Employer threatening to ban e-cigs...

If you allow nicotine abuse then why not methadone, steroids, alcohol etc.?

Drinking is not allowed in most work places so nicotine consumption should really follow suit..
 
D.P. said:
If you allow nicotine abuse then why not methadone, steroids, alcohol etc.?

Drinking is not allowed in most work places so nicotine consumption should really follow suit..
Click to expand...

that is a concise way to view the issue.

But in what became a sub-topic, what of 0 nicotine vapors? which only have flavour.
 
What I find funny (until there is some scientific evidence to convince me otherwise), is that part of my daily commute involves a 5 minute walk along a busy road, and that certainly does more damage to me and my lungs than second hand nicotine vapour. Hell, the general air pollutants in a major UK city probably do more damage.
 
If the people I was working with were vaporising pseudoephedrine and caffeine into the air around where I was trying to work then I would probably agree that it should be banned. Until that time I cant see how its comparable.
 
krooton said:
What I find funny (until there is some scientific evidence to convince me otherwise), is that part of my daily commute involves a 5 minute walk along a busy road, and that certainly does more damage to me and my lungs than second hand nicotine vapour. Hell, the general air pollutants in a major UK city probably do more damage.
Click to expand...

well as far as i understand there's zero damage caused to the lungs from nicotine vapor, nicotine is however an addictive substance whereas I've not heard of exhaust fumes being addictive.
 
You should see the crap we all breathe in in my work, paper dust and ink dust.

The paper we use (newsprint) is mostly recycled so who knows what's in it. It has a very similar texture to MDF dust when cut and it's known that MDF dust is dangerous.

As for the ink, we are still trying to find out what it actually contains.

After a night shift you can blow your nose and the mucus is black :eek: so god knows what's going into our lungs.

They don't like it when we ask about the dust levels and what crap we are breathing in, but they say it's not harmful.

I wear a mask whenever possible, but others mostly don't.
 
I stood next to a vaper in down the local yesterday.

Next morning had to run to the pharmacy to pick up some nicotine patches. Damn dude got me totally addicted.

Said everyone all the time.
 
McGray said:
I stood next to a vaper in down the local yesterday.

Next morning had to run to the pharmacy to pick up some nicotine patches. Damn dude got me totally addicted.

Said everyone all the time.
Click to expand...

While the volume of passive vapor needed to effect a non-dependant person is vast, if a person with a prior dependency on nicotine was having to sit in an enclosed space (office) it could negatively effect them.
therefore vaporizers should be taken outside a work environment to be used.
 
GiraffePencils said:
well as far as i understand there's zero damage caused to the lungs from nicotine vapor, nicotine is however an addictive substance whereas I've not heard of exhaust fumes being addictive.
Click to expand...

A) Given it's diluted state, how much second-hand nicotine vapour would one need to inhale to receive a dose large enough to stimulate addiction?

B) Even if it was enough, part of the addiction is the brain's ability to link an action to whatever it craves. You smoke, eventually get addicted, and your brain as learnt that smoking gives you what you are craving, ergo you crave a cigarette. How would your brain know that it is addicted to nicotine if the nicotine has been absorbed passively? In fact, can't say I have ever heard of someone becoming passively addicted to something.
 
As I've already said I don't think e-cigs should be used in the work place (I'm a non-smoker btw).

Thinking you could become addicted to nicotine as result of passive vaping/smoking is a bit silly.
 
GiraffePencils said:
While the volume of passive vapor needed to effect a non-dependant person is vast, if a person with a prior dependency on nicotine was having to sit in an enclosed space (office) it could negatively effect them.
therefore vaporizers should be taken outside a work environment to be used.
Click to expand...

Clutching at straws now.

We've gone from "It might make other people become addicted to nicotine." to "It might cause former nicotine addicts to relapse."
 
LOAM said:
If the people I was working with were vaporising pseudoephedrine and caffeine into the air around where I was trying to work then I would probably agree that it should be banned. Until that time I cant see how its comparable.
Click to expand...

Neither can I. We were taking the michael out of the first post on this page rather than making any sensible comparison between vaping and caffeine. He said "Drinking is not allowed in most work places so nicotine consumption should really follow suit.. ".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom