What's frustrating here is that cartridges designed for PAX in particular are almost certainly not the ones involved in the health crisis last year, being both proprietary and more expensive than a standard cartridge (and thus an unlikely target for counterfeiters). I don't necessarily have a problem with regulation targeting these products (as long as it's well thought out and based in science, not emotion), but one's choice of smartphone platform should not impact their ability to use a perfectly legal product (or, at least, a product that's de-facto legal in some states due to justice department policy in lieu of actual lawmaking; the entire situation is pretty ridiculous at this point).
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
After Apple Bans Vape Apps From App Store, PAX Creates Website for Vape Management
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's worth noting that banning these apps isn't stopping anyone from vaping. All these apps do is add some incidental functionality to a product that's absolutely designed to work on its own, out of the box. (Read the online documentation if you're curious.)
the problem is that Apple is making a broad stroke ban here. Not all vape pens or devices that use an app use vegetable-acetate the leading cause of lung infection and respiratory problems leading to deaths and hospitalization.
mom glad Pax was able to adapt. pax Era Pro seems to also have temperature controls as well.
this is one move that Apple needs to re-think and research deeper into. Being lazy about it just shows exactly that.
In that they are both naturally occurring stimulants found in plants I beg to differ.
Nicotine - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Nicotine is a stimulant and potent parasympathomimetic alkaloid that is naturally produced in the nightshade family of plants.
Caffeine - Wikipedia
Caffeine - Wikipedia
PS - Not speaking to any other comparison other than that, you indicated that is should be made an illegal substance and I challenge that making any naturally occurring substance illegal is just dumb, it comes from a plant!
Make the forest illegal bro!
Well, by that logic...
Cocaine - Wikipedia
I'm just not sure what you're getting at? That all plant-derived stimulants are somehow comparable? The physical properties, chemical mechanism, and physiological responses to introduction to the human body are all very different. Nicotine is far more similar to Cocaine than it is to Caffeine.
Oh, and Cocaine is highly addictive, highly destructive, and illegal, just so that's clear.
I think this will have tremendous impact on the user base. I can actually see a lot of hipsters, artists, etc who on their own time enjoy a puff or two being out down by this policy.
I understand this sentiment and where are you coming from, however removing freedom is rarely, if ever, the answer. It sets a precedent and it can escalate quickly to authoritarian rules playbook... that never works and actually, unless Apple has a sound argument better than “I don’t feel like it”, it should be compelled to be put back.
An angle is to imagine what if it was for your own benefit... not saying that you should, because it’s actually nasty, but objectively speaking IT IS competition freeing itself on its own... people that abuse substances, if all things are equal, are ultimately denigrating their health, denigrating their finances, some of them might even kill themselves drunk to death, to drug overdose, etc.
A good analogy, imagine there’s a race to run, but so much people binge eat their way towards overweight and associated problems (diabetes, heart problems and overall impaired lives) that your race will mostly be between those very few left.
Most people will just recreationally puff by, some will get stuck and jump to other stuff and a very small minority might actually get rich with a side business out of it... besides the richer ones, all the others are clearing the path in one way or another.
Yes, it’s sad if it is a known or close one in a bad spot, but for the vast majority it is all in good fun and good vibes.
I understand this sentiment and where are you coming from, however removing freedom is rarely, if ever, the answer. It sets a precedent and it can escalate quickly to authoritarian rules playbook... that never works and actually, unless Apple has a sound argument better than “I don’t feel like it”, it should be compelled to be put back.
An angle is to imagine what if it was for your own benefit... not saying that you should, because it’s actually nasty, but objectively speaking IT IS competition freeing itself on its own... people that abuse substances, if all things are equal, are ultimately denigrating their health, denigrating their finances, some of them might even kill themselves drunk to death, to drug overdose, etc.
A good analogy, imagine there’s a race to run, but so much people binge eat their way towards overweight and associated problems (diabetes, heart problems and overall impaired lives) that your race will mostly be between those very few left.
Most people will just recreationally puff by, some will get stuck and jump to other stuff and a very small minority might actually get rich with a side business out of it... besides the richer ones, all the others are clearing the path in one way or another.
Yes, it’s sad if it is a known or close one in a bad spot, but for the vast majority it is all in good fun and good vibes.
As far as we know, no product manufactured “legally” (i.e. under the supervision of a state regulatory framework) used the compound that caused acute respiratory symptoms. According to the reports I've read, it was a cutting agent used to dilute legitimate products without significantly changing their appearance. Unfortunately, due in part to the quasi-legal status of these products (How many people are going to be willing to describe a black market product they purchased illegally in detail?), I don't think there was ever any definitive conclusion as to exactly which products were involved, or where they came from.
The bottom line is that if you purchased your vaping products from a state-sanctioned store, while there's certainly plenty to learn about the long-term consequences of their use, you almost certainly did not end up in a hospital with acute lung damage.
Last edited:
The issue was fake carts having additives. These apps confirmed if they were real and fake and were actually protecting people. So Apple and their zealot mentality actually is causing more harm than good.
This is a good point. The only feature I was able to find advertised on PAX's site today which explicitly requires their app is cartridge identification. If implemented correctly, this would easily identify a black market product unless the producer was somehow able to maintain a supply of legitimate cartridges to fill.
What I am getting at is that making plants illegal is preposterous. My own opinion, YMMV.
"Extraction of cocaine from coca requires several solvents and a chemical process known as an acid-base extraction, which can fairly easily extract the alkaloids from the plant."
I think this chemical concentration is what makes cocaine differ from my examples of the naturally occurring amounts of caffine in coffee or nicotine in tobacco, I don't think it possible to eat enough coca leaves to get the same effects.
Yes, you can obviously extract and concentrate both caffine and nicotine but again do we really need to make these things illegal?
I guess I'm not sure what you are getting at? Do you want tobacco, thereby smoking, made illegal or do you really want plants made illegal because you can extract components you deem harmful?
Last edited:
This is an arbitrary distinction.
Plenty of dangerous compounds are produced by plants. Plenty of beneficial products you'd be hard-pressed to use in a way which harms yourself or others are not. I can see an argument for not making a plant illegal simply because it can be used to produce an illegal compound, but the moment you start processing that plant, what you have is no longer a natural product, but the byproduct of a human-engineered manufacturing process. (And, even if no processing is involved, it's obviously preposterous, for instance, to say that it's okay to use a poison because the poison was 100% natural.)
There's also another perspective you probably didn't even consider. What if the plant you're talking about is an invasive species, and you deciding you have a right to grow that plant results in irreparable harm to the local ecosystem or requires a cleanup effort costing hundreds of thousands of dollars? Surely you bear some responsibility there.
The legality of plenty of plants has absolutely nothing to do with what they they may be used to produce. (Seriously, try stopping at a California agricultural checkpoint and telling them you're carrying some plants or bulk produce of unknown origin. See how far you get.)
Edit: Actually sounds like we're pretty much on the same page. Appreciate the response, and the difficulty of having a nuanced discussion in an online forum.
Last edited:
Now we are getting somewhere! Agreed, my response to SDJim was specifically to his blanket statement that nicotine should be make illegal, that seems overkill and slippery slope. Why should it be illegal? One of its uses is in smoking cessation products, seems a beneficial use. I was simply challenging a blanket statement I disagreed with, this is a nuanced discussion.
Perhaps an example:
How can nicotine be good for me?
Nicotine based drugs are currently under development by pharmaceutical companies. Find out which ailments could be treated with nicotine based drugs.
health.howstuffworks.com
Also agreed, I didn't mean to incidate that anyone should just be able to plant whatever they want from a different ecosystem into theirs.
Also agreed. Outside the intended scope of my comment but well taken.
But according to the MacRumors article, this web app won't work on iOS or iPadOS web browsers.
Indeed, it appears to require Chrome. (The actual Chrome, not WebKit wrapped in a Chrome skin.)
and by that measure Pax and their capsules actually can be purchased at state-sanctioned stores.
north of the USA here in Canada I can purchase JuJu, Pax and a few other vape pens (closed or open/510) from the Canadian government itself or provincial-sanctioned retail outlets.
this move by Apple affects me as a Canadian when their trying to affect US citizens.
This is still super ignorant of Apple. We know what caused the issue and it sure as **** wasn’t high-end products like PAX.
[automerge]1591102231[/automerge]
[automerge]1591102231[/automerge]
Why?
Well ****! Look how easy it is! We'll send you out to the state's ravaged by the Opioid Crisis and you can fix all their problems!
I'm pretty sure they said that about regular cigarettes back in the 60s too.
So I just bought the Pax Era Pro for my gf for Xmas. I didn't know about the app being removed from the app store.. and even though the graphic on this thread shows it, the web app for the Mac *cannot* connect to the Era Pro. If you have an iPhone and a Macbook, there zero way of using the features of your Era Pro. I'm just stunned by that, and I'm a jerk because I got her something she can't really use and now I feel bad. 
It's a great vape pen though, by far the best we've tried!
It's a great vape pen though, by far the best we've tried!