Addictive Mild Stimulants, Cont’d
I was surprised (not pleasantly) by what seems an apparent endorsement of “vaping” in a Week paragraph (October 14) that accused Trump of being buffaloed on the issue. Even restricting this technique to such “purer” products as those offered by Juul does nothing to restrict the absorption of high levels of nicotine — much higher levels than those provided by tobacco cigarettes or cigars. It’s not merely the “drug dealer’s garbage” (NR’s words) that is the problem! Nicotine at the levels provided by vaping is dangerous — and should indeed by deemed hazardous to the user’s health. While I very often disagree with Mr. Trump’s positions, he’s right on with this issue.
The editors respond: Nicotine has been studied exhaustively, and it has been found to be about as dangerous to one’s health as the caffeine in coffee. If the choice is between addiction and non-addiction, then non-addiction is preferable; if the choice is between nicotine in a cloud of carcinogens and nicotine in a cloud of water vapor, then the vapor is preferable, even if the concentration of nicotine is higher.
In either case, limiting the choices of adults because some families have trouble controlling their children is a foolish non-solution to a minor problem.
Thanks to Carrie Lukas for writing and to NR for publishing “So Long, Aunt Bee” in the October 14 issue. May I add to Ms. Lukas’s essay that what Elizabeth Warren does not understand or seem to care about is that the government programs now in place, like the future ones she proposes, are among the reasons we need non-parental fee-based child care outside the home. Past generations of families would have one parent at home raising and caring for the children while the other parent worked outside the home, earning the family’s income as well as parenting the children. Owing to the plethora of federal, state, and local programs, and the taxes to pay for them, today’s parent at home has been forced into the workplace in order to secure a second income for the family to pay taxes and the added expense of the now-needed child care, which in turn is detrimental to both the children and the family.
As a grandfather of a five-year-old grandchild, and with firsthand experience, I can fully attest to the truth of Ms. Lukas’s statement that “multigenerational living situations can be beneficial, both for young families that benefit from having more caregivers and for the older caregivers, who remain more engaged and engrained in family life.” My wife and I have considered it a privilege and a joy-filled obligation to assist the parents of our grandchild in the staggering responsibilities of raising, nurturing, and caring for the youngest member of our family.