Utah planning to add use of eCigs to definition of smoking

[vjc4]

glad that there are people out there taking action.thanks for your service.

It doesn't matter for what they were "intended" to be used. There is no evidence that e-cigarette vapor poses a health risk to bystanders and the smoking ban was passed to protect the public from smoke, not vapor. They cannot just arbitrarily decide that vapor is the same as smoke because of what it looks like or why it's used. Otherwise, they are setting a precedent that they can forbid anything on the same grounds - "smokeless tobacco lozenges intended to circumvent the prohibition of smoking" (which also market with that selling point) or "nicotine gum intended to circumvent the prohibition of smoking."

There is absolutely no reason someone shouldn't be able to vape in a bar that allows it or use a hookah in a hookah bar.

 

[LibertariaNate]

Changed to public indoor ban ... thanks. Agree its about where they can be used. It's the same thing they did to smoking in California back in 85 basically.

I think Utah initially passed their smoking bans in '94. I lived in Florida at the time and was far too young to care about such things as smoking bans.

They advocate a lot of things, I think there is a difference in advocating, and a public indoor ban. If the church wants to tell you that using nicotine probably isn't the healthiest thing you can do. I couldn't argue with that.

Do I think they care? I can be an optimist, I hope if they let me down, they let me down easy. I do realize some are paid, not to care.

Telling a nicotine addicted person, that vaping is harming others, and what your doing is as bad as smoking, sends a terrible message.

I agree that many states could benefit from harm reduction methods. Spending money on anti-smoking campaign messages in Wyoming for example has been abysmally ineffective, when you look at what they have spent per capita there.

I do know that when you give 100 people nothing and 100 people an e-cigarette, the people who got the e-cigarette, are more likely to not smoke as much if at all.

Thanks, for the catch.

I think we're on the same page here.

I don't remember the LDS church coming out with any official statements supporting the recent amendment. Maybe there was a "Smoking's bad, mmkay?" though...

You mentioned ~60% of the Utah population being Mormon. I wouldn't be surprised if that % was much higher as it goes for the politicians. Sometimes it can be pretty difficult to separate the "official" stance of the church from that of the more "vocal" members who wish to shove their brand of morality on others through legislation. Of course this isn't a problem unique to Utah as seen in similarly proposed legislation across the country. At least you can buy beer here (Sundays included), even if it is the watered down variety.

Really though... Utah ain't a bad place to live.

 

[Cyatis]

Now this is just for fun, as it has interesting, but non-useful facts in my case, about Utah.

If you took out all of the Democrats in Utah and made them a separate state. That new state would be 2nd in the highest opinion of Obama.

Obama has no chance in winning Utah in the next election.

I've been through Utah. I think when peer pressure is used to make people healthier and happier, that's not a bad thing at all. Telling someone something might be unhealthy for them, while allowing them the choice, is reasonable enough. It's hard for me to ask the majority of the people of a state to give up what they believe. It's totally another for me to ask them, to not criminalize others based on those beliefs, when the activity in question harms nobody else.

I think that asking what is the official stance of the church, might be a question worth asking. I mean you know, they might surprise all of us. I had a member of the church hire me to help him catch up with work, when I got out of the military. He was fair, I worked hard, the pay was alright, I had no complaints about the guy.

What if the church has no real policy on it, perhaps they need one.

I have nothing against the citizens of Utah at all. I don't like the indoor electronic-cigarette ban there, because it will likely kill people.

Last time I was through there was on the way from Claremont, Ca, through Yellowstone and back. 15 days of no work, and a gorgeous trip it was.

 

[Koman]

I don't think it's cool at all.

 

[tumbafox]

Unfortunately the way the law is written, the FDA must weigh whether of not new or modified smoking devices or tobacco products may create a disincentive for people to quit or may make it more likely that current non smokers might be tempted to start vaping.

Since vaping everywhere may eliminate in (regulators opinions) much of the social and legal pressure to stop smoking and may perhaps entice some first time nicotine users to start using in the absence of all the current social and legal pressure created by cigarette (analog) bans which exist almost everywhere to discourage people from starting to smoke and to encouragce smokers to stop, regulator may lean towards a ban even if the hard evidence does not support their subjective views.

My fear is that this argument can be made. I know if I could no longer vape anywhere as I enjoy now and that if I have to revert to smoking/vaping with my head sticking out my no smoking apartment window or if I could only vape in my car and endure even more limited outdoor smoking bans, I just may go back to cigarettes. But it won't make me quit and therefore the ban would not accomplish a greater good. Freedom is an incentive for me to vape rather than smoke.

But science is proving that vaping does vastly increase the likelihood of successful smoking cessation and hence will eventually be seen as a harm reduction method better than any other method currently available to smokers who want to quit, then in that case the public and healthcare system would be better served by continuing to permit vaping everywhere.

A vaping everyware policy, which may reduce cancer and emphysema and heart disease and other ailments as well as the associated suffering that comes from a lifetime of cigarette smoking should be interpreted as creating better and greater good for the public rather than creating any possible benefit to the public created by abolishing a vaping everywhere policy.

As I read the new law, if the good outweighs the bad than a ban should not be enacted. At least the FDA should give the medical community more time to study the issue since a hasty act could lead to more death and suffering overall by dissuading folks from vaping as an alternative to the vastly greater perils of long term cigarette usage.

 

[RobFindlay]

I think Utah initially passed their smoking bans in '94. I lived in Florida at the time and was far too young to care about such things as smoking bans.



I think we're on the same page here.

I don't remember the LDS church coming out with any official statements supporting the recent amendment. Maybe there was a "Smoking's bad, mmkay?" though...

You mentioned ~60% of the Utah population being Mormon. I wouldn't be surprised if that % was much higher as it goes for the politicians. Sometimes it can be pretty difficult to separate the "official" stance of the church from that of the more "vocal" members who wish to shove their brand of morality on others through legislation. Of course this isn't a problem unique to Utah as seen in similarly proposed legislation across the country. At least you can buy beer here (Sundays included), even if it is the watered down variety.

Really though... Utah ain't a bad place to live.

The church doesn't need to make a public statement, I've been to the Utah legislature, Senators change their votes when the right person opens their phone to make a call. It *is* that bad.

This is a standard Utah moral-knee-jerk reaction.

The state is 60% something Mormon, however if you live in Park City, Moab or Salt Lake proper the mormon population is in the minority.

It's not a *bad* place to live, but it isn't all that great either, it's a right-not-work state, unions are practically illegal, they still raid video stores for renting "cable" versions of adult films. The liquor laws are freaking bat-....-monkey-in-a-cage dumb.

They actually want to add a rule to the books that a restaurant that serves alcohol has to prepare the drink behind a partition. Ya know just in case a non-drinker gets any ideas.

That said, being 15 minutes from the wilderness, rivers etc does have it's appeal.

 

[LibertariaNate]

The church doesn't need to make a public statement, I've been to the Utah legislature, Senators change their votes when the right person opens their phone to make a call. It *is* that bad.

This is a standard Utah moral-knee-jerk reaction.

I'm sure the threat of being tattled on to church officials is a powerful way to keep people "in check."

The state is 60% something Mormon, however if you live in Park City, Moab or Salt Lake proper the mormon population is in the minority.

I live in Utah County, aka "Happy Valley" where the LDS population must be closer to 90%. For the first few months after moving here from California and the neighbors "disovering" we weren't members we must have received a few dozen visits from the local church leaders and missionaries. I don't know what my wife said to them, but the calls and visits abruptly ended.

It's not a *bad* place to live, but it isn't all that great either, it's a right-not-work state, unions are practically illegal, they still raid video stores for renting "cable" versions of adult films. The liquor laws are freaking bat-....-monkey-in-a-cage dumb.

They actually want to add a rule to the books that a restaurant that serves alcohol has to prepare the drink behind a partition. Ya know just in case a non-drinker gets any ideas.

Ahh... The "Zion Curtain"... I thought it was mostly about "protecting the children" and others who might be offended by the mere sight of alcohol. You know, out of sight, out of mind...

That said, being 15 minutes from the wilderness, rivers etc does have it's appeal.

Definitely love this... If I was a skier, I'd probably enjoy it even more.

 

[rothenbj]

"That said, being 15 minutes from the wilderness, rivers etc does have it's appeal."

On a business trip to Provo years ago, we had a dinner conference at Sundance resort. It was just amazing traveling out of the flatlands where it was warm, past the flowing clear streams into the mountains where the snow was still deep in the spring.

Smoking could have killed me at Sundance. We went out of the conference room for a smoke and were standing under a porch supported by something like 3 foot pillars. We understood why, when there was a rumble and tons of snow slid off the roof no more than 5 feet from us. Glad we weren't star glazing or we'd have been living among them.

Amazing country, but not sure I could live around all that goodness.