I wasn't sure exactly where to post this, so, mods move as required.
The company I work for (a large hotel/casino complex with about 1200 employees) recently decided to ban vaping under the "Smoke-Free Workplace" policy. The HR rep authoring the memo made the mistake of asking for comments...my reply follows:
(Redacted)
As an employee who read your memo regarding e-cigarettes being covered under the Tobacco-Free Workplace policy, I feel that some comments and clarifications need to be made. I understand that the health and well-being of employees and customers are of prime importance, and we all appreciate management's efforts to ensure that the workplace and public areas are free from harmful influences; however, it seems that knee-jerk reactions to misunderstood science and misinterpreted appearance have taken over logical and rational reasoning regarding this activity, not only here, but in many other venues as well.
I am currently 59 years of age. I was a heavy smoker since my teen years. E-cigarettes (as they are improperly labeled the accepted scientific term is vaporizers) have essentially saved my life. Until almost 2 years ago, I smoked over 2 packs of tobacco cigarettes a day. Over my lifetime, I have attempted to quit the habit countless times, with every technique available, but to no avail. vaping, as it is now known, has been the only technique that has afforded me the freedom from cigarettes. Period.
I would like to attempt to clarify a few of the misunderstandings regarding the vaping science as it compares to cigarette smoking, since they have nothing in common:
*E-cigarette or Electronic cigarette are misnomers. Although there is some electronic control circuitry involved, vaporizers have absolutely nothing in common with tobacco cigarettes because there is NO tobacco involved. NO fire, NO flame, NO smoke, first- or second-hand. The electronics are present to control a battery-operated heating coil, which vaporizes the liquid to create a steam-like vapor. Nothing burns or smokes in the process. Let me emphasize this: THERE IS NO TOBACCO OR TOBACCO SMOKE INVOLVED.
*The chemical composition of vaping liquid consists of three main ingredients: propylene glycol, an FDA Generally recognized as safe (GRAS) food additive and a solvent for oral, inhalable, and injectable medications; vegetable glycerine, another FDA GRAS food additive found in everything from cookies to toothpaste; and a small amount of nicotine. Nicotine, being the addictive component in tobacco smoke, is necessary to the formulation to replace the addictive qualities of tobacco, and can be accurately decreased as a percentage of the liquid to create a tapering-off program. The vaporizer is merely an alternative method of nicotine delivery, no different than nicotine gum, lozenges, or patches, all of which are condoned and accepted as smoking-cessation aids. Nicotine, in small quantities, has been found to be relatively harmless, and is available in the aforementioned forms over-the-counter. The other 4,000 or so chemicals and compounds in tobacco smoke, some of which have been proven carcinogenic, are where the health hazards lie in both first- and second-hand smoke, and NONE of these harmful compounds are present in the vapor created.
*Vaping is the only smoking-cessation aid that actually simulates the physical act of smoking, which, by itself, reduces the urge to light a real cigarette. Unfortunately, the sight of someone using a vaping device tends to trigger a negative response from the misinformed non-smoker it makes them feel uncomfortable although they have no concept of the science involved. It looks like someone is smoking, when, in actuality, they are not. The aversion to cigarette smoking takes over rational thought, and vaping is automatically demonized regardless of the reality.
*Vaping is NOT a smoke-break type of activity. One does not puff on a vaporizer for a 15-minute break and walk away, as does a smoker using tobacco cigarettes. Normal vaping consists of just a few puffs here and there throughout the day rather than a fast and furious cigarette fix every couple of hours. Cigarettes are finite once a person lights up, the cigarette has to be either entirely consumed or extinguished. Vaporizers don't have that limitation one can use them as much or as little as necessary during the day with no constraints. The controlled nicotine doses in small amounts over a long period of time negate the need for a tobacco fix (cigarette break), again, like nicotine patches or gum. Restricting vaping to a smoking area completely negates the purpose of vaping in the first place, and exposes the vaporizer user to temptation to use tobacco just by being in proximity to it.
*Vaporizers, unlike burning tobacco products, create no noxious fumes. To the contrary, the small amounts of flavoring concentrates added to vaping liquid are, for the most part, very pleasant in nature. One's clothing and atmosphere do not smell like tobacco smoke from being in proximity to a vaper. I have been asked to blow some vapor the way of others who enjoyed the lingering olfactory stimulus of the flavorings.
To arbitrarily include vaporizers in a smoke-free policy is a total contradiction, and is a backwards step towards providing a healthy workplace. One would assume that the benefits of a safe alternative to tobacco smoke would be welcomed and championed in the workplace, rather than be relegated to the same status as tobacco usage and condemned out of ignorance of the facts. I can understand the concept of prohibiting vaping in public areas (mainly because of the aforementioned misconceptions), but I fail to understand the prohibition of this harmless activity 'back of the house'.
When I made the decision to give up tobacco cigarettes for vaping, I did a large amount of research on the science. I would hope that the decision makers within our organization would be willing to do the same, and I would be eager to offer any assistance necessary.
Thank you for your attention.
Respectfully submitted,
(Redacted)
Am I missing anything??? Comments welcome.
Cheers...
Dave
The company I work for (a large hotel/casino complex with about 1200 employees) recently decided to ban vaping under the "Smoke-Free Workplace" policy. The HR rep authoring the memo made the mistake of asking for comments...my reply follows:
(Redacted)
As an employee who read your memo regarding e-cigarettes being covered under the Tobacco-Free Workplace policy, I feel that some comments and clarifications need to be made. I understand that the health and well-being of employees and customers are of prime importance, and we all appreciate management's efforts to ensure that the workplace and public areas are free from harmful influences; however, it seems that knee-jerk reactions to misunderstood science and misinterpreted appearance have taken over logical and rational reasoning regarding this activity, not only here, but in many other venues as well.
I am currently 59 years of age. I was a heavy smoker since my teen years. E-cigarettes (as they are improperly labeled the accepted scientific term is vaporizers) have essentially saved my life. Until almost 2 years ago, I smoked over 2 packs of tobacco cigarettes a day. Over my lifetime, I have attempted to quit the habit countless times, with every technique available, but to no avail. vaping, as it is now known, has been the only technique that has afforded me the freedom from cigarettes. Period.
I would like to attempt to clarify a few of the misunderstandings regarding the vaping science as it compares to cigarette smoking, since they have nothing in common:
*E-cigarette or Electronic cigarette are misnomers. Although there is some electronic control circuitry involved, vaporizers have absolutely nothing in common with tobacco cigarettes because there is NO tobacco involved. NO fire, NO flame, NO smoke, first- or second-hand. The electronics are present to control a battery-operated heating coil, which vaporizes the liquid to create a steam-like vapor. Nothing burns or smokes in the process. Let me emphasize this: THERE IS NO TOBACCO OR TOBACCO SMOKE INVOLVED.
*The chemical composition of vaping liquid consists of three main ingredients: propylene glycol, an FDA Generally recognized as safe (GRAS) food additive and a solvent for oral, inhalable, and injectable medications; vegetable glycerine, another FDA GRAS food additive found in everything from cookies to toothpaste; and a small amount of nicotine. Nicotine, being the addictive component in tobacco smoke, is necessary to the formulation to replace the addictive qualities of tobacco, and can be accurately decreased as a percentage of the liquid to create a tapering-off program. The vaporizer is merely an alternative method of nicotine delivery, no different than nicotine gum, lozenges, or patches, all of which are condoned and accepted as smoking-cessation aids. Nicotine, in small quantities, has been found to be relatively harmless, and is available in the aforementioned forms over-the-counter. The other 4,000 or so chemicals and compounds in tobacco smoke, some of which have been proven carcinogenic, are where the health hazards lie in both first- and second-hand smoke, and NONE of these harmful compounds are present in the vapor created.
*Vaping is the only smoking-cessation aid that actually simulates the physical act of smoking, which, by itself, reduces the urge to light a real cigarette. Unfortunately, the sight of someone using a vaping device tends to trigger a negative response from the misinformed non-smoker it makes them feel uncomfortable although they have no concept of the science involved. It looks like someone is smoking, when, in actuality, they are not. The aversion to cigarette smoking takes over rational thought, and vaping is automatically demonized regardless of the reality.
*Vaping is NOT a smoke-break type of activity. One does not puff on a vaporizer for a 15-minute break and walk away, as does a smoker using tobacco cigarettes. Normal vaping consists of just a few puffs here and there throughout the day rather than a fast and furious cigarette fix every couple of hours. Cigarettes are finite once a person lights up, the cigarette has to be either entirely consumed or extinguished. Vaporizers don't have that limitation one can use them as much or as little as necessary during the day with no constraints. The controlled nicotine doses in small amounts over a long period of time negate the need for a tobacco fix (cigarette break), again, like nicotine patches or gum. Restricting vaping to a smoking area completely negates the purpose of vaping in the first place, and exposes the vaporizer user to temptation to use tobacco just by being in proximity to it.
*Vaporizers, unlike burning tobacco products, create no noxious fumes. To the contrary, the small amounts of flavoring concentrates added to vaping liquid are, for the most part, very pleasant in nature. One's clothing and atmosphere do not smell like tobacco smoke from being in proximity to a vaper. I have been asked to blow some vapor the way of others who enjoyed the lingering olfactory stimulus of the flavorings.
To arbitrarily include vaporizers in a smoke-free policy is a total contradiction, and is a backwards step towards providing a healthy workplace. One would assume that the benefits of a safe alternative to tobacco smoke would be welcomed and championed in the workplace, rather than be relegated to the same status as tobacco usage and condemned out of ignorance of the facts. I can understand the concept of prohibiting vaping in public areas (mainly because of the aforementioned misconceptions), but I fail to understand the prohibition of this harmless activity 'back of the house'.
When I made the decision to give up tobacco cigarettes for vaping, I did a large amount of research on the science. I would hope that the decision makers within our organization would be willing to do the same, and I would be eager to offer any assistance necessary.
Thank you for your attention.
Respectfully submitted,
(Redacted)
Am I missing anything??? Comments welcome.
Cheers...
Dave
