Boycot Starbucks

[sailorman]

The issue is pretty simple.
Do companies like Charbucks have a right to ban vaping on their premises? Yes, absolutely.
Do vapers have the right to withhold support from them for doing so? Yes, absolutely

The whole argument seems to revolve around the question of whether vapers who call for a Boycott are being unfair to Charbucks because they have the right to ban vaping.

Charbucks has the right, but not the obligation. If the law imposed a ban, then it would be unfair to "punish" them.

If they voluntarily impose a ban, vapers are perfectly justified in boycotting them. I really don't see what the controversy is in that. If we were talking about individual human beings, people would call it "personal responsibility". They'd be mumbling stuff about "choices have consequences".

Well, corporations ARE people. Just ask Mitt Romney.

On a separate note:

On a seperate note , Sailor you gotta ease up. You are way to quick to call some ignorant or make insinuations about their intelligence because their views differ with yours.

newq, please point out where I have done this, particularly because their views differ. The mods are pretty alert around here and I think that if I was guilty of that, I'd have heard from them first, not you. But if you have an example, let me know and I'll apologize to the offended party.
Having said that, if someone is made to feel ignorant because their point was demonstrated to be based on something other than reality, then there's not much I can do about that. "If the shoe fits..". But I don't recall having made such insinuations on the basis of a simple difference of opinion. Please don't confuse the two situations. I suspect that if someone is hesitant to participate, a contention that I'm not convinced of, it may be more a case of "If you can't stand the heat..."

 

[MissThree33]

To go back on track, I managed a Starbucks store in Redmond Washington back in the 1980s. It was the 11th store in the chain at the time. When I started with them, there were 11 stores, when I left, there were over 730 world-wide.

I'll never boycott Starbucks. They're one of my favorite corporations for a lot of reasons, some my own reasons, some for more public reasons. I love the company that people love to hate. LOL.

Interesting piece of history here... Starbucks started in 1971, even back then when smoking was allowed EVERYWHERE, they never allowed smoking in their store(s). Second point is that Starbucks headquarters are in Seattle. E-cigs are banned in King County everywhere analogs are. Starbucks is dedicated to hyper-super consistancy. They can't allow them in their Seattle stores, and based on that, they won't allow them in their other stores anywhere else either. If I had to guess at why they're banned, that would be it.

They won't allow you to visit a store in say Florida where you can vape, then go to a store in Seattle where you by law cannot. They stay this consistent so the rules are clear to their employees and their visitors. With a company that size, it's almost a necessity.

 

[sailorman]

Ah... Least common denominator. I'm familiar with the concept.

Too bad their coffee is so consistently burnt and overpriced.

Do they hold to such a degree of consistency with their wages?
I somehow doubt it.

 

[MissThree33]

Ah... Least common denominator. I'm familiar with the concept.

Too bad their coffee is so consistently burnt and overpriced.

Do they hold to such a degree of consistency with their wages?
I somehow doubt it.

Ah, burned to one person is dark roasted to another

Their wages for baristas are ok, especially given the fact they give EXCELLENT benefits. My benefits at Starbucks were mind-blowingly good. I believe their benefits still stand out as unheard of for a near minimum wage employee. This is why a lot of college age students and retirees choose to work there. Managers do very very well.

You can go to a Starbucks in Seattle and one in Istanbul and have the experience be identical (I know, I've done it). When you're a company as large as they are now, consistancy and contentment go hand in hand. There are a lot of benefits to it for both the corporation and the customer.

Which brings us around to the PV industry, it could certainly do with a level of consistancy and contentment itself. That in and of itself breeds acceptance.

 

[Ladypixel]

Yes, but it's not quite the same thing. The source is a sterile vaporizer in the HVAC system, that's a little different than the source being the mouth of a sick person expelling it in massive quantities. The thought just crossed my mind. I have a background working in a hospital pharmacy in a lab environment inside a LAFH. (a sterile environment for mixing medications like IVs and other) , then I started to think about little droplets of water coming out of my current spring cold infected mouth and settling all over my kitchen as I puff away. The thought kind of conjured images of coughing or sneezing without covering my mouth. LOL.

Well, admittedly I'm not a doctor, nor a lab technician, so my guess is probably not as educated as yours. It's something that should likely be looked into, though - I'd imagine anything we exhale, whether it be air or vapor, does have some capacity for carrying bacteria.

 

[sailorman]

...
Which brings us around to the PV industry, it could certainly do with a level of consistancy and contentment itself. That in and of itself breeds acceptance.

Well, just my opinion, but I don't like the level of consistency that I see across every business in the country. I like the idea of regional flavor. I even remember when a McDonalds in Florida was different than one in New York. Nowadays, you could pluck someone up from one city and deposit him in another and there's a fair chance that he'd never know he moved. One man's consistency is another man's homogenized predictability. I'm by no means content to have the same experience in Oregon as in Tennessee. Variety is the spice of life, and the U.S. has become so, so bland.

Public acceptance? Maybe if all pvs looked the same, the public would accept them, but that's a pretty high price to pay.

Other than consistency in juice, ie. reliable nic levels, and maybe threading patterns within a type, what consistency would be good? I'd hate to see PVs all look the same or perform the same. I'd hate to see all juice be consistently the same flavor, like a cup of Charbucks or a McDonalds burger. A manufacturer should be consistent within his product line, for reasons of compatibility if nothing else, but give me variety any day. That's especially true with non-manufactured items, like food.

 

[Maestro]

Ah, burned to one person is dark roasted to another

Their wages for baristas are ok, especially given the fact they give EXCELLENT benefits. My benefits at Starbucks were mind-blowingly good. I believe their benefits still stand out as unheard of for a near minimum wage employee. This is why a lot of college age students and retirees choose to work there. Managers do very very well.

You can go to a Starbucks in Seattle and one in Istanbul and have the experience be identical (I know, I've done it). When you're a company as large as they are now, consistancy and contentment go hand in hand. There are a lot of benefits to it for both the corporation and the customer.

Which brings us around to the PV industry, it could certainly do with a level of consistancy and contentment itself. That in and of itself breeds acceptance.

I find that amazing. The two times I had a Starbuck's coffee I had to throw it away because I literally could not force myself to swallow it all. I had assumed they were an aberration. If all their coffee is really that bad, how on earth did they ever get so popular? I know around here customers for Tim Horton's are lined up down the street on every second corner and there's tumbleweeds blowing through the few Starbucks I know of.

 

[MissThree33]

This is totally off topic. LOL. But, it's the difference in the roast Starbucks uses. There are several "levels" of roasting you can put a coffee bean through. The most common in order of light to dark: being Cinnamon, City, Full City, Vienna, Italian and French (there are a few lighter, and a one darker) The longer you roast a bean, the more oils you bring out in it the more "roasty" and oily it tastes. The darker the roast, the less acidic it is as well. With the exception of Italian and French (respectively named) all their other coffees are Full City roast. They're very oily and very smoky and strong flavor. I love their coffee, but I like that extra dark roasted flavor. Petes Coffee out of San Francisco actually puts a Vienna roast on all their beans, it's even more dark and more oily. I like their coffee as much (sometimes more) as Starbucks. Starbucks recently put out a blend called "Blonde" it's a cinnamon roast (which is what Tim Hortons is) much much lighter body and has higher acids Personally? I think it tastes like gym socks lol. But that's just me, I don't like light roasted coffee.

Think of the taste range like a beer... LOL. Tim Hortons and Starbucks cinnamon roasts are like drinking a Corona, drinking a Petes or Starbucks Full City or Vienna roast is like drinking a Guinness. And we know how many people hate Guinness and other traditionally black beers. No suprise that if I'm going to drink beer, I'll choose a porter or stout every time.

The other less understood aspect of roasting is that in order to put a Full City or darker roast on a coffee bean, you have to use a really high quality arabica bean. If a less superior bean is used and you try to roast it dark, it'll actually burst into flames in the roaster. Some companies roast light to mask an inferrior bean, other roast light to appeal to bigger audience.

 

[sidetrack]

We know what vapor contains. We know that food flavorings are not toxic. We know that if they were toxic because of being heated, some chemicals would be detectable. We know that food flavorings are routinely heated to temperatures in excess of the 200 degrees of an atomizer and people in food processing plants aren't keeling over dead. If you want to believe that heating food flavorings creates some mysterious, heretofore unknown toxic substance, you go right ahead. But don't expect the rest of us to buy into your magical thinking.

Ecigarette mist harmless, inhaled or exhaled

http://www.healthnz.co.nz/Portland2008ECIG.pdf

Might I suggest additional reading on your part. CDC - Flavorings-Related Lung Disease - NIOSH Workplace Safety and Health Topic

I will respectfully have to disagree with you on your above reply to my post. Up untill 2000 we thought most food flavoring were quite harmless until these workers DID in fact start to keel over. I must confess I was surprised to see this one slip by you since you are so(self proclaimed) knowledgeable about secondhand vapor. Dicetyl poses no threat if consumed in food but can when heated and inhaled. FA TFA CA and most of the common flavor manufacturers that we use in vapeing are quick to tell us now that they are dicetyl free. What else is lurking in our eliquid that we just don't know about at this point. While I am willing to take that risk over smoking, which I believe will surely kill me, I don't presume to make that judgement for others.
I know of no food flavoring company that will put in writting that their flavors are 100% safe when used in a manner not intended for. They know it's pretty much a lawsuit waiting to happen. For starters, food flavorings in foods are not used at near the percentages by volume that most of us (10-20%) vape. Food flavorings are designed for, wait for it........ food........ and to be consumed through oral ingestion not vaporized inhalation. Nothing magical about that just a bit of common sence.

 

[Uncle Willie]

Might I suggest additional reading on your part. CDC - Flavorings-Related Lung Disease - NIOSH Workplace Safety and Health Topic

I will respectfully have to disagree with you on your above reply to my post. Up untill 2000 we thought most food flavoring were quite harmless until these workers DID in fact start to keel over. I must confess I was surprised to see this one slip by you since you are so(self proclaimed) knowledgeable about secondhand vapor. Dicetyl poses no threat if consumed in food but can when heated and inhaled. FA TFA CA and most of the common flavor manufacturers that we use in vapeing are quick to tell us now that they are dicetyl free. What else is lurking in our eliquid that we just don't know about at this point. While I am willing to take that risk over smoking, which I believe will surely kill me, I don't presume to make that judgement for others.
I know of no food flavoring company that will put in writting that their flavors are 100% safe when used in a manner not intended for. They know it's pretty much a lawsuit waiting to happen. For starters, food flavorings in foods are not used at near the percentages by volume that most of us (10-20%) vape. Food flavorings are designed for, wait for it........ food........ and to be consumed through oral ingestion not vaporized inhalation. Nothing magical about that just a bit of common sence.

Excellent post .. and many of us believe this is the area that will cause most harm, if there is harm to be caused .. no one knows what the home made chemistry produces ..

 

[Uncle Willie]

Which brings us around to the PV industry, it could certainly do with a level of consistancy and contentment itself. That in and of itself breeds acceptance.

Absolutely spot on .. standards imposed by makers / consistency in product / clear and concise instructions / .. all would go a long way in our efforts to hold off any possible forced regulation ..

 

[N rustica]

it's a silly debate. a business owner has the right to refuse service to an "unruly" customer. my business, my rules, .... and don't come back, you're banned

LOL....this thread reminded me of one of the greatest list of rules ever posted in a coffee shop located in montreal.... the old world merchant mentality

That must be some damn good coffee… | PassiveAggressiveNotes.com

 

[kristin]

Might I suggest additional reading on your part. CDC - Flavorings-Related Lung Disease - NIOSH Workplace Safety and Health Topic
.

My personal opinon:

First of all, no workers "keeled over" from diacetyl - they developed bronchiolitis obliterans or other illnesses, but no one died as far as I am aware. (I make that distinction because the ANTZ like to say e-cigs should be banned because nicotine poisoning can kill a small child - even though no small child has actually died from nicotine poisoning in decades.)

If you think about it, the fact that the issue with diacetyl came to light in the first place should be comforting to vapers, not disconcerting. If there are other flavors out there that can cause lung diseases or illnesses then the first hit would be factory workers exposed to the flavorings in higher, more concentrated amounts and we would have already heard about it. When the popcorn workers developed health problems, there were dozens of studies on the inhalation of food flavorings and yet the focus remained on diacetyl - not other flavorings. There have been no reports of other food flavorings causing health problems in factory workers - that is a GOOD thing for vapers. In light of the massive investigation into diacetyl, one would think other flavorings would have also come under scrutiny and workers with non-diacetyl flavoring chemicals, who suffered adverse effects from inhalation, would have come forward. So, one could conclude that the lack of any reports of non-diacetyl food flavoring issues with workers exposed to higher and more concentrated amounts means it's highly unlikely that there would be problems inhaling them in the small amounts found in our vapor.

Personally, I am not concerned about diacetyl or other flavors at all. We are nearing 10 years on the world market and we are not seeing any reports by vapers of severe lung problems such as bronchiolitis obliterans and even reports of minor allergic reactions are more the exception, not the rule.The health problems experienced by the popcorn workers were after massive exposure to diacetyl and other chemicals. (The one consumer who claimed to have popcorn lung from the lesser exposure by eating microwave popcorn lost his lawsuit due to the judge determining that the doctor's testimony was "full of unsupported opinions and conclusions.") To claim at this point that diacetyl is a health concern at the tiny levels that would be contained in e-liquid is the same to me as the FDA saying the tiny amounts of TSNAs and diethylene glycol they found in their tests are a health concern because they contain "carcinogens and toxic chemicals."

Given all of that - I do believe that companies who continue to use diacetyl (and even those who do not) should list ingredients on their labels beyond saying just "food/artificial flavoring" to list WHICH food flavorings, so consumers may make an informed choice. While artificial flavorings continue to be the "great unknown" about e-cigs, I highly doubt that it will come to light that many of them (if any - other than possibly diacetyl) are causing or going to cause significant health issues for vapers. If those chemicals were a significant health risk for inhalation, we would already have heard of workers who are exposed to much higher amounts and stronger concentrations having health issues - as we did with diacetyl - and we would be hearing reports from long-time vapers. That is simply has not been the case.

But like I said - that's just my personal opinion.

 

[sailorman]

Might I suggest additional reading on your part. CDC - Flavorings-Related Lung Disease - NIOSH Workplace Safety and Health Topic

I will respectfully have to disagree with you on your above reply to my post. Up untill 2000 we thought most food flavoring were quite harmless until these workers DID in fact start to keel over. I must confess I was surprised to see this one slip by you since you are so(self proclaimed) knowledgeable about secondhand vapor. Dicetyl poses no threat if consumed in food but can when heated and inhaled. FA TFA CA and most of the common flavor manufacturers that we use in vapeing are quick to tell us now that they are dicetyl free. What else is lurking in our eliquid that we just don't know about at this point. While I am willing to take that risk over smoking, which I believe will surely kill me, I don't presume to make that judgement for others.
I know of no food flavoring company that will put in writting that their flavors are 100% safe when used in a manner not intended for. They know it's pretty much a lawsuit waiting to happen. For starters, food flavorings in foods are not used at near the percentages by volume that most of us (10-20%) vape. Food flavorings are designed for, wait for it........ food........ and to be consumed through oral ingestion not vaporized inhalation. Nothing magical about that just a bit of common sence.

Ah...Yes. The old "popcorn lung". People spending 8 hours a day inhaling diacetyl fumes in concentrations tens of thousands of times higher than a vaper would be exposed to in many lifetimes of vaping buttered popcorn juice. Where are the cases of this happening with other flavorings? They are made and used in factories as well. If you are suggesting that we assume any flavoring is dangerous in the minute quantities present in secondhand vapor until it undergoes years of testing, then you might as well go hide in your closet to vape. After all, your vapor could be as toxic as plutonium and you just don't know it yet.

Anyway, that's beside the point. We are not discussing potential harm to the vaper. We accept that risk. We are discussing potential harm to others, via our exhaled vapor. Even diacetyl has a safe exposure limit. The people with popcorn lung exceeded it by a vast degree. I'm sure that the amount of diacetyl contained in secondhand vapor would be nowhere near the safe exposure limit for workers in a popcorn factory. I doubt that even a vaper would be ingesting as much as a worker in a OSHA compliant factory.

I think common sense would indicate that anything so toxic in the minute quantities likely to escape absorption by our own bodies, would be already causing some serious problems in us. Given the rather flimsy science behind the issue of harm caused by secondhand tobacco smoke, the issue of secondhand vapor is making a mountain out a very tiny molehill. We know for a fact how bad inhaled smoke is, yet we still have no conclusive evidence of serious harm, other than irritation, caused by secondhand smoke.

My contention is that the risk posed to others is so minute that it's ridiculous to make an issue of it in light of all the other things we do that we know contribute to air pollution in a real and measurable way, like driving a car for example. Those who wring their hands over secondhand vapor are using the issue to mask their real objections and people like you play right into their hands. If I vaped buttered popcorn juice all day in the same room as an innocent bystander, I may be putting myself at risk (small as it may be), not him. We need to get a grasp on what kind of quantities we are dealing with here, especially in secondhand vapor, and put this into perspective. We're in a room full of lions, looking for ghosts under the bed.

 

[sidetrack]

While I respect your position:
A. I did not say anything about anyone dieing. If you are the point that you need a lung transplant which 2 did, then I would say it's safe to say at some point they keeled(to fall down suddenly because of illness or weakness) over. A bit of a liberty but I think you get my gist.
B. I would never be so presumptuous as to think that just because something has not come to light in the past 10 years that it won't in the future. By the same token I hope to see scientific evidence that vapeing IS safe.
C. Where are all these long time vapers you speek of. Are there really that many that have been vapeing for 10 years? I have never come across one or seen a post here on ECF from a 10 yr vet.
D. I agree with you 100% about the ingredient list that should be place on all e-liquids.

And that my fellow vapers is just my opinion........

 

[Foxfur]

Personally, I will patronize Starbucks simply due to their anti-hate stance on people's sexual identity. I'll vape outside or hold it in until I exhale no vapor. I'm just not into picketing or taking rash action due to an individual manager's actions. I personally don't care for their coffee (I get a cup of hot water and use my own Folgers instant!) but their WiFi and customer's generally quiet manners make it a cool place to spend an hour or two.

 

[sailorman]

it's a silly debate. a business owner has the right to refuse service to an "unruly" customer. my business, my rules, .... and don't come back, you're banned

LOL....this thread reminded me of one of the greatest list of rules ever posted in a coffee shop located in montreal.... the old world merchant mentality

That must be some damn good coffee… | PassiveAggressiveNotes.com

And who is debating the right of a business to refuse service to an unruly customer? No one.
Who is debating the right of a business to make or enforce his own rules about vaping? No one.

The only debate here is about the propriety of calling for a boycott against a corp. that imposes a rule you don't appreciate. Some people think that a business owner has the right to do what he wants, but a customer is wrong to encourage a boycott or withhold support.

So, you've obviously gotten lost and are on the wrong thread. Please try to keep up.

BTW, those rules are why they're referred to as old world merchants and why they're extinct.

 

[Foxfur]

I loved the comment on the "Damn good coffee" page:
"I’m a firm believer in the “the customer is nearly always wrong” set of Old World standard business practices. That’s what’s wrong with America today…too few surly business owners!"
I love me an ill-tempered food / beverage nazi...

 

[sailorman]

While I respect your position:
A. I did not say anything about anyone dieing. If you are the point that you need a lung transplant which 2 did, then I would say it's safe to say at some point they keeled(to fall down suddenly because of illness or weakness) over. A bit of a liberty but I think you get my gist.
B. I would never be so presumptuous as to think that just because something has not come to light in the past 10 years that it won't in the future. By the same token I hope to see scientific evidence that vapeing IS safe.
C. Where are all these long time vapers you speek of. Are there really that many that have been vapeing for 10 years? I have never come across one or seen a post here on ECF from a 10 yr vet.
D. I agree with you 100% about the ingredient list that should be place on all e-liquids.

And that my fellow vapers is just my opinion........

I'm not sure what country you are in, but in the U.S. we don't share the same philosophy as some European countries. (I kind of wish we did). In Europe, if you want to bring a new food additive to the market, you have to prove it's safety. In the U.S., you have to submit some rudimentary information and you pretty much can use the population as your lab rats.

The point is that there is a constant stream of new compounds, chemicals, additives and other ingredients being injected into our food supply, our water and our atmosphere. The U.S. is awash in untested chemicals, fertilizers, pesticides and food additives. None of these is forced to go through what amounts to clinical trials. It could come to light in 10 years that some of them are harmful. It's happened before with certain food colorings and additives. It will happen again. But the point is that we don't practice prior-restraint in any other segment of the market. There's no reason to single out vaping as the one product where every component has to be certified safe.

You will NEVER see scientific evidence vaping is safe. Never in a million years. It may be presumptuous to think that just because something hasn't come to light in the last 10 years, that it won't in the future.. But, what is the alternative?? Should we subject everything to rigid clinical trials for 10 years before it's allowed on the market? Why not 20 years? Should we assume that everything is poison until we can prove otherwise? That's not how science works. That's not practical.

There's no proof that any chemical product that has ever come on the market won't, at some future time, turn out to be dangerous or toxic. You can't prove that, 10 years hence, we won't discover shampoo causes brain cancer. That's not the way to live your life. It's not reasonable to assume everything is toxic unless proven otherwise because, in the end, there's no such thing as proof. All you can do is make a reasonable evaluation of the risks, based on what is currently known. And based on what is currently known, vaping is safer than any practical alternative and secondhand vapor poses no realistic threat to the public.

 

[sailorman]

..........deleted tech prob.