NYU professors who defended vaping didn't disclose ties to Juul

Conflicts of Interest & Scientific Credibility

• Commenters see undisclosed ties to Juul as part of a long pattern (tobacco, opioids, finance) of experts being paid to defend harmful products.
• Some argue this shows modern science communication is fragile: motivated researchers can usually find data to support a desired conclusion, especially in “soft” public‑health fields.
• Others stress that peer review and replication should buffer against individual bad actors, but acknowledge the replication crisis and p‑hacking.

Health Effects: Nicotine, Vaping, and Comparisons

• Strong disagreement over how harmful nicotine itself is, separate from combustion.
• Some link studies showing vaping associated with increased heart‑attack risk versus non‑users, and RCT data suggesting nicotine (even via gum/patch) raises risks of palpitations, GI issues, and insomnia.
• Others argue nicotine’s risks are modest, liken it to caffeine, and cite sources claiming minimal long‑term harm and cognitive benefits.
• Multiple comments emphasize that vaping eliminates tar and combustion products, so is plausibly much less harmful than cigarettes, though unknowns about inhaled solvents and additives remain.
• Comparisons to caffeine: withdrawal from caffeine is described as short‑lived and manageable; nicotine is widely characterized as more addictive and harder to quit, though some report the opposite.

Addiction, Quitting, and Personal Experiences

• Many personal stories: cigarettes → vaping → eventual quit; dip → long‑term cravings; others stuck on vapes or pouches for years.
• Several describe nicotine as uniquely “owning” their life; others say quitting caffeine was harder.
• Some differentiate “dependency” (managed use) from “addiction” (continued use despite significant harm).
• Cold‑turkey plus months of discomfort is reported as the only durable solution for some; others claim gradual tapering via vaping works.

Youth Uptake, Marketing, and Flavors

• Strong sentiment that a near‑smoke‑free youth generation was “lost” to vapes designed like USB sticks with candy flavors and stealth use.
• Widespread concern about middle‑ and high‑school kids getting hooked on high‑nicotine disposables and nicotine pouches.
• Debate over whether focusing on one brand (Juul) simply ceded the market to unregulated flavored disposables and copycats.

Regulation, Policy, and Corporate Incentives

• Many call for “deny by default” regulation for new nicotine products; others warn this just pushes use into black markets.
• Some see Juul’s rapid legal backlash (ad bans, attempted product bans, multi‑billion settlements) as evidence regulation can move fast; others note cigarettes remain legal and heavily harmful.
• Commenters highlight corporate behavior as amoral: firms systematically exploit loopholes, market to youth, and treat legal penalties as a cost of doing business.
• There is frustration that flavored vapes are restricted while sugary, ultra‑processed foods and alcohol face comparatively less scrutiny, despite major health impacts.

Broader Social & Cultural Themes

• Discussions branch into marijuana legalization, obesity, sugar/HFCS in food, and “sin taxes,” comparing how different vices are regulated.
• Some argue Western hyper‑individualism and corporate power undermine public health, while others push back against “communitarian” solutions as potentially authoritarian.
• Several note the environmental externality of disposable vapes as a new form of ubiquitous e‑waste.