at the Smidt Heart Institute at Cedar-Sinai in Los Angeles found that vaping can be more harmful to the heart than tobacco. [...] [Be] very careful and not to fall for the promises that e-cigarette producers make suggesting that e-cigarettes are healthy alternatives to cigarette smoking because we're just learning now that e-cigarettes might actually be just as harmful as tobacco cigarettes or even more harmful."

    This is a topic-rated cardiologists group, #3 rated in the nation. Not funded by tobacco companies, lol, who btw are buying up vape companies. 

    https://www.cedars-sinai.org/programs/heart.html

    ....anyway yes I agree that using science and research should be the basis of govt policy. But the pipe dream of ecigs being healthy alternatives to traditional smoking is not looking good. 

    Back to Apple — do they allow tobacco apps? I really don’t know. 
    Thank you for posting this: We need to welcome all research that allows us to better understand the real risks associated with vaping as an emerging technology and I look forward to seeing the peer-review following its presentation, although I note that it appears to have contradictory results compared to a VESUVIUS study also undertaken this year at Dundee University; this project has been on going on 2017 afaik: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-7690361/Vaping-better-heart-tobacco-scientists-prove.html (I was looking for their earlier study that is often referenced by PHE and the British Heart Foundation, but found this press release about updated work, full report not yet published).

    The point is that we’re talking about the unknown long-term effects of vaping that demands further research and discussion; This is the ‘5%’ that’s left from being at least 95% less harmful that smoking tobacco.  Anyone who describes vaping as ‘healthy’ is not understanding the context of the harm-reduction message.

    Vaping is without question less harmful than smoking.  There is also without question some risk to vaping which needs to be quantified, as your study into one health aspect suggests and why people who have never smoked shouldn’t vape.  But the health effects of tobacco are well known, including killing up to half the people who regularly use it.  The number of adverse health effects tobacco smoking contributes to is too long to list here...  I’m not trying to be confrontational, but to suggest that vaping can hold a candle to that level of pathology, particularly with the amount of research scrutiny that the vaping category is under with little evidence being produced to support the claim, is the pipe-dream.

    As I said in my first post, I understand Apple’s dilemma - I believe they don’t allow tobacco orientated apps in the Store either, so I can see the case for excluding those related to vaping as well, particularly in the current climate of controversy in the States.  But I again fall back on the advice presented by the PHE in their Vaping in England report, that careful consideration must be given to actions that may create barriers, discourage or otherwise prevent people from switching from smoking tobacco to vaping... The potential positive impact for public health could be comparable to the invention of running water and inside plumbing!

    Edit: Spelling and Grammar 
    Not sure I know of anyone that dies from smoking cigarettes the first year they started using them. We've been here before, another huge industry does research into possible health affects from their product and hides it as the tobacco industry did for decades, or no research was conducted and somehow the FDA fails to enforce research or the launch of vaping devices. 

    Unfortunately it's all about profits and little thought goes towards how will my product one which produces vapors which come into direct contact with one of most vital organ are lungs. 
    Not sure I know of anyone dying from using legally purchased vaping products in the ten years they’ve been available on the market either.  The tragic injuries and deaths in the US are not being experienced elsewhere in the world and are being linked to illicitly manufactured and distributed THC e-cigerette pods, containing the Vitamin E acetate that is not found in genuine, FDA registered nicotine vaping products - CDC Statement

    The matter of shelf regulation and self-investigation contributed to people worldwide being exposed to unparalleled levels of harm from tobacco, which we are still struggling to tackle today despite now knowing the true risks of smoking for nearly three decades!  The only possible silver lining to that situation is the increased public awareness (read: scepticism) and levels of genuine scrutiny that studies from all fields of public health and the wider scientific community are subjected to.  

    It is clear that this is the case for vaping as well and it is right that evidence assessing the true risks is growing all the time.  But please note that it is already reasonably abundant and those studies indicating significant harm must not be dismissed out of hand, but the balance of the evidence supports the claim that it is at least 95% less harmful than smoking tobacco and a potential important tool in reducing the impact of cigarettes on people lives. 
  • Reply 35 of 36
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 5,043member
    Not a fan of smoking or vaping, but at least I agree people should be free to choose and that includes the freedom to choose things which may harm them, as long as they are informed of the harm beforehand or understand there are unknown risks.
    as well as not ask you to pay for the things they doing which harms them.
Sign In or Register to comment.