If you don't watch FX News then what you KNOW is: "There's not a smidgen of corruption" in the IRS. Ooops... sorry, that was said on FX... but also what debunked it was too.
Dems propose ban on ecigs????
- Thread starter Sady
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I wanted to like this post. I wanted to like it a whole bunch of times.
But the first paragraph prevents me from doing so.
I agree with some of the sentiments in the first paragraph, but not entirely.
I think a lot depends on whether or not the amount of nicotine in what we exhale is truly negligible.
And also on what is meant by "breathe it on someone".
What a bunch of well-trained and submissive sheep we've become.
Don't offend!
Don't do things others may not like.
Make things illegal because someone dislikes them.
Don't do anything someone else may lack the capacity or desire to understand.
Makes me sick!
Don't offend!
Don't do things others may not like.
Make things illegal because someone dislikes them.
Don't do anything someone else may lack the capacity or desire to understand.
Makes me sick!
This thread makes me sick also. There is much that I would like to say but it would be too long and probably too many dirty words. "Fox News makes me feel dirty"? Would you explain how that happens? Does MSNBC or CNN make you feel elated? Is Chris Matthews the only honest reporter out there and make you feel clean and refreshed?
Give me a break.
Nataani, my sympathy goes out to your sister with her nicotine hypersensitivity.
But, if you look around, you'll find that there's someone allergic or hypersensitive to just about every substance on this earth. We can't go around minimizing or eliminating each and every possible allergen.
Here's just one example out of thousands, and this involves a substance that, like nicotine, millions of people voluntarily consume. And consume with zero problems. I have a deadly allergy to certain penicillium mold species.
Among other things, this means I can't tolerate the antibiotic penicillin, or any of its derivatives. The first time I got a penicillin shot when I was a child, I almost died from anaphylaxis. It gets worse. I cannot tolerate many different kinds of cheese, including all the veined cheeses and brie. If someone who has been eating, say, a Roquefort-slathered cheeseburger so much as breathes in my face, I'm in trouble. Just a wheel of brie, uncut, in a closed room leaves me gasping inside of a few minutes. Some restaurants, with lots of penicillium mold spores floating in the air, I simply have to leave. I toss bread with even a hint of the white mold — most people of my age simply pick off the bad parts. Every so often, I'll eat a less-than-fresh orange and have difficulty breathing afterward. I even have trouble in some newer buildings closed ventilation systems and clogged filters.
In the mid-1960's I went through desensitization, injecting myself with allergens (I have other allergies and hypersensitivities) four times per week for a year. Once epi-pens were invented, they became my best friends, because they meant I didn't have to get carted off to the hospital nearly so often. And, as I've aged (I'm 65 now) my sensitivity has decreased somewhat, and I've found that 200-400 mg. of diphenhydramine will knock out the closed breathing passage problem — and incidentally give me a several-hours-long power-snooze. This happens to me about 10-15 times per year.
My feeling is, if you have a disability such as this, then you have to learn to live with it. You can't insist that the world remake itself to suit each and every person's bunged-up physiology.
But, if you look around, you'll find that there's someone allergic or hypersensitive to just about every substance on this earth. We can't go around minimizing or eliminating each and every possible allergen.
Here's just one example out of thousands, and this involves a substance that, like nicotine, millions of people voluntarily consume. And consume with zero problems. I have a deadly allergy to certain penicillium mold species.
Among other things, this means I can't tolerate the antibiotic penicillin, or any of its derivatives. The first time I got a penicillin shot when I was a child, I almost died from anaphylaxis. It gets worse. I cannot tolerate many different kinds of cheese, including all the veined cheeses and brie. If someone who has been eating, say, a Roquefort-slathered cheeseburger so much as breathes in my face, I'm in trouble. Just a wheel of brie, uncut, in a closed room leaves me gasping inside of a few minutes. Some restaurants, with lots of penicillium mold spores floating in the air, I simply have to leave. I toss bread with even a hint of the white mold — most people of my age simply pick off the bad parts. Every so often, I'll eat a less-than-fresh orange and have difficulty breathing afterward. I even have trouble in some newer buildings closed ventilation systems and clogged filters.
In the mid-1960's I went through desensitization, injecting myself with allergens (I have other allergies and hypersensitivities) four times per week for a year. Once epi-pens were invented, they became my best friends, because they meant I didn't have to get carted off to the hospital nearly so often. And, as I've aged (I'm 65 now) my sensitivity has decreased somewhat, and I've found that 200-400 mg. of diphenhydramine will knock out the closed breathing passage problem — and incidentally give me a several-hours-long power-snooze. This happens to me about 10-15 times per year.
My feeling is, if you have a disability such as this, then you have to learn to live with it. You can't insist that the world remake itself to suit each and every person's bunged-up physiology.
Last edited:
mostlyclassics, than you. You saved me a lot of typing. There aren't many products that someone, somewhere doesn't have a problem with. Some perfumes have caused me to have to leave the room. I didn't feel I should ask someone else to leave just because I had a bad reaction to it. There's another way at looking at adverse situations.
I have read the Drexel university report, as well as the Oxford journals report. While second hand vapor does not expose people to combustible toxicants, it does expose them to nicotine.
You are essentially advocating that I should be able to sit in say the waiting line for the DMV with my 0.15 ohm dripper and fog the place up. If I happened to be vaping on 18 mg (which would give me one hell of a buzz) that is going to be far more than enough to affect people around me. But hey, its my right, so who cares about those pesky people who don't want to breathe in my vapor right?
If people vaped in public in a tolerant manner, stealth vaping, with decent resistance coils and mostly just keeping it all to themselves, there really wouldn't be a problem. The fact of the matter is that I have seen more times than I care to count, people essentially cloud chasing in very public areas. The people doing it are usually young and full of the "its my right!" argument.
I am an avid vaper, I was an avid smoker, I support my right to vape, I also support the right of non vapers or smokers to not have to breathe in my habit. That should be their right.
Regarding the slippery slope argument that you have pointed out. There is actually a huge reason why one makes sense and the other doesn't. A government building is, by definition, enclosed, thus trapping vapor in an area where others will be exposed to it. Parks, beaches, etc, are not enclosed, the vapor can easily dissipate.
I am far from naive sir, I have done my reading, I know the consequences. But, I tend to think about those around me more than I do myself. Selfishness is not one of my strong suits.
Now take the time to read the German report on vaping that found there is virtually no nicotine exhaled in vapor. And whatever nicotine that may be exhaled is less than what one would get by eating a tomato. Your nicotine example is just plain weak and makes no sense.
Second, what all of us who advocate vaping publicly consistently state, is to do so in a common sense and respectful manner.
Third, I strongly guess I have been vaping significantly longer than you have and have NEVER seen vapers (young, old or in-between) trying to "fog up" a place. In fact, just the opposite. I have found all vapers I have encountered in the wild to be considerate and respectful. And hundreds of other vapers I have talked to have told me the same thing. I am having a difficult time believing your version of people vaping publicly.
Fourth, vaping has already been banned outside in parks, beaches and college campuses. And since you are fine with some bans, it would be hypocritical to be against a ban that others believe are important and needed. Unless you arrogantly believe you should be the arbiter of what should be ban and where.
But considering who the mayor is of your city, I can see how you would embrace vaping bans.
People who bash Fox are more or less low information people are just plain ..........yes yes, they are way more truthful in there programming than the other major outlets....now if one was getting real news they'd look elsewhere to begin with than any of the major players...you need to check out The Blaze it's available on DISH and a few other networks, plus online. Or just go to the Drudgereport.com to get all in one new site. I'll stick with the great one Mark Levin or the like.
P.S. The Daily Caller is an excellent site amongst others like CNSnews.com and WND.com
P.S. The Daily Caller is an excellent site amongst others like CNSnews.com and WND.com
And many other bans. I have an office in Chicago, hate going there.
Nanny state livin large.
If you want to stop the bans we need more libertarian leaning representatives.
If you want to stop the bans we need more libertarian leaning representatives.
Well said SD
Lincoln
“To sin by silence, when they should protest, makes cowards of men.”
Eisenhower
“A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both.”
Churchill
The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is
Jefferson
"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."
"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty"
Snipped for brevity but YES. THIS.
We are the most despised non-smokers there ever were. No "Congrats! Good job getting off tobacco!" which is fine, don't need to pin a rose to my nose (that's a horrible thought but anyway) - since when do we go after people for using a perfectly legal chemical that is available on every streetcorner in form that is deadlier by magnitudes?
Really I think it's all the dollars involved.
Oh heck yes... I love a nightly dose of Mark Levin, he really does a great job of pointing out issues. Great constitutional conservative well worth listening to and a great call in show too. I also sometimes follow that up listening to red eye radio which is a fine discussion type of call in show that covers the issues really well.
Now the other side of the coin, people like Bill Mahr, just silly stupid and transparent dem sound byte pablem puking rhetoric similar to people like Rachael Maddow or that fat slob Ed on bsnbc...anyone who actually falls for that tripe...well...nevermind heh heh
I agree with everything except the "sheep we've become" part. We always have been. The shamers and blamers have gone as far as to actually study us. They use what they've learned very effectively. I just watched the life story of Winnie Mandela last night... sad case in point. As for the "news," if its littered with shaming language, I know what's up. The media is what HAS changed in this country. I don't recall that kind of language being used by media passing itself off as "journalism" previous to more recent times in at least American history. I'm sure it was there in political language during racist or prohibition days but it wasn't part of "journalism." I wish more people would stop and ask themselves why or to what purpose inflammatory, shaming, language is being used instead of becoming "sheep" and using it themselves. I wish every time they're tempted to shame or blame they would realize just how totally conditioned and controlled they've become due to a steady media diet that seeks to rile us up and use us. I guess you're right in that sense.... "sheep" but hardly that innocuous.
I wanted to like this post. I wanted to like it a whole bunch of times.
But the first paragraph prevents me from doing so.
Thanks for your kindnss and sense of humor (really!).
Let me just make the brutally-obvious logical point that all of us spend much (or in some cases, all) of our time in spaces that we don't personally control. So there is some other entity that will have a say over whether we vape there. It could be our job site, it could be a public park, it could be within our car - but travelling on a public road (so the gov't has control), or even in a private parking lot (so the business owner has some authority over the rules - some employers have already banned smoking in private cars when parked on their lots). We might even be in our own rented abodes (once again: the landlord and/or the gov't have control).
How will our vaping be treated? There are only three possibilities for any given location:
1) As analog smoking (which means we probably can't do it).
2) As breathing (which means we can do it).
3) As something else (which means that we might be able to do it, but we won't be restricted in the same way as smokers are ... and almost certainly less restricted).
Now think of vaping regulations as a kind of pinball. Depending on the employer, landlord, jurisdiction, etc. ... the pinball has either fallen into one of those three "holes," or it's still bouncing around. But it can't bounce around the table forever. Eventually, it has to end up in hole #1, #2, or #3.
Of couse the analogy is flawed in many ways. For example, as long as the ball is bouncing around ("unregulated"), it's basically the same result as hole #2 (in other words, vaping is no more regulated than breathing). But of course this is misleading ... does anyone seriously think that a state like California will have no statewide rules on indoor public vaping by this time in - say - 2019, five years from now? Pretty doubtful. They'll proably pass a law this year.
And there are lots of "tables" out there. If we're talking about a government building in Fargo ND, then the ball has already fallen into hole #1 - ND's Clean Air act treats vaping like smoking. (But what about a public park in Fargo? Surely the city could decide to ban vaping in its own public parks. So the ball is still "bouncing around." Yet sooner or later, either the state of ND or the City of Fargo is going to decide what the status of vaping in Fargo public parks should be.)
Finally, pinball is generally pursued by a single "player." In this case, we have many influences - BP, BT, employers, politicians, the media, public opinion, and .. oh yes ... that tiny gadfly-like sliver of (America's, or substitute your country name here) activist vapers.
We can already see this game of "pinball" being played out at the state level, when it comes to proposed bans on the sale of vaping supplies (and their possession) to minors. CASAA argues for option #3 - put vaping in a different category by restricting the rights of minors, but not those of adults. The ANTZ, meanwhile, are asking for option #1: just define vaping as smoking, and be done with it. (That way, when the state legislature does decide to ban smoking in state parks as a litter control measure, vapers will be automatically included.) No one is arguing for option #2 - a minor who vapes should not be treated the same as a minor who breathes.
The same goes for the existence of (say) designated vaping areas in bars, restaurants, airports, shopping centers, workplaces, etc. Most vapers want to hold out for option #2: treat vaping as breathing, no need for a designated area. The ANTZ want option #1: shopping centers, college campuses, airports, etc. are already "smoke"-free, so if a state simply recognizes that vaping IS smoking, then that will settle the issue. And the next time that the smoke-free regulations are extended, no one will have to think about whether the extension makes sense for vaping (even if the rationale has to do with fire risk or cigarette butts).
My point is that the "pinball" can't bounce around forever. We vapers have limited abilities to control the outcome. So far, we've lived in relative freedom in most places, due to the lack of regulation (i.e., the ball is still on the table).
Now it would be nice to imagine a world in which hole #2 actually existed. And I can see that happening in a limited way, i.e. for special-purpose "private vaping cubs" etc. But that's not going to help most vapers much unless we work in the establishment, or very near it. (It already must be difficult to vape in Chicago, given the 25-ft. clearance required from doorways. Who knows what vapers will do when/if the distance is extended to 25 or 100 yards ... in order to "help smokers quit," as an ALA spokeswoman recently put it.)
What I can see happening is a series of legislative measures that define the concept of a designated vaping area in (say) a bar, restaurant, or work place. And until we get statutes and ordinances like that, either the "pinball" will be in hole #1 (i.e. we've lost, and vaping is regulated as smoking), or it will still be rolling around the table.
Just gonna throw this out there.
Study Finds Fox News Viewers Least Informed Of All Viewers
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/23/fox-news-less-informed-new-study_n_1538914.html
For the record, I don't have cable or broadcast and I listen to NPR.
An example of an NPR piece on e-cigarettes:
E-Cigarettes: A Nearly $2bn Industry, A Regulatory Wild West
http://www.npr.org/2013/10/21/239269426/e-cigarettes-a-nearly-2bn-industry-a-regulatory-wild-west
I'd say they covered both sides pretty well.
Another NPR story mentioning e-cigs:
Surgeon General Adds New Risks To Long List Of Smoking's Harms
Hints That Electronic Cigarettes Could Help
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/201...eral-report-breaks-new-ground-on-e-cigarettes
Study Finds Fox News Viewers Least Informed Of All Viewers
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/23/fox-news-less-informed-new-study_n_1538914.html
For the record, I don't have cable or broadcast and I listen to NPR.
An example of an NPR piece on e-cigarettes:
E-Cigarettes: A Nearly $2bn Industry, A Regulatory Wild West
http://www.npr.org/2013/10/21/239269426/e-cigarettes-a-nearly-2bn-industry-a-regulatory-wild-west
I'd say they covered both sides pretty well.
Another NPR story mentioning e-cigs:
Surgeon General Adds New Risks To Long List Of Smoking's Harms
Hints That Electronic Cigarettes Could Help
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/201...eral-report-breaks-new-ground-on-e-cigarettes
Last edited:
I'm shocked that the Huffington Post would have an article disparaging Fox News.
That's almost as unlikely as my PV falling down toward the floor if I knock it off my desk.
Let's see what they have to say about vaping...
Hmmm... Just some random headlines:
9 Terribly Disturbing Things About Electronic Cigarettes
Electronic Cigarettes -- Let's Think Before We Inhale | Jeffrey B. Lane
E-Cigarettes Are Dangerously Unregulated (VIDEO)
E-Cigarettes Gain Steam, But Health Experts Wary It Could Serve As 'Gateway' To Tobacco Smoking
Last edited:
I'm shocked that the Huffington Post would have an article disparaging Fox News.
That's almost as unlikely as my PV falling down toward the floor if I knock it off my desk.
There were lots of other outlets that covered the story, that just happened to be at the top of the search results and had the actual study embedded in it, so I used it.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
