4 ms·
Regulate purity and accuracy of labeling. Then their job is (or should be) done.
by pstuart 14y ago
Regulate purity and accuracy of labeling. Then their job is (or should be) done.
- ars 14y agoNot quite. E-smokers are drugging everyone near them. I'm not OK with that. Smoke is definitely worse, don't get me wrong. But it should be illegal for a 3rd party to force someone to take a drug.
- Tenoke 14y agoYour deodorant is "drugging" me significantly more. Same for your car. If you use neither then something else you use is forcing more chemicals into my body than second hand e-smoke would.
- Osmium 14y agoCar yes, deodorant no. Not all chemicals are created equally, and it doesn't help anyone to make unfair comparisons. I do sympathise with the smokers here, who see e-cigarettes as a compromise, but ultimately it's a compromise that non-smokers shouldn't have to make, because like everyone should have the right to do to their own body what they want, they also don't have the right to passively drug someone else and impose your own choices on other people. That's not okay.
- Tenoke 14y agoMy comment was a response to "But it should be illegal for a 3rd party to force someone to take a drug." So my claim stands even if deodorant is less harmful in tiny amounts than vapor in tiny amounts. However, if you were wondering, it has not been proven that tiny amounts of vapor are more dangerous than tiny amounts of deodorant. In fact it seems likely that both have negligible effects on health.
- Wintamute 14y agoSo you're equating somebody expelling water vapour laced with minute quantities nicotine with the phrases "drugging everyone near them" and "force someone to take a drug"? Way to ratchet up the rhetoric. Using such emotive and inflammatory language isn't going to get the discussion anywhere.
- deelowe 14y agoSource? I don't believe this one bit. You'd have to be french kissing a smoker for it to have any effect.