Dane County WI ordinance to ban e-cigs introduced

[CarolT]

8/12/2015 - Dane County Executive Joe Parisi and County Board Supervisor Jenni Dye introduced an ordinance to prohibit the use of electronic delivery devices (e-cigarettes) in workplaces. They spout the usual malicious nonsense: "Continuously breathing air that contains fine or ultra-fine particulate matter — any particulate matter — is cause for concern. For that reason alone, e-cigarettes should not be used in workplaces and even more concerning; there are hundreds of other “vaping” products on the market that have never been the target of any scientific study."
Dane County Introduces Measure to Prohibit E-Cig... - Dane County Press Releases

 

[UncLeJunkLe]

This is not a ban, it's a public spaces ban (particularly workplaces) and since no one REALLY knows what is in the exhaled vapor others are being forced to breath, then it is to be expected that public spaces bans will be enacted.

It's back to smoking beside the dumpster, I guess. (smoking, vaping, whatever).

 

[CarolT]

What's that I hear - resignation to their crap? That is the most rip-roaring, shameless FUD-mongering ever, and it's a moral outrage that innocent citizens are being subjected to it. That's even beyond the despicable thirdhand smoke - this is just teensy specks of dust, which food, clothes, furniture and even the human body exude clouds of, every day.

 

[KattMamma]

Workplace bans.... that's when things got really ugly for me as a smoker, and the same will happen (already is happening) with vaping. IMO, NO gov't entity has any right to tell a privately owned business what they can or cannot allow in their own workplace.

Texas has no statewide bans, only age requirements, on cigs (now on vape stuff, starting Oct 1) although many cities have bans in place. There are also many towns (mostly small towns) that do not have any sort of ban, and although it is rare I still occasionally see an employment ad for a job in a "smoking office". It always makes me smile. It's a pretty simple concept - hey, we smoke here, if you're good with that we may have a job for you, if you're not ok with it, look elsewhere.

 

[CarolT]

Dane County likely to implement indoor e-cig ban
http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/govt-and-politics/dane-county-likely-to-implement-indoor-e-cig-ban/article_0e634f4f-36e5-57b9-98fc-bd8e5b4175ca.html

This is an outrageous charade:

Madison’s indoor ban on e-cigarettes drew strong opposition from those who argue electronic cigarettes offer a healthier alternative to smoking traditional cigarettes. Both sides argued that the effects of secondhand vapor are largely unknown, those in favor of the ban saying non-vapers shouldn’t have to inhale that unknown substance and those opposed to the ban saying it’s unclear whether it even causes harm.
​

It's despicable because the pro-vaping side is throwing the fight by that mealy-mouthed sniveling, when they should be attacking the scientific fraud the pro-banners used to get the smoking bans in the first place.

Bayrd, however, said she doesn’t trust the tobacco industry and pointed to studies funded by that industry.

"They are not to be trusted. They’re not a trustworthy organization," Bayrd said. "There are chemicals in this, it is not just vapor."
​

In comparison, the anti-smokers' precious EPA report on secondhand smoke wasn't even written by real EPA scientists, because they were against calling secondhand smoke a human carcinogen, and said so in their reviews. Instead, it was written by handpicked anti-smokers of the most militant ilk, who used illegal pass-through contracts to conceal their role. And on the board of directors of the crooked company that handled the pass-throughs sat Fred Malek, who was both a director of anti-smoker Sen. Frank Lautenberg's company, ADP, and the campaign manager for President George Herbert Walker Bush, by whose administration the fraudulent report was released. And the mass media have deliberately concealed the truth all these years so they can FORCE their political agenda on the American people.
The EPA's ETS Lies

So Bayrd and her ilk worship and adore those criminals, who have made a mockery of both science and democracy, and go around badmouthing the tobacco industry (whose real offense was to LET them).

Although not all the health consequences of secondhand vapor are yet known, Dye said, it’s a simple way to ensure everyone has access to clean air in shared workplaces.
​

No, cupcake, your job is to ensure that people have access to places where they can smoke and vape, and that they are not being victimized by criminals committing scientific fraud.

"I remember one gentleman who had lung cancer and he had never smoked, but he worked in an office that he shared with an individual who did smoke in the workplace," said Dye, recalling her time working for the American Cancer Society. "I think about him when I think about this resolution."
​

In fact, the American Cancer Society is the primary instigator, aider, and abettor of the scientific fraud of falsely blaming smoking and "chemicals" for diseases that are really caused by infection. The Cancer Society ignores the fact that human papillomaviruses have been implicated in around a quarter of lung cancers, and that non-smokers' exposure to HPV is much more similar to smokers' exposure to them, compared to their respective exposures to cigarette smoke; and that any reasonably scientific conclusion would be that HPV causes many more cases of lung cancer in non-smokers than secondhand smoke. The Cancer Society gets away with committing scientific fraud purely because they're a $1.3 trillion racket with monopoly control over every politician from the President on down.
HPV Causes Lung Cancer

 

[Jman8]

This is not a ban, it's a public spaces ban (particularly workplaces)

How does it make sense to you to say it is not a ban and that it is a ban?

and since no one REALLY knows what is in the exhaled vapor others are being forced to breath, then it is to be expected that public spaces bans will be enacted.

Do you know the chemical composition of all people who are breathing in the same public spaces you might be in? If not, then wouldn't it be beneficial, for those that support bans of vaping in public, to make sure everyone wears a filter over their mouth, while in public? Everyone might need to breath, but no one needs to breath without a mouth filter.

This sort of legislation is keeping the mouth filter thing a reality based on its (insane) rhetoric.

It's back to smoking beside the dumpster, I guess. (smoking, vaping, whatever).

Yeah, like this silly law will stop me from vaping in public. I find that funny.

 

[SpaceApe]

when will they stop the insanity....

 

[skoony]

This is not a ban, it's a public spaces ban (particularly workplaces) and since no one REALLY knows what is in the exhaled vapor others are being forced to breath, then it is to be expected that public spaces bans will be enacted.

the sad part is we do know whats in second hand vapor.
that baby has been put to bed. at least three studies have
shown with out a doubt that any toxic substance found has
been in such minute quantities there is no possible way
it could become a health issue for any reason to anybody.
the long term study clause does not come into play here
as no one is going to waste the time or money to do them.

regards
mike