Report from Speaker's office on Va. E cig ban

[LaceyUnderall]

Story -

I have everything that was presented to Marion County City Council.

If you are interested, you are more than welcome to PM me your email and I will forward on.

 

[Storyspinr]

I spoke to Gary Hagy, the Health Department's "point man" on the smoking ban and here is what I was told:

Their attorneys looked at the situation and decided, since the law says "any cigarette" and the e cig websites all refer to the device as a "cigarette", it falls under the ban. He also quoted Webster's dictionary as defining "smoke" as emitting a "smoke or vapor" (which is scientifically incorrect). No matter how much I tried, I could not convince him the e cig was NOT technically a cigarette, and the vapor was not smoke.

However, he is willing to reconsider and asked me to send him all the links I have to various websites (tobacco Harm Reduction, Health New Zealand, Dr. Siegel's blog, etc.). It will be after the first of the year before he will be able to devote extensive time to it, but has promised he will look at it and discuss it with the others involved in making the decision.

A word of warning: he has gotten some nasty emails attacking him personally (I think on the whole ban, not just e cigs) and it is, in his words, "destroying their credibility". If you send him an email, please try to present your arguments calmly without anger. He is more likely to be receptive.

Also, he said one employee there uses an e cig and brought it in Friday for him to see (he's never actually seen one), but he was off that day. She is supposed to bring it in again for him to see how they work.

I will be putting together an email with all the links and sending it to him. The problem is clearly twofold: some dictionaries include vapor with "smoke" (erroneously), making it hard to convince their attorneys vapor is NOT smoke; and (2) the ban wording says ANY cigarette, so they have interpreted that as including anything the "looks like a cigarette, feels like a cigarette and is called a cigarette", regardless of whether it actually IS a cigarette (as defined by the government: tobacco rolled in paper or other nontobacco substance).

I pointed out the ban was not of cigarettes, but of secondhand smoke. E cigs do not produce secondhand smoke. That did give him a moment's pause.

It sounds like it will be a battle, but we ended the conversation on a friendly note, so there is some hope.

 

[Mac]

I spoke to Gary Hagy, the Health Department's "point man" on the smoking ban and here is what I was told:

Their attorneys looked at the situation and decided, since the law says "any cigarette" and the e cig websites all refer to the device as a "cigarette", it falls under the ban. He also quoted Webster's dictionary as defining "smoke" as emitting a "smoke or vapor" (which is scientifically incorrect). No matter how much I tried, I could not convince him the e cig was NOT technically a cigarette, and the vapor was not smoke.

However, he is willing to reconsider and asked me to send him all the links I have to various websites (Tobacco Harm Reduction, Health New Zealand, Dr. Siegel's blog, etc.). It will be after the first of the year before he will be able to devote extensive time to it, but has promised he will look at it and discuss it with the others involved in making the decision.

A word of warning: he has gotten some nasty emails attacking him personally (I think on the whole ban, not just e cigs) and it is, in his words, "destroying their credibility". If you send him an email, please try to present your arguments calmly without anger. He is more likely to be receptive.

Also, he said one employee there uses an e cig and brought it in Friday for him to see (he's never actually seen one), but he was off that day. She is supposed to bring it in again for him to see how they work.

I will be putting together an email with all the links and sending it to him. The problem is clearly twofold: some dictionaries include vapor with "smoke" (erroneously), making it hard to convince their attorneys vapor is NOT smoke; and (2) the ban wording says ANY cigarette, so they have interpreted that as including anything the "looks like a cigarette, feels like a cigarette and is called a cigarette", regardless of whether it actually IS a cigarette (as defined by the government: tobacco rolled in paper or other nontobacco substance).

I pointed out the ban was not of cigarettes, but of secondhand smoke. E cigs do not produce secondhand smoke. That did give him a moment's pause.

It sounds like it will be a battle, but we ended the conversation on a friendly note, so there is some hope.

I applaud your efforts! Keep up the good work and keep us posted. If I get cited while working at the mall I will let you guys know.

 

[kristin]

Unfortunately, even though they should be looking at the definition of "smoke" and not "cigarette, as the ban applies not just to cigarettes, Merriam-Webster also defines "smoke" as "fume or vapor often resulting from the action of heat on moisture"

Maybe we should start referring to the vapor as "fine mist"!!! (I didn't see that in the definition.)

People can send a copy of this article, too: Legislators Jump on Electronic Cigarette "Ban" Wagon - Associated Content - associatedcontent.com

Tell him to read the comments, too!!

 

[Storyspinr]

One of the things he kept repeating was that Webster's Dictionary described "smoke" as something including "liquid that was heated". I just checked Webster's on line and their definition of smoke includes: "A cloud of particles suspended in gas", and "A hot vapor containing fine particles of carbon being produced by COMBUSTION" (my emphasis). Combustion means burning.... Yes, it uses the word "vapor", but only conjunction with burning and containing carbon, which e cig vapor does not. I then checked their definition of gas, which, as it would apply to smoking in my opinion, is as follows: A COMBUSTIBLE gas or gaseous mixture for fuel or lighting. Finally, I checked the Webster definition of a cigarette: a slender roll of cut tobacco enclosed in paper and meant to be smoked. This is precisely the same definition used by the U.S. Government at smokefree.gov.

If they're going to use Webster's, so we can, lol.

 

[kristin]

One of the things he kept repeating was that Webster's Dictionary described "smoke" as something including "liquid that was heated". I just checked Webster's on line and their definition of smoke includes: "A cloud of particles suspended in gas", and "A hot vapor containing fine particles of carbon being produced by COMBUSTION" (my emphasis). Combustion means burning.... Yes, it uses the word "vapor", but only conjunction with burning and containing carbon, which e cig vapor does not. I then checked their definition of gas, which, as it would apply to smoking in my opinion, is as follows: A COMBUSTIBLE gas or gaseous mixture for fuel or lighting. Finally, I checked the Webster definition of a cigarette: a slender roll of cut tobacco enclosed in paper and meant to be smoked. This is precisely the same definition used by the U.S. Government at smokefree.gov.

If they're going to use Webster's, so we can, lol.

Merriam-Webster also defines "smoke" as "fume or vapor often resulting from the action of heat on moisture"
#3: smoke - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

Unfortunately, that describes e-cigs to a "T."

 

[uba egar320]

It never fails.I have done everything to quit analogs.Almost as soon as I started vaping I quit and have been analog free for a month.It is no surprise to me the gov will want to get rid of these things.Glad we have people like you on our side.I just don't understand how ANYTHING could be worse for you than a real cig.Thanks for fighting the good fight.

 

[Storyspinr]

Kristen, that is precisely what he said. However, the Webster's on line has no such defintion. I called that definition into question because, scientifically, smoke requires combustion or burning. Heating a liquid creates vapor, not smoke, which has a totally different chemical composition.

I also pointed out to him the ban exists due to smoke, not cigarettes. There is no ban on cigarettes - only the lighting and smoking of them in restaurants.

 

[kristin]

Kristen, that is precisely what he said. However, the Webster's on line has no such defintion.
I also pointed out to him the ban exists due to smoke, not cigarettes.

Yes it does - see my link above.

 

[Janetda]

You know, when it comes down to it, the fact is all of our doctors (I know mine anyway) say we stopped smoking. I would think that would be the final word on what is or isn't "smoking". Is there something we can do to draw attention to that?

 

[Storyspinr]

Kristen, that is weird. I did a Google search for Webster's and found a page completely different from the one you linked to; the one I found made no mention of fumes or vapor from heating liquid. I have no idea where they came up with that, but every other definition of "smoke" I have found never includes that - including from researchers and scientists.

 

[kristin]

As far as I can tell, the site I was using is the official Merriam-Webster site.

 

[kristin]

You probably used this site:
Webster's Online Dictionary with Multilingual Thesaurus Translation

Which is not a published dictionary and not affiliated with the official Merriam-Webster dictionary.

But, if they are relying on the official Merriam-Webster definition, then other dictionary definitions won't matter to them, I guess.

 

[Storyspinr]

Kirsten, it gets even more interesting. Since "heating" rather than burning does not produce smoke, I tried to track down where they got that definition. I learned there is such a thing as "liquid smoke", which is heated; it's used in food processing, including for bacon and hot dogs. Apparently, wood chips are burned and the smoke somehow extracted, collected, and eventually transformed into liquid smoke. I'm wondering if that's where they got that part of their definition. I checked their website for a way to contact them, but no luck so far.

Also, when checking their definition of "vapor", one states "Diffused matter (as smoke or fog) suspended floating in the air and impairing transparency". They are once again using "smoke" and "vapor" as one and the same when as I understand it, scientifically, they are not.

I'm learning more about smoke than I ever wanted to know....

Any scientists out there??????

 

[Storyspinr]

Oops, sorry - been staring at the computer too long. I know your name is Kristin....not Kirsten.

 

[RatRacer]

I know liquid smoke is collected by harvesting the condensation from burning the wood type of choice. A cone shaped hat on top of chimney allows the condensation to build up, then run down to drip into a collection reservoir.

 

[kristin]

Well, I found an online science dictionary. Maybe that holds more weight than an "English" definition?

Smoke: "Particles suspended in air after incomplete combustion."

Combustion: "1. Burning, or rapid oxidation, accompanied by release of energy in the form of heat and light. 2. Refers to controlled burning of waste, in which heat chemically alters organic compounds, converting into stable inorganics such as carbon dioxide and water."

Vaporization: "The conversion of a liquid to a gas."


Science Dictionary - Glossary of Scientific Definitions

 

[Storyspinr]

RatRacer, if ever there is proof you can find answers to anything on the internet, you're it. That's very interesting.

Kristin, I'll print out that definition, too. I would think a science dictionary has to carry more weight. Webster's bases theirs on "common use".

However, not being shy, I asked them. Yes, that's right. I emailed Websters and asked for clarification on that definition. We'll see if I get a response.

 

[kristin]

The American Heritage Science Dictionary defines "smoke" as:
"A mixture of carbon dioxide, water vapor and other gases, usually containing particles of soot or other solids, produced by the burning of carbon-containing materials such as wood and coal."
The American heritage science dictionary - Google Books

Vapor: "1. The gaseous state of a substance that is normally liquid or solid at room temperature, such as water that has evaporated into the air. 2. A faintly visible suspension of fine particles of matter in the air as mist, fumes or smoke. 3. A mixture of fine droplets of a substa, refer to the gaseous state of a substancence and air, as the fuel mixture of an internal-combustion engine."

"The words "vapor" and "steam" usually call to mind a fine mist, such as that in the jet of water droplets near the spout of a boiling teakettle or in a bathroom after a shower. Vapor and steam, however, refer to the gaseous state of a substance. The fumes that arise when volitile substances such as alcohol and gasoline evaporate, for example, are vapors. The visible stream of water droplets rushing out of a teakettle spout is not steam. As the gaseous state of water heated past it's boiling point, steam is invisible....the steam loses its heat to the surrounding air, then falls below the boiling point and condenses in the air as water droplets."

Mist: "A mass of fine droplets of water in the atmosphere near or in contact with the Earth. Mist reduces visibility to not less than 1 km (0.62 mi)."

So, what is coming out of e-cigs is not technically smoke, vapor, mist nor steam. According to the Science Dictionary, it's FOG:

"An opaque or semiopaque condensation of a substance floating in a region or forming on a surface."

 

[Storyspinr]

I found several similar definitions in other places. I guess I need to collect all the various definitions from reliable sources and include them in what I send him. They took just the definition from Webster's - I have no idea if they will be receptive to the fact virtually every other definition of smoke requires combustion.