My town is trying to add Ecigs to it's smoking ordanance, College Station Tx

[arilen]

If You Have any useful Information as to why Ecigs shouldn't be added to the smoking ordinance please go here and post a comment

Brick: Why I support adding e-cigarettes to College Station’s tobacco ordinance | City of College Station

 

[arilen]

I'm not saying that it's okay to vape every where, but If nothing positive is said about Ecigs I'm sure that tons of negative or false comments will be made.

 

[amurphy]

thanks for sharing. i'm hoping to get into a&m this upcoming semester, so this is helpful ahah.

 

[eratikmind]

I have always vaped, as I had smoked with regard to where and when.

Honestly, I do not think that the non-smoking public will ever accept vaping in public places where smoking is banned. I really have no issues with that.

I am more concerned with future regulation creating a potential lack of access to vaping supplies.

 

[bluecat]

Instead of government regulation it should be open to the establishment to decide. Then let the consumers decide if they wish to patronize or not. Government buildings can do what they want. That is how I respond/write to my officials.

Let the majority of people decide with their pocketbooks instead of a bunch of bureaucrats that 80% of the population had no idea that they voted them in. I call them passively elected officials.

I was at my daughters high school football game Friday night. She is in the marching band. Anyway one of the elected officials was there handing out some thing with her name on it. One of her workers came up and wanted to give me one. I said I would not take one because she declined to answer one of my emails. Therefore, I do not support her and she did not get my vote. Needless to say he was not expecting that.

 

[eratikmind]

Unfortunately, smoking regulations and bans in public places has set a precedent for vaping, which I do not expect to change anytime in the near future.

Unlike my CCW permit, if an establishment does not permit it, I have the option of going somewhere that allows it and there are many.

 

[klynnn]

The more things they try to control the less money I spend in their establishments. Win win for me.

 

[KODIAK (TM)]

This is why I plan to support the proposed ordinance amendment to add e-cigarettes and vapor devices to the existing ordinance that limits smoking in designated public areas. It is a reasonable way to offer a minimum amount of regulation for the greater good of all.

Translation: I can't think for myself and don't know what the hell to do so I'm going to fall in line with the rest of the "banners" and cover my azz

 

[Alien Traveler]

I am sorry, but in your posted response you stated: “But people need to understand that It not smoking and that the vapor has little to nicotine in it because all of it is absorbed by the user when inhaled”, and this is not true. Your statement can be easily attacked, marked as a “vaper’s lie” and serve as an example of vaper’s sleazy tactic. Be very careful when posting on such sites.

 

[DrMA]

Feel free to modify this letter and send it to your city council and mayor to let them know they're actions are ill advised and contrary to public health:

http://vapefight.com/public-health-directors-lie-to-the-fda-about-vaping-part-2-2/

 

[Alien Traveler]

Feel free to modify this letter and send it to your city council and mayor to let them know they're actions are ill advised and contrary to public health:

http://vapefight.com/public-health-directors-lie-to-the-fda-about-vaping-part-2-2/

Exteremely poor letter.
Just one sentence (close to the beginning):
“The information in the letter you submitted to FDA is, in its entirety, false, being backed up by demonstrated junk science [1] and unsubstantiated propaganda [2]”
With two very first references to BLOGSPOT (O, my…)!!!
If I received such a letter I’d think it is just one more piece from some dumb conspiracy-theory adept and will never read it any further. It will go immediately into trash.
Can somebody write a really good letter?

 

[monkey39]

While I do not support equating smoking and vaping, I'm also not a "vape anywhere" supporter. Health concerns (pro/con) aside, vaping certain flavors can leave a lingering smell that all might not enjoy, particularly enclosed spaces. Sometimes it's a mental thing, also - I don't enjoy thinking about breathing someone else's exhale. I'm also adamantly against people who wear too much perfume/cologne! Turns my stomach.

 

[KiMB00P]

My college campus is tobacco free with smoking huts set up around campus away from general walking areas. They recently put signs up on all doors saying vaping is not allowed indoors, but it doesn't say you have to go to the smoking huts either.

 

[DrMA]

Exteremely poor letter.
Just one sentence (close to the beginning):
“The information in the letter you submitted to FDA is, in its entirety, false, being backed up by demonstrated junk science [1] and unsubstantiated propaganda [2]”
With two very first references to BLOGSPOT (O, my…)!!!
If I received such a letter I’d think it is just one more piece from some dumb conspiracy-theory adept and will never read it any further. It will go immediately into trash.
Can somebody write a really good letter?

Thanks for your valuable and constructive contribution. If only all vapers were like you, we wouldn't have any of these problems.

Those who are actually informed about THR advocacy already know that Dr. Siegel's blog is a well-established and respected resource.

For those who would like to be informed, here's a brief bio for Michael Siegel:
Dr. Siegel is a Professor in the Department of Community Health Sciences, Boston University School of Public Health. He has 25 years of experience in the field of tobacco control. He previously spent two years working at the Office on Smoking and Health at CDC, where he conducted research on secondhand smoke and cigarette advertising. He has published nearly 70 papers related to tobacco. He testified in the landmark Engle lawsuit against the tobacco companies, which resulted in an unprecedented $145 billion verdict against the industry. He teaches social and behavioral sciences, mass communication and public health, and public health advocacy in the Masters of Public Health program. More here: http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/

 

[arilen]

I am sorry, but in your posted response you stated: “But people need to understand that It not smoking and that the vapor has little to nicotine in it because all of it is absorbed by the user when inhaled”, and this is not true. Your statement can be easily attacked, marked as a “vaper’s lie” and serve as an example of vaper’s sleazy tactic. Be very careful when posting on such sites.

My bad, I guess I was misinformed, I thought I had read that very little nic was exhaled in the vapor, Maybe I should have said my vapor since I am at 3mg and zero nic most of the time and that IS little to none

 

[DrMA]

My bad, I guess I was misinformed, I thought I had read that very little nic was exhaled in the vapor, Maybe I should have said my vapor since I and at 3mg and zero nic most of the time and that IS little to none

Don't be sorry. Your statement is entirely accurate and consistent with all available scientific evidence. [unlike those posted by Alien Traveler]

Here are a few:
Secondhand Exposure to Vapors From Electronic Cigarettes
BMC Public Health | Abstract | Peering through the mist: systematic review of what the chemistry of contaminants in electronic cigarettes tells us about health risks
Electronic cigarettes: review of use, content, safety, effects on smokers and potential for harm and benefit - Hajek - 2014 - Addiction - Wiley Online Library

Much more here:
Clinical Research: Electronic Cigarettes
Lab Reports: ecigarettes

A good summary here:
http://www.ecigarette-research.com/web/index.php/research/2014/171-fda

 

[sonicdsl]

Moved to Legislation News from General Vaping Discussion

 

[SmokinRabbit]

I don't exactly understand the people who don't think it's worth at least a discussion that vaping and smoking shouldn't be treated the same when it comes to no-smoking/no-vaping areas.

First off, some of the smoking bans were completely unreasonable. For example, NY State Parks. That ban was actually overturned because people fought it... however, a lot of people don't even know about it. Personally, outdoors, where there aren't huge crowds of people congregating (to annoy or "harm"), I should be able to vape happily. Like a state park. Or a hospital parking lot. It's just unreasonable to ban vaping (or even smoking) in these types of outdoor locations.

It's at LEAST worth talking about, no?

Sure, I'll give it to you that restaurants, movie theaters and other indoor facilities where lots of people frequent, I'll agree that no-vaping should follow similar no-smoking laws. But lets not have it turn into some of the unreasonable no-smoking laws that have spread like wildfire across the US.

 

[BuGlen]

I don't exactly understand the people who don't think it's worth at least a discussion that vaping and smoking shouldn't be treated the same when it comes to no-smoking/no-vaping areas.

First off, some of the smoking bans were completely unreasonable. For example, NY State Parks. That ban was actually overturned because people fought it... however, a lot of people don't even know about it. Personally, outdoors, where there aren't huge crowds of people congregating (to annoy or "harm"), I should be able to vape happily. Like a state park. Or a hospital parking lot. It's just unreasonable to ban vaping (or even smoking) in these types of outdoor locations.

It's at LEAST worth talking about, no?

Sure, I'll give it to you that restaurants, movie theaters and other indoor facilities where lots of people frequent, I'll agree that no-vaping should follow similar no-smoking laws. But lets not have it turn into some of the unreasonable no-smoking laws that have spread like wildfire across the US.

I agree with you about everything but following indoor smoking laws. The indoor smoking laws were created to protect the workers (and patrons) of establishments from breathing in second-hand smoke, which has been reported to cause health issues. (we can discuss the validity of those studies as well, if you like). However, all the research published regarding vapor products reveals that there are no such concerns as there are with combustible tobacco products. Therefore, it should be up to the business owner as to whether or not they want to allow or restrict use of vapor products in their establishment. Many will choose to ban it's use, for the comfort of their clientele, while others (bars and other adult-only establishments) may allow it.

In any case, it's an over-reach for governments to restrict their use, based on the evidence that's been gathered to date showing no harm to bystanders.

 

[Alien Traveler]

Don't be sorry. Your statement is entirely accurate and consistent with all available scientific evidence. [unlike those posted by Alien Traveler]

Here are a few:
Secondhand Exposure to Vapors From Electronic Cigarettes

Your opinion could be much more valuable if you have read what it written under the links you supplied.
The very first link says:
“Results: The study showed that e-cigarettes are a source of secondhand exposure to nicotine but not to combustion toxicants.”
So, there is secondhand exposure to nicotine. Period.
Please, do not misinform other forum members.