Called out in staff newsletter...

[BostonVape]

Ridiculous. vaping is about as dangerous to those around you as drinking coffee in your office.

*sniff sniff* What's that smell? Oh lawd! He's drinking coffee!

yup what about the people who put WAY too much cologne/perfume on.. that smell makes me sicker than vapor any day.

or the people who cook disgusting smelling food in the break room - ie: fish/ broccoli

the 'vapor smell' excuse is so lame.. most people love the smell of it.. who doesnt want to smell sweet tarts or orange hi-c all day?

 

[eratikmind]

R1080, having skipped everything after reading the first post, the issue is not with vaping. It has more to do with your Company's policies in general. As such, the question is, whether or not you are willing to comply with the said vaping policy.

Vaping is not the magic cure for ex-smokers to be accepted by the general masses, whom frown upon smokers. To believe so, one will only be disappointed.

I vape, as I had smoked. As such, I expect no further consideration from others, as I respect their space.

- Andy

 

[Myk]

But what are the "facts"? No offense or anything. I'm just not sure what they are...I've been under the assumption that ecigs are "less" harmful than tobacco. I would say that the only solid facts for a company are that production would go up if people didn't have to take nic breaks. Other than that? I don't think we'll know about vaping and it's effects for quite some time.

2cents

Yes we do know the facts.
Utah Vapers - Clearstream Air Results

We even have the facts about second hand smoke, although the people who ran the study lied about them and most do not know the facts, "Our results indicate no association between childhood exposure to ETS and lung cancer risk. We did find weak evidence of a dose–response relationship between risk of lung cancer and exposure to spousal and workplace ETS. There was no detectable risk after cessation of exposure" http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/90/19/1440.full.pdf
Repeat the lie long enough and it becomes accepted as truth.

 

[uba egar320]

After people have been using these things for more than 4 or 5 years...we'll know. Studies are great. Especially peer reviewed ones...but for long term use and exposure? Only time will tell imo. I'll stick with telling people that they are less harmful than tobacco.

 

[Myk]

Abide by their rules. Find a sympathetic lawyer to send them a letter about forcing you, an ex-smoker, to be exposed to second hand smoke and the liability that is opening them up to.

You don't know what you're asking for when saying they shouldn't be called ecigs or wanting them to not be a tobacco product. Ecigs would've been shut down long ago if that was the case, at least any that contained nicotine. The only reason we can still get them is because a court ruled they are a tobacco product.
We'd be waiting indefinitely for manufacturers who can't afford the testing to cross a finish line that would forever be moved further away.

 

[Myk]

After people have been using these things for more than 4 or 5 years...we'll know. Studies are great. Especially peer reviewed ones...but for long term use and exposure? Only time will tell imo. I'll stick with telling people that they are less harmful than tobacco.

They've been around since 2003, that's 10 years. Now what, 20 years? It's the ever moving finish line set up by the ANTZ, finish one hurdle only to find they've set up another.

 

[uba egar320]

Abide by their rules. Find a sypathetic lawyer to send them a letter about forcing you, an ex-smoker, to be exposed to second hand smoke and the liability that is opening them up to.

You don't know what you're asking for when saying they shouldn't be called ecigs or wanting them to not be a tobacco product. Ecigs would've been shut down long ago if that was the case, at least any that contained nicotine. The only reason we can still get them is because a court ruled they are a tobacco product.
We'd be waiting indefinitely for manufacturers who can't afford the testing to cross a finish line that would forever be moved further away.

I'd almost think that at this point, the best he could do would be asking the company to have a separate area to vape in IF vaping in the smoking section bothered him.

 

[uba egar320]

They've been around since 2003, that's 10 years. Now what, 20 years? It's the ever moving finish line set up by the ANTZ, finish one hurdle only to find they've set up another.

There is no way that ecigs were being used in the numbers they are now in 03. That, and they're so damn effective now. Delivery systems trump 901 atty's from 2009 10 times over. And yes, I'd say 20 years is a good number.

 

[R1080]

I think after all of these posts, I have come to a simple conclusion.
I am not upset about not being able to vape inside of my employer's building, whether i am alone or around others... I am simply dissapointed in the fact that the few people that did see me and spoke with me about it were supportive and encouraging, but 1 (don't know who, how many or care to know) complained about it and screwed it all up for the rest of us. And my employer, instead of speaking to me/us regarding the situation, put it out like breaking news for everyone to know that "I" was being banned from doing this horrible thing to myself and others. Like stated before I am sure they probably wear toxic perfume that gives me a headache, but I never said anything about it to them or anyone else. Live and let live!

Thanks for helping me quit!

Frustration level:HIGH but slowly decreasing.

 

[SilverBear]

Abide by their rules. Find a sympathetic lawyer to send them a letter about forcing you, an ex-smoker, to be exposed to second hand smoke and the liability that is opening them up to.

If he goes that route, I hope he lets us know how that worked out.

 

[Myk]

If he goes that route, I hope he lets us know how that worked out.

In FL I can imagine, probably fired to avoid the liability. In more sane places I would think a separate area would be suitable.

I only go out to eat in a restaurant about once a year. So far both times I've asked I've been turned down, and I understand why. The first time I jokingly complained about being a non-smoker being forced to inhale smoke. The second time the waitress was the one who said it doesn't make sense.
I really don't mind, I know the dangers of SHS was a lie and I've known it for many years. I also know nobody has a "right" to ban odors they find offensive. I just like to point out the hypocrisy of places that make rules (or laws) to protect some non-smokers from SHS while forcing other non-smokers to be exposed to it.

I would be worse with a nicotine free workplace because nicotine is a medicine for a percentage of about 1 in 100 Americans.

 

[Myk]

There is no way that ecigs were being used in the numbers they are now in 03. That, and they're so damn effective now. Delivery systems trump 901 atty's from 2009 10 times over. And yes, I'd say 20 years is a good number.

There's that ever moving impossible finish line.
Not enough were using them in '03. They weren't good enough then. 10 years isn't enough, now we need 20.
Problem is if they're banned everywhere or users harassed none of those requirements will ever be met.

Everything else in the US works on "risk assessment". If something isn't assessed to carry a risk it is allowed until a risk is proven. The actual risk of SHS is extremely low. There is nothing in vapor to carry those same minimal risks and nothing to say they have their own risks or else NRT wouldn't be allowed, baking wouldn't be allowed, and concert fog wouldn't be allowed. Accepting special rules for vaping because it looks like smoking is not acceptable.

 

[R1080]

If he goes that route, I hope he lets us know how that worked out.

I've seen a few co-workers lost to this situation... I am not going to follow their lead!

Lawsuits againgst your employer are a no-win situation!

 

[Myk]

I've seen a few co-workers lost to this situation... I am not going to follow their lead!

Lawsuits againgst your employer are a no-win situation!

Note that I did not suggest threatening lawsuits. Just mentioning that forcing a non-smoker to be exposed to SHS could open them up to liability.

 

[Jeremy Evans]

I find it funny when people complain about not being able to vape here or there. I didnt stop smoking and vaping instead so I could indulge whenever I wanted where ever I wanted, I did it to stop smoking cigarettes. All it takes is one person to complain about something like this and it will have a ripple effect for everyone. No matter how less toxic or dangerous to yourself and others you are still ingesting something FOREIGN into your body, if you were the person who obviously was bothered by vaping then you would see there side of it. It's being respectful of other people that people seem to forget when they pick up e-cigs instead of analogs

 

[patkin]

I am all for being respectful. I am not, however, for irrational control of other people's lives based on one's own, personal, preferences USING health concerns to do it. We've all seen the progression move from legittmate health concerns to out-and-out control issues by ANTZ inability to cope with what they don't like. Now, in some places, we're in a situation where you can't smoke in your own car or back yard nor off the job on your own time. Just sayin... don't want to see the same irrational progression with vaping.... separate the reasonable from the unreasonable and, in this case, I smell unreasonable when its extended to using SNUS which no one can possibly know your doing. I like my Big Gulps, salt and nicotine... don't control my life with spin jobs to do it. If you don't like what I'm doing... suck it up.... grow up. After all, if its you're controlling little ANTZ, I tolerate you... you can do the same.

 

[R1080]

I find it funny when people complain about not being able to vape here or there. I didnt stop smoking and vaping instead so I could indulge whenever I wanted where ever I wanted, I did it to stop smoking cigarettes. All it takes is one person to complain about something like this and it will have a ripple effect for everyone. No matter how less toxic or dangerous to yourself and others you are still ingesting something FOREIGN into your body, if you were the person who obviously was bothered by vaping then you would see there side of it. It's being respectful of other people that people seem to forget when they pick up e-cigs instead of analogs

I am sure that may be the case for some... But I never STOPPED being respectful of others. With my analogs or vaping or anything else.

No ofense taken in anyway, just stating facts.

 

[BostonVape]

I've seen a few co-workers lost to this situation... I am not going to follow their lead!

Lawsuits againgst your employer are a no-win situation!

no-win situation? seems like you need a better attorney

 

[BostonVape]

I've seen a few co-workers lost to this situation... I am not going to follow their lead!

Lawsuits againgst your employer are a no-win situation!

no-win situation? seems like you need a better attorney

 

[evan le'garde]

Simple solution, Use no nic juice and ignore the complaints. They can't stop you doing that !.