Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Chaos215bar2

macrumors regular
Jan 11, 2004
211
550
If you believe that it’s not...you aren’t worth the effort. Smoke, regardless of what it’s from...is harmful. Period. Scientific fact. I would love to see you post a reputable study that shows marijuana smoke is NOT harmful. Good luck. Science isn’t going to be on your side.
I agree with you in principal, but you need to tone down the rhetoric if we’re going to talk science. First, we’re talking aerosolized liquids here, not “smoke”. Second, there are absolutely medically established uses for, really, just about every drug that’s actually been available to study. (Schedule 1 is a bit of a catch 22 in the US, since the moment something makes it onto that list, it becomes exceedingly difficult to actually do the kind of research that might find a medical use.)

Smoking is absolutely harmful under nearly if not all circumstances, and the vast majority of vape use likely is as well. But tearing down a straw man doesn’t really help anyone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech and flindet

iOS Geek

macrumors 68000
Nov 7, 2017
1,622
3,364
In fact they've found in some cases it inhibits lung cancer. Once you perform your effort I'll provide the study.

My very first search:


moking marijuana clearly damages the human lung. Research shows that smoking marijuana causes chronic bronchitis and marijuana smoke has been shown to injure the cell linings of the large airways, which could explain why smoking marijuana leads to symptoms such as chronic cough, phlegm production, wheeze and acute bronchitis.4,9
Smoking marijuana has also been linked to cases of air pockets in between both lungs and between the lungs and the chest wall, as well as large air bubbles in the lungs among young to middle-aged adults, mostly heavy smokers of marijuana.
However, it's not possible to establish whether these occur more frequently among marijuana smokers than the general population.4

WebMD:

Studies that have looked for a direct link between the two have conflicting results -- some found evidence that ties marijuana to lung cancer, while other data show little to no connection.





run ya mouth some more.
"Run ya mouth some more"? You know what? If you're going to be an a**...you definitely aren't worth the time and effort. You ran your mouth saying prove that the smoke is NOT harmful and then you provided a study that right in the beginning...says it "CLEARLY DAMAGES the lung". Did you even read that before you posted it? The study is literally ONE "However" away from directly linking it to harm. I would have been happy to debate with you. But I expect open mindedness and respect, which you don't seem to be willing to offer. So I won't be returning the same. Hate to break it to you, but as more research is conducted...it is pretty much a GUARANTEE that marijuana will be found to have serious drawbacks. And people like you will do what you continue to do...which is ignore it because it goes against what you want to believe. With it's legality becoming more widespread...we now have a larger pool of guinea pigs. It will end the same way as alcohol and tobacco...proven that it's not good for you. Only difference is at least drinkers and tobacco smokers actually admit that it's bad for them. Pot smokers are literally the ONLY people I ever hear say their vice is "harmless". Won't be addressing you any farther.
 

darkslide29

macrumors 68000
Oct 5, 2011
1,861
886
San Francisco, California
Disappointing trigger happy reaction to the news. The Pax app allows control of a vaporizer to change the temperature, set how long you want your session to be so you don't over do it, or lock the device so that it cannot be used (by children for example) until it's unlocked. It is just a utility to control the device, nothing more. It's also a device that is very much like Apple in that they created a closed ecosystem to buy legit pods, and not go into the shady bootleg black market stuff that's making people sick.

Now the alternatives are going to be to sideload on Android (google hasn't banned yet), or go for the other brands that may not be legitimate and are more of a concern.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Breezygirl

albebaubles

macrumors 6502a
Feb 9, 2010
623
544
Sierra in view
"Run ya mouth some more"? You know what? If you're going to be an a**...you definitely aren't worth the time and effort. You ran your mouth saying prove that the smoke is NOT harmful and then you provided a study that right in the beginning...says it "CLEARLY DAMAGES the lung". Did you even read that before you posted it? The study is literally ONE "However" away from directly linking it to harm. I would have been happy to debate with you. But I expect open mindedness and respect, which you don't seem to be willing to offer. So I won't be returning the same. Hate to break it to you, but as more research is conducted...it is pretty much a GUARANTEE that marijuana will be found to have serious drawbacks. And people like you will do what you continue to do...which is ignore it because it goes against what you want to believe. With it's legality becoming more widespread...we now have a larger pool of guinea pigs. It will end the same way as alcohol and tobacco...proven that it's not good for you. Only difference is at least drinkers and tobacco smokers actually admit that it's bad for them. Pot smokers are literally the ONLY people I ever hear say their vice is "harmless". Won't be addressing you any farther.
I would say you started it. Clearly is has an affect, and clearly you are ill informed. Doctors can find no evidence I've used MJ for 35 years. None. They did however find evidence that the prescribed nexxium was wiping out my liver. Go figure.

And, yes I see you have a pre-exisitng opinion of MJ.

Please do not address me, just STOP TALKING.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech

JtheLemur

macrumors 6502a
May 13, 2002
665
344

blacktape242

macrumors 68000
Dec 17, 2010
1,906
2,814
Sacramento, CA
and not alcohol, which kills how many people per year.... ya apple, great job.
[automerge]1573850217[/automerge]
Forgive the nitpicking, but yes, it is. Nicotine is a drug.

Edit: This isn't advocacy for Apple's decision to ban the apps; I think that's silly (and I also think vaping is silly) and likely to have about zero impact. And if it does happen to reduce vaping use, that's probably bad for public health, because vaping looks so far to be less harmful than cigarette smoking. When vaping products are banned (not by Apple; I'm talking governments here), cigarette usage is likely to go up.

My unsolicited advice: Don't smoke. Don't vape. But if you must do one of the two, vape instead of smoke. And use legal vaping products, provided they still exist.


Nicotine is essentially harmless on its own. addictive yes, but harmless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech

cwosigns

macrumors 68020
Jul 8, 2008
2,225
2,724
Columbus,OH
Forgive the nitpicking, but yes, it is. Nicotine is a drug.

Edit: This isn't advocacy for Apple's decision to ban the apps; I think that's silly (and I also think vaping is silly) and likely to have about zero impact. And if it does happen to reduce vaping use, that's probably bad for public health, because vaping looks so far to be less harmful than cigarette smoking. When vaping products are banned (not by Apple; I'm talking governments here), cigarette usage is likely to go up.

My unsolicited advice: Don't smoke. Don't vape. But if you must do one of the two, vape instead of smoke. And use legal vaping products, provided they still exist.
There are a lot of apps that facilitate, if not encourage, behaviors that might be detrimental to public health (Tinder, anyone?). But that doesn’t mean they should be banned. I’m not in support of smoking or vaping for myself, but I’m also not in support of banning apps in an attempt to curtail the legal pursuit of happiness in the name of public health.
 

eoblaed

macrumors 68030
Apr 21, 2010
2,974
3,034
I get Apple can do whatever they want in their Store, but this is stupid.

An app had no influence over my decision to smoke/vape.

Of course not.

But they don't want to support an activity that is objectively dangerous and demonstrably causes great harm to participants. It would be like people writing a social media type app that would allow people to compete remotely with their street racing exploits ("last week you spent 9 minutes over 100 mph, ranking 37th in your county") and Apple deciding to remove those apps from the store.

People are being wrecked by vaping, the numbers are continuing to climb, and I don't blame any company one bit if they choose to not participate in that.
 

FrankieTDouglas

macrumors 68000
Mar 10, 2005
1,554
2,882
Cool, at least Untappd is still available in the app store. Or has Apple decided to become the moral police on drinking, too?
 

Millah

macrumors 6502a
Aug 6, 2008
866
515
I think many people have called smartphones and smartphone addiction a societal crisis.

Better get to banning iPhones too.
 

Bawstun

Suspended
Jun 25, 2009
2,374
2,999
It’s whatever is socially acceptable. You can have apps on using illegal drugs but vaping is bad LMAO

If you mean things like WeedMaps, then they're being scientifically acceptable. Vaping is much, much worse for your lungs than smoking marijuana. Just google some studies...reduced risk of lung, throat, head, neck, esophagus cancers. Certainly won't find that from vaping...
 

LIVEFRMNYC

macrumors G3
Oct 27, 2009
8,780
10,844
I think it’s funny that so many here are defending drug (illegal and legal) distributors apps. I frankly don’t care if the poor vape manufactures can’t have an app.

In the scheme of things be upset about this is just stupid. Fact is vaping is bad for you and I agree with not letting it easy to advertise. Why should they be any different than tobacco products. they both hurt public health and cost us in long term healthcare costs (both financial and resource utilization).


Then by your logic. Fast food, liquor, Gun, and etc apps should be banned.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.