Employer threatening to ban e-cigs...

wickfut said:
Me, I'm not a part of a thriving community of e-cig enthusiasts. I smoke and I see e-cigs for what they really are - a two finger salute to the smoking bans.

People cried for the banning of smoking and they got their own way. What did you think would happen to all these smokers with a nicotine addiction? Did you think they would just all go away and vanish?

Now you have e-cigs, they're harmless to others and now people are calling on banning them completely. Why? It's a small metal tube that lights up for a couple of seconds and emits a vapor similar to a mini humidifier. It just screams of none smokers wanting to get their own way for no other reason other than "just because.."

How about this.. None smokers accept that smokers have an addiction, and that this addiction cannot just be banned away overnight just because you don't like it. And if you do eventually ban them then you'll just create a large bunch of people with a nicotine chewing gum addiction. Or should they ban them too?
Click to expand...

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS could have not said it better! :D
 
Pestilence said:
Enough studies have been done on the contents of the vapour itself to have a universal agreement that it poses no risk to the user or bystanders (and this is accepted by the likes of the MHRA).

In terms of bacteria transfer... well, people like to chew on pens and set them down and what have you. You touch a thousand carriers a day and then touch your lips, your face, and others. I wouldn't worry about it in that regard. Unless you have AIDS or whatnot.
Click to expand...

I didn't mention the vapor itself, as I know it's pretty much just water. And thankfully I'm not a freak about breathing in second hand air so I don't have to worry about sighing. :)

Your statement regarding pens is just, I'm purely intrigued by it as I know sweet FA about vaping other than the blindingly obvious. For all I knew, they come with special little pouches with magical cleansing properties and disposable mouth pieces. :confused: ;)
 
wickfut said:
Me, I'm not a part of a thriving community of e-cig enthusiasts. I smoke and I see e-cigs for what they really are - a two finger salute to the smoking bans.

People cried for the banning of smoking and they got their own way. What did you think would happen to all these smokers with a nicotine addiction? Did you think they would just all go away and vanish?

Now you have e-cigs, they're harmless to others and now people are calling on banning them completely. Why? It's a small metal tube that lights up for a couple of seconds and emits a vapor similar to a mini humidifier. It just screams of none smokers wanting to get their own way for no other reason other than "just because.."

How about this.. None smokers accept that smokers have an addiction, and that this addiction cannot just be banned away overnight just because you don't like it. And if you do eventually ban them then you'll just create a large bunch of people with a nicotine chewing gum addiction. Or should they ban them too?
Click to expand...

Good post, the only part I disagree with is the bit about e-cigs solely existing as two fingered salute to the rapid anti-smoking lobby. I see them as a much, much and demonstrably healthier alternative to smoking.

The inventor of the electronic cigarette didn't come up with his product as a reaction to smoking bans, but rather because his father died of lung cancer and wanted to create a realistic alternative to smoking tobacco. He, unlike some on here, realised the quit or die attitude wasn't working.
 
I'll just leave this here...

wickfut said:
I smoke and I see e-cigs for what they really are - a two finger salute to the smoking bans.

People cried for the banning of smoking and they got their own way. What did you think would happen to all these smokers with a nicotine addiction? Did you think they would just all go away and vanish?
Click to expand...

itchy said:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS could have not said it better! :D
Click to expand...


bloodiedathame said:
vaping is a cry for attention
Click to expand...

Again, I'd just like to point out that for medicinal reasons I totally get it, giving up smoking is farking hard, but there is undoubtably an element of 'hey look at me' about it.
 
I am an ex-smoker and now serial vapist, and I go outside to do it.

While it might not be hurting anyone, me squirting plumes of banana flavoured 'smoke' all over my customers and co workers might not go down well.

I mean, it might, but it might not. So I don't. I haven't even asked if I can get vapey at work, and I would expect a no if I did.

With regards to the whole hoo ha about it still being smoking and all the rest of the blah, I do it because I have tried repeatedly to give up smoking and have always ended up doing it again because I am a mental weakling. This is stopping me from dying (as far as I know, maybe we'll all explode in ten years but I'll take the risk). So I don't really mind what people think, I just don't want to die a slow and painful death because I'm too vain to smoke a hilarious metal cigarette instead of a murderous paper one.
 
Last edited:
eCigs are treated the same as normal cigs here at the NHS in Stoke and we even have a policy on it.
Apparently there have been no full tests on them so the evidence they are better than normal cigs is not proved.
 
Dimple said:
eCigs are treated the same as normal cigs here at the NHS in Stoke and we even have a policy on it.
Apparently there have been no full tests on them so the evidence they are better than normal cigs is not proved.
Click to expand...

Seriously? What you've just said is like saying you might as well continue swimming in shark-infested waters because chlorine filled swimming pools could be dangerous.

There is plenty of evidence to suggest vaping is at least 99% safer than smoking tobacco. Maybe you should research the work of Dr Michael Siegal (a rabid anti-smoking campaigner I may add) who has done plenty of clinical trials.

The "long term evidence" thing is just asinine, by that logic we should ban anything invented within the last 10 years, Do we have absolute proof that smartphones, tablets or MP3 players aren't bad for you?

Sadly, whilst I have massive respect for the NHS, they are unfortunately biased towards the pharmaceutical opinion (who of course stand to lose millions from e-cigs which has a demonstrably better success rate than the NRT products they insist on promoting).

The only two major organisations who bring this "lack of regulation" and "no long studies" argument is the MRHA and the World Health organisation, both of whom are financed by big pharma.
 
bloodiedathame said:
but there is undoubtably an element of 'hey look at me' about it.
Click to expand...

I really don't see this cry for attention or look at me element. Can you explain your logic?

What I see is people moaned about second hand smoke. They showed results stating health risks with second hand smoke (which is debatable either way depending on the bias of the researcher) and complained that their clothes stank after sharing a confined space with smokers.

Now people have started using e-cigs and you no longer have any health risks or stinky clothes, the moan has changed to "it looks silly/unprofessional" or "it lights up, makes a funny noise and sometimes smells weird".
As a grown adult can you put your hand on your heart and say that those reasons are enough to justify a ban of e-cigs?
 
estebanrey said:
What about caffeine?
Click to expand...

Thanks for the wikipedia quote, I'm from Mars and thus had no idea caffeine was a stimulant...

In terms of their psychoactive effect and social appearance, they are completely different.

Dimple said:
eCigs are treated the same as normal cigs here at the NHS in Stoke and we even have a policy on it.
Apparently there have been no full tests on them so the evidence they are better than normal cigs is not proved.
Click to expand...

There's no evidence that e-cigs cause cancer or any disease, banning something based on absence of evidence like that is absurd. It's a shame that people with no medical knowledge are making hospital policy these days.
 
Last edited:
Pestilence said:
Their workplace, their rules. They'll go ahead with it regardless of what you say.

The best thing you can do right now is arrange for a special vaping area to be constructed, away from the current smokers' huddle, within which you can spend your breaks. They have a duty of care towards you at the workplace, and sending you out to forcibly partake in second-hand smoke goes against that. Basically, just be as big a pain in their butts (reasonably, of course) as you can with it.
Click to expand...

Smoking/'Vaping'/E-cigs or whatever you want to call it is a choice, it's not a right and your workplace has no duty of care for you in this respect.
 
To non-smokers, in the smoking ban age, having a puff on an e-cig in the office is similar to injecting some harmless heroin substitute. It's like "ewww don't do that in front of me", but totally baseless.

I think it's a bit weird to want to do it in an office. It's essentially saying "I know people will think this is odd but (I'm so addicted) I don't care".
 
Energize said:
In terms of their psychoactive effect and social appearance, they are completely different.
Click to expand...

They are both stimulants and addictive and niether are unhealthy when consumed in a common sense manner, why is one better than the other in that respect?

As for social appearance, that is subjective and can change over a few short years with enough demonisation. We discovered smoking was bad for your health in the 1960s yet it didn't become socially unacceptable to a loud minority until relatively recently.

The act of smoking being immoral was socially engineered over the last decade for good (if OTT) reasons, the same can't be applied to vaping.

The whole "if it looks and walks like a duck" logic is clearly not a rational standpoint, yet it is being defended by some here. Why?
 
estebanrey said:
The whole "if it looks and walks like a duck" logic is clearly not a rational standpoint, yet it is being defended by some here. Why?
Click to expand...

I think the point you're missing here is that if you're in an office, why should you have to deal with someone blowing clouds of sugary smelly vapour all over the place?

And don't tell me it doesn't smell, and don't tell me it doesn't linger.

Some of my juices positively reek, yes they are mostly 'nice' smells but it's not my place to force those smells upon my co-workers and it's not yours either.

Also saying they're 'banning' them is more than a bit dramatic. They're banning you from doing it inside while you work.
 
Here's one for the none smokers.

Japan has one of the largest population of smokers.
smoking-map-2.jpg

Yet has one of the longest expected lifespans
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

please explain..
 
Aren't the smells/vapour added? If they were just the nicotine hit without the vapour or smell would there be an issue?

And in response to above it doesn't make much sense does it.
 
estebanrey said:
You are making an argument based on personal opinion though. It's completely subjective as to how "unprofessional" vaping looks and not something you can state as fact.

Furthermore there are plenty of things I would consider not looking "professional" but wouldn't suggest banning, like....

* People who don't iron their shirts
* People who wear comedy ties
* People who think it's funny to fart loudly
* Footballers' hairstyles
* People who don't know the correct usage of the apostrophe

Yet none of the above are banned or picked out by management.
Click to expand...

Lol I can't wait to try this logic next time I go for a job interview in shorts and neon vest instead of a suit and tie.

"Well you see future employer, professionalism is merely personal opinion and subjective, and therefore not fact, and as a robot libertarian logic dictates that I dip my fedora at you"

I know plenty of offices that would send you packing for a comedy tie, the fact that you even begin to equate the two shows how oblivious you are to how smoking e-cig's in the office is not professionally acceptable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom