11 ms·
E-Cigarettes Bring Smokers Back Inside, For Now
- sultezdukes 13y agoI want to see the excuse for banning these from being used indoors. It'll probably be along the lines of "children will be influenced or something". Gotta love the nanny state - not!
- eurleif 13y agoAs far as I'm concerned, that justification should fail on first amendment grounds, since it would banning them based on the message they (allegedly) communicate.
- noblethrasher 13y agoThe agitators will just classify it as something 'obscene'.
- Niten 13y agoMore likely along the lines of other people not wanting to breathe your second-hand nicotine / whatever the hell else might be in this vapor, because the jury's still out on their safety.
- sultezdukes 13y agoBut even if the exhaled vapor is perfectly safe, they'll still try to ban them.
- sp332 13y agoMainly because I don't want to get addicted to nicotine just by sitting next to a co-worker who uses e-cigs indoors.
- jebblue 13y agoHas there been a study to prove that can happen or are you just assuming?
- eswangren 13y agoWhat a ridiculous statement. How many people do you know of that became addicted to nicotine via second hand tobacco smoke?
- LnxPrgr3 13y agoFrom the research I've read, that seems unlikely. This study was unable to detect any environmental contamination from nicotine: http://clearstream.flavourart.it/site/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/CSA_ItaEng.pdf http://clearstream.flavourart.it/site/wp-content/uploads/201... "Among all, the most interesting aspects we observed was that nicotine was not detected in air during the e-smoking session, although liquids used for experiments contained it. On the other hand, 34µg/m^3 of nicotine were found during the smoking session." I remember another study I'm having trouble finding that was able to detect some nicotine in the exhaled vapor using a different method (capturing exhaled vapor in a glass chamber), but at an extremely low concentration. Nothing I've found leads me to believe secondhand nicotine exposure from e-cigarettes is a significant hazard.
- mullingitover 13y agoThe major component of the secondhand vapor would be glycerin and/or propylene glycol. In extreme cases you might inhale entire milligrams of the stuff. Both substances are safe enough to be in the FDA's 'Generally Recognized as Safe' list and you could drink liters of them without any ill effects.
- jimzvz 13y agoHere's a study[1] that concludes there is "no significant risk". [1]-http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/08958378.2012.724728 http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/08958378.2012.7...
- UnoriginalGuy 13y agoThat one was funded and conducted by the e-cigs industry, of course it is going to come to that conclusion.
- devoidfury 13y agoE-cigs were banned from public indoor use at the same time as smoking in my area. They used the reasoning that, for some of the e-cigs, it was hard to distinguish them from actual cigarettes as they look similar, and would cause confusion.
- rscale 13y agoThe vast majority of the public indoor e-cig smokers I've run into seemed to be doing it so they could look like they're smoking and then get indignant that it's not a cigarette
- eurleif 13y agoHow do you know that's what they were doing?
- rscale 13y agoPerhaps it's not. But it's definitely what most seemed to be doing.
- jlgreco 13y agoMaybe it just seems that way to you because you do not think they have a reason to become indigent.
- skore 13y agoNo, I think "seem" as a qualifier places it perfectly well into the realm of an opinion, with the implied agreement that it can be debated. You and the other comment mistake it for an absolute judgment, which would be problematic, but that's not what the OP was writing.
- eurleif 13y agoImpugning peoples' motives like that should require some justification, even if it's labelled as "just an opinion".
- jleader 13y agoDoesn't the 2nd-hand vapor contain nicotine, just as the vapor inhaled by the user does? Maybe less than from a cigarette (or maybe not?), but still some. Nicotine is an addictive, potentially toxic drug, with some possible beneficial effects, and some definite harmful effects. I'd like to be able to choose for myself whether I'm going to inhale it. How is "I want to choose which drugs I expose myself to" an expression of the nanny state? If you want to consume a drug in public, figure out how to do so in such a way that you don't share it with bystanders against their will. We already have patches, gum, snuff, chaw; if you really want to inhale it as a vapor, why can't you do that in private?
- hcarvalhoalves 13y agoNicotine is harmful in high doses, like > 10g. Cigarettes have something close to 1mg of it. You get intoxicated and die for all the other crap in it way before Nicotine is a problem.
- jleader 13y agoDo you have a citation for that lethal dosage? http://www.inchem.org/documents/pims/chemical/nicotine.htm#PartTitle:7.%20TOXICOLOGY http://www.inchem.org/documents/pims/chemical/nicotine.htm#P... claims the lethal dose is estimated at 30-60mg for adult humans, citing Gosselin 1988. That's 0.3% of the dose you quote. I wasn't able to find the relevant page in Google books, but I did see a snippet that seemed to say that some of the other chemicals in cigarette smoke may actually have a protective effect against nicotine toxicity. Gosselin RE (1988). Clinical toxicology of Commercial Products. VI.ed Baltimore, Williams & Wilkins: 311-313.
- hcarvalhoalves 13y agoSorry, it's a typo. I meant 10mg. Also, I said the dose it starts being harmful, not necessarily lethal. I remember reading this somewhere about the usage of nicotine patches.
- AnthonyMouse 13y ago
- skore 13y ago> Gotta love the nanny state - not! I have yet to hear somebody complain about "the nanny state" who doesn't sound like a spoiled brat. I suppose it's kind of logical.
- guylhem 13y ago"Local governments are already taking steps to limit e-smoking in places where traditional smoking is banned" For no health reason, but for governments to demonstrate their power and how they are doing something - a bit like the pre-flight security theater. The fact that we have a technological replacement better than the original (ie no tars or carcinogens) while giving the sample pleasure (nicotine, inhaling) should be ground enough to change the laws in the other direction - ie allowing e-cigarattes wherever they are possible.. But this is not about logic. The new habitus sees tobacco as low class and bad http://www.powercube.net/other-forms-of-power/bourdieu-and-habitus/ http://www.powercube.net/other-forms-of-power/bourdieu-and-h... Why I am not surprised the government will fight against it, regardless of the scientific facts or the right to pursue happiness? EDIT: From the original article "The FDA has said that it plans to assert regulatory authority over electronic cigarettes" - just like every government agency looking for a piece of the cake, while consumers will suffer. There is another good article on e-cigarettes on http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21573986-world-should-welcome-electronic-cigarette-no-smoke-why-fire http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21573986-world-should-... "Smoking tobacco is the most dangerous voluntary activity in the world. More than 5m people die every year of the consequences. That is one death in ten." Want to save human lives? Don't regulate e-cigarettes- in fact, it might be a better idea to GIVE THEM AWAY in poor countries instead of spending the same amount to procure them with expansive drugs that may help at best a hundred people per year (cancer drugs are expansive, and except in specific cases their efficiency is limited. we still have a lot to learn). Since people will consume tobacco products anyway, we might as well give them the good stuff that won't give them cancer, our last technology - that's e-cigarettes, instead of exporting the old foul smelling plant. We are talking about the potential to save 5'000'000 humans every year. It should be about helping people, not just subsidizing the agricultural industry or making feel good but ultimately counter-productive actions. But reason won't prevail. It will be a sad thing to watch. EDIT2: I originally said "it is about", which is an incorrect formulation since it could be interpreted as a statement on how current systems work. It was ironic, and may not have been very clear.
- nazgulnarsil 13y ago>it's about helping people, not about feeling good about our own actions. sure, ideally. In reality going by the metric of dollars spent -> outcomes it is far and away about feeling good.
- nnnnni 13y agoDo they stink like regular cigarettes? The horrible stench of regular cigarettes is worse than any possible carcinogens to me, ugh!
- enobrev 13y agoNot by a long shot. I've been a smoker for more than half my life, and while I still am, since I've moved to another city that frowns upon smoking in your own apartment, I've become far more cognisant of the smell - not that I was completely ignorant to it. Nicotine vaporizers have no scent that I've ever been aware of. I've had a couple myself, and they have found quite a bit of popularity in my neighborhood very recently. You can't even tell someone is smoking one unless you see them take a puff. As far as I've been able to tell, there is no scent.
- jsmeaton 13y agoSome liquids leave a bad smell, most do not. There's about 8 of us in my office that smoke them (inside) and no one had an issue with it until recently when we got some new liquids and they DID smell. So we took them outside until we got back to our regular liquids. I think people just need to have some common decency.
- ars 13y ago> As far as I've been able to tell, there is no scent. You said you still smoke. Smokers have a terrible sense of smell. You would have to ask a non-smoker if the e-cigs smell. If you wonder: They do. Not anywhere near as bad as a real cigarette, but they do smell.
- klibertp 13y agoOf course they smell. Nearly everything has some smell, me and you included. It's just that you happen to dislike this particular smell. I know how it is - the smell of raw meat makes me puke almost instantly. But... It's my problem, you know? I'm not going around trying to ban making meals from raw meat (really, I can smell even if the kitchen is quite far away). Disliking e-cigs smell - which one? there's tons of them... - is your problem. I think mine is more serious - think of what I feel when I have to feed my dog! - and so I don't think your moaning about is needed or even worth listening.
- simonsarris 13y ago>The FDA warns that more research needs to be done on the health risks of inhaling liquid nicotine. > "The FDA has said that it plans to assert regulatory authority over electronic cigarettes. And that could lead to them being regulated in the same way as cigarettes as far as marketing is concerned," Felberbaum says. This is odd. For one, we know the health risks of nicotine patches, and we know the health risks of the alternative to e-cigarettes, which carries very large known risks. For that reason alone we should celebrate these little devices. Further, what the hell is the FDA doing? I thought this would be for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Edit, some dates: Since 2009 the FDA has had the authority to explicitly regulate tobacco too, not just nicotine: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_tobacco_by_the_U.S._Food_and_Drug_Administration http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_tobacco_by_the_U.... Since 1998 the FDA has been allowed to regulate cigarettes as nicotine delivery devices: http://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/8846773/Szubin.html?sequence=2 http://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/8846773/Szubin.ht...
- ceol 13y agoNicotine isn't an alcohol, tobacco, firearm, or explosive. It's a drug. It's also fair to request additional research into an inhalant version of a drug. I wouldn't want an FDA that immediately celebrates a product without properly researching it.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- ceol 13y agoWas it really not obvious what was meant by my previous comment?
- logn 13y agoA nit, we actually know very little about nicotine since most of the studies are about tobacco use. Further, it's almost impossible to find subjects who use(d) nicotine but not tobacco. However, Sweden has a large percentage of people who use snus with little ill effect, and is one of the better sources of data on purer nicotine (but snus is still tobacco, just a purer form). Also, we know that inhaling smoke is bad and that tobacco smoke is bad, but we don't know about hot vapor so much, let alone hot nicotine vapor. There is more research needed here and I look forward to it. It's pretty safe to assume though that it's safer than cigarettes.
- jordanthoms 13y agoE-Cigarettes are are excellent litmus test for the prohibitionist brigade - it shows clearly that it's not about safety or health, it's about control and some misguided puritan ideal.
- javert 13y ago> misguided puritan ideal misguided progressive ideal. (Ironic they choose that label for themselves, no?)
- illuminate 13y ago"Nanny staters" are bipartisan, always and ever.
- hristov 13y agoHow do you know that it is not about safety or health? Do you have any study that says they are safe? It is amazing how many delusions a little marketing can create.
- monkeyspaw 13y agoI agree with you. But the reason cigarettes are banned is because they affect other people. American rules/regulations aren't built around the concept of proving something is safe. Tobacco is different from the norm because of how much evidence exists to prove its harm
- MortenK 13y agoAnd it's amazing how much fear a little innovation can create.
- Zigurd 13y agoWe do know e-cigs are much less harmful than cigarettes. We have a range of outcomes of studies regarding second-hand smoke. We have very good reasons to think stray e-cig vapor is much less harmful than second hand smoke. It is at least plausible that the risks of e-cig users around you is negligible, especially compared to your dry-cleaned suit, the air quality of the airplane you flew on, the radon in your house, etc. In that context, don't you find it curious that the negative reaction is so strong against the idea that people who enjoy a nicotene buzz can have their cake and eat it, too? To me it doesn't look like caution. It looks like a bluenose impulse to control people for what is likely to be no good reason, and is well below the threshold for regulating access to other psychoactive substances. Now if people really are motivated only by protecting other people from a significant new source of risk, then I'm sorry. But, man, it sure looks like e-cigs are a touchstone for revealing prohibitionists.
- mullingitover 13y agoGood luck keeping people from using them anywhere. They don't smell, so non-smokers aren't going to complain (I've been using e-cigs at work for two years and never received any complaints, in fact one person who sits five feet from me wasn't aware that I did it). The only people who've ever asked me to stop using them in restaurants and bars are staff (and only two instances in two years of regularly going out with e-cigs), and they're only doing it because they're afraid of getting into trouble with whatever regulators might crack down on them. Electronic cigarettes should be left the hell alone. I've never seen a more successful smoking cessation tool. Trying to heavy-handedly 'regulate' them so they aren't as easy or affordable to use will only ensure that people keep smoking regular cigarettes. Of course, the more paranoid side of my brain reminds me that a lot of tax revenue comes from old fashioned cigarette sales, and perhaps governments will want to protect those revenues.
- ChiperSoft 13y agoJust because you don't smell it doesn't mean they don't have a smell. My ex-boss started smoking again after he discovered them. Guy puffed it like he was in a noir film, blew the vapor all over the place. They most definitely have a smell, and I'd often end up stinking of it when I got home from work.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- sk5t 13y agoI haven't heard a case for banning things that smell a bit funny... otherwise, can we please ban microwave popcorn?
- jlgreco 13y agoBanning perfume would be nice while we are at it. If I can smell you in the elevator, and you are not in that elevator, then there is a problem. If e-cig "smell" qualifies it for a ban, then I cannot see any possible argument for not similarly banning indoor use of perfume.
- StavrosK 13y agoI'm as anti-smoking as they come, and it enrages me that Greece is stuck in the middle ages in that regard. People smoke everywhere, inside and out, and you can't go to a bar without inhaling loads of smoke. I would like nothing better than to see smoke-free indoors environments, but smokers here have a huge sense of entitlement, their mindset being "if it bothers you, go somewhere else". All that said, there's no reason to ban e-cigarettes. They don't smell, they don't make my eyes/throat hurt, they aren't obtrusive in any way, unless you're trying to inhale the other person's smoke as it comes out of their nose. As long as it doesn't bother other people, it shouldn't be banned, and e-cigarettes don't bother other people.
- simcop2387 13y agoSome of them don't smell (or at least the odor isn't nearly as much of an issue). There is at least one that my boss uses all day long that make it so that anyone within 40 feet of him knows it. I have no idea what kind he's managed to find though as it has no labeling and some bizarre cartridge.
- klibertp 13y agoI'd be happy if you asked him what he smokes for me. I stopped smoking a pipe half a year ago (earlier I was smoking cigs) and I sometimes miss that heavy, but quite good smelling smoke from the pipe.
- simcop2387 13y agoI will next time I remember, but he's notorious for being hard to find when you want to ask him something. It looks ALMOST like this[1] but is larger. The cartridges are about like this[2] but the body is that thick all the way down. Given the fact that he's said before he goes through a cartridge a day I suspect he's gone and found whatever the largest capacity one there is, possibly from outside the US (at least I wouldn't put that past him). [1] http://www.info-electronic-cigarettes.com/images/ManWithEcig_3.jpg http://www.info-electronic-cigarettes.com/images/ManWithEcig... [2] http://www.ecigsbuy.com/images/l/201211/13535904500.jpg http://www.ecigsbuy.com/images/l/201211/13535904500.jpg
- Alex3917 13y agoFor what it's worth they now make smokeless hookah. It's basically stones that are pressure injected with flavored vegetable oil, and they're free of tobacco and nicotine. https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&hl=en&q=smoking+stones+hookah&revid=1520962025&sa=X&ei=Lo58UfCXG4no0wHiyIDwCw&ved=0CG8Q1QIoAQ&biw=480&bih=268 https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&hl=en&q=... I've never tried them, though there are a few different brands you can find on Amazon, some of which actually have pretty good reviews.
- praxeologist 13y agoIt isn't vegetable oil. Hydrocarbon oils would be dangerous to inhale potentially. This would be closer to ecigs than a regular hookah and hookah is safer than cigarettes because you are vaporizing versus burning. Still this is probably a bit mroe dangerous than ecigs because you still have burning coals.
- Nursie 13y agoThese things were a godsend to me quitting BUT they do need to be studied to find out if they also have long term harms.
- Siecje 13y agoWhat I don't understand is how are they allowed to put ads on TV?
- dade_ 13y agoE-Juice is available with and without nicotine. Without, it is basically a tiny humidifier. I haven't seen any reference to nicotine in the ads.
- jlgreco 13y agoWe allow alcohol advertisements on TV; why should we ban e-cigarette advertisements?
- deepvibrations 13y agoI have no idea how the alcohol industry gets away with it tbh...I guess they have some serious lobbying power, in fact I know a lot of the anti-drug campaigns are driven by the alcohol industry, one of their biggest threats is probably cannabis!
- jebblue 13y agoWow, I miss smoking, maybe this is how to get that clear lucid feeling back but without the health risks. I know it would be regulated, the government needs to make its two cents too. Right?
- septerr 13y agoSometimes I wonder if I am at a disadvantage because I don't smoke! It would be nice to be able to call on the clear and lucid feeling when I sit down to work or need to think something through.
- jsmeaton 13y agoYou're not. It's like having a mini-hangover every hour or so and the only cure is to have just one more shot of vodka. Forever. Or another analogy. It's like having a really bad headache, taking some aspirin, and getting a 'clear and lucid' head after it takes effect. Wouldn't it be better just not to have the headache in the first place?
- corin_ 13y ago"Clear and lucid" isn't a phrase I'd use, and when I haven't had a smoke for a while I generally don't really notice it - for me it's more about habits than physical withdrawal symptoms. The chemical thing that I love is the slight rush a cigarette brings if you haven't smoked in a while. Cigarettes are obviously bad and a stupid thing to do, but there are people (including myself) who genuinely enjoy them, we aren't just addicted and using them to get back to level zero.
- deepvibrations 13y agoSpot on! The only time I smoke is on a Friday night with a pint of ale and I enjoy smoking my weekly roll ups far too much to consider quitting. I know the health risks, but when I live in London and inhale car fumes for an hour whilst cycling to and from work everyday, the pleasures I get from smoking few cigarettes on a friday night exceed the health implications by a long way!
- dade_ 13y agoLove love love my e-cig. No one has a clue in the office. I quit smoking quite a while back, but I still had cheaters from time to time. I really think nicotine has a much more permanent effect on the brain than we are led to believe. If you don't smoke, don't go near the stuff, but if you do, you really should try it.
- justanotheratom 13y agoWhich ones?
- UnoriginalGuy 13y agoNobody has a clue you're exposing them to toxic, carcinogenic chemicals in the office you mean. Maybe you should show some consideration to others and smoke outside.
- jimzvz 13y agoPlease stop spreading baseless information.
- hcarvalhoalves 13y agoThese electronic cigarettes are pretty cool, nicotine without all the other downsides. There's no point in banning that. Could this be used for ganja too?
- ck2 13y agoI cannot believe how many people still buy cigarettes and smoke though. Stand and watch at your local drugstore how many people come in within 15 minutes to buy cigarettes. If they are addicted then the industry failed at helping them quit and the government needs to force the industry to provide direct free assistance to quit. It's not a game where they should be able to keep making profit off known death.
- george88b 13y agoWhy is it the industry's responsibility to help them quit? Also, why is it the government's responsibility?
- sciurus 13y agoBecause they are knowingly selling people an addictive and fatal product but have tried to hide this fact.
- jff 13y agoHave you ever met someone who didn't know cigarettes are addictive and dangerous? They print it all right there on the box, and at the bottom of every advertisement (are there even still cigarette ads? I never see them around), and you can't complete school without being told over and over how dangerous they are. I think these days the cigarette companies don't even need to do anything. Cigs are there, if you want them they're easy to find, everyone knows what they do, some will still choose to smoke them.
- Natsu 13y agoYes, my grandfather. Back then, the dangers of smoking were not well known by the public. In fact, the tobacco industry pushed bogus research to attempt to throw the conclusion that smoking causes cancer into doubt. Once it was apparent that smoking was harmful, my grandfather quit smoking cold turkey. It was too late. He spent more than a decade coughing up his lungs only to finally succumb to cancer, weakened by the steroids keeping him alive to the point where he broke his back picking up a gallon of milk.
- fsckin 13y agoI quit smoking 1.5 packs a day about 120 days ago, and started out with 36mg nicotine/ml e-liquid, and have cut down to 6mg/ml e-liquid. In another month, I should be off nicotine completely. I use a eGo Twist/iClear16 (w/ iClear30 heads) at work, and CCTS/IGO-L at home. The variety of flavors are endless, and none smell up the office, my home, hands, or clothes. Even if they did stink as bad as regular smokes, who would really complain about smelling Watermelon, Pear & Honey, Ecto Cooler (yes!) or Swedish Fish when they come to visit me? After switching, I don't: 1. Smell like an ashtray 2. Lose my breath walking up a few sets of stairs 3. Take several 15 minute breaks at work 4. Spend $300(!) per month 5. Have fears of emphysema and/or lung cancer in my future. My doctor is happy with the results. So am I.
- gingerlime 13y agoare there any completely nicotine free e-cigarettes? I'm tempted to start using them just for the fun of inhaling and exhaling smoke and having something between my fingers to fiddle with... This is half in jest, but I used to be a smoker, and one aspect I really enjoyed was the whole ceremony involved with smoking. The habitual aspect of it (something to do when you're waiting for somebody, something to twiddle with...) was perhaps stronger than the physical addiction when I quit.
- merlish 13y agoYou can get nicotine-free e-liquid from some suppliers, yep.
- CorrectingDude 13y agohttp://www.mtbakervapor.com http://www.mtbakervapor.com is dirt-cheap, very good, and has a zero nicotine option for all their juices. I recommend Orange Dream Bar, Hot Chocolate, or Ecto Cooler.
- nicholassmith 13y agoThey're an interesting one in terms of 'should you use them around non-smokers', as there's no statistics on exhaled contents of nicotine (that I've seen) so it's quite difficult to make a call in terms of second hand health risk. First hand health risk? It's your body so do what you want. There's other issues, do they smell? Yes, some do, they have flavourings in that will impart a smell. However it's quite faint in a lot of cases, it bothers my girlfriend in the car but not at home. Is it anti-social? Depends on the social group you're in, I generally hang around with smokers (maybe there's some selection bias inherent in social groupings due to the smoking ban) and a couple of us have shifted to e-cigarettes (traditional style and vape style) and no one minds. I wouldn't use one in a restaurant but I would in a pub or nightclub. Hopefully they'll avoid regulating them for a while, but there's rumblings of regulation on the horizon in the EU.
- np422 13y agoThe rush of moral righteousness and overall feeling of superiority that non-smokers must get when they are agitating are obvious very addictive and I think that should be regulated. It's amazing how far the brainwashing have gone in regards to anything remotely smoking related. Otherwise sensible and thinking people throw out all sense of consideration, respect and balance and start repeating "Smoking is bad, smoking should be banned", no matter what the consequences are. And when we are talking about e-cig it is very clear to me that none of the objections are about health or genuine care for those affected, at all. At best, the supporting arguments for that are severe exaggerations - which should be obvious with minimum of critical thinking.
- mart8801 13y agoAs an asthmatic, e-cigarettes induce my asthma just as well as normal cigarettes, it only takes a longer time to have the same quantitative effect. I do hope they get regulated, and soon, because this is seriously going to hamper my ability to enjoy social activities. The lack of odor is actually problematic. I was not able to quit a place before the inset of an asthmatic attack in a couple of restaurants because I didn't smell anything until it was too late. I'm actually used to that (several substances do the same), but it's only in the last year or so that I increasingly attributed that to e-cigarettes because people feel "it's ok". Even if I wasn't asthmatic, I would still be pissed as hell to be sniffing nicotine just for the addiction of somebody else. It's not a drug powder that you can contain and keep it to yourself.
- jimzvz 13y agoMaybe I should lobby for the regulation of flowers indoors because pollen upsets my hay-fever. >I would still be pissed as hell to be sniffing nicotine just for the addiction of somebody else. Don't worry, even sitting right next to someone who is using one, you are almost certainly not "sniffing nicotine".