To all my ecf brothers and sisters.....please read.

[throatkick]

Bans are usually instituted by opinion. Science often doesn't come into the picture until much later. You also have to realize that the property rights and pretzel throwers also have an effect- sometimes good and sometimes bad...

Wrote a message addressing all that about 20 pages back.

Bans can also be used to sway opinion to make it easier for additional bans.

Someone could easily become a supplier and offer tainted juice only to have it be picked up the a major news outlet within a week. Game over. This sways opinion. Most will never bother to check the history of this hypothetical supplier. It's the headline that matters. My point is that freedoms can be and have been curtailed by this type of activities. While the findings of studies can be "fudged" it is harder to conceal the truth. More people are closely watching etc......

Again, all of this was thoroughly addressed throughout the thread.

 

[Colonel]

I served my country, swore to support and defend the Constitution of the U.S. Though I have been discharged from part of that oath, the part concerning supporting and defending the Constitution is a lifetime commitment. The Constitution is clear concerning what/how our Government can govern. If we allow the Government to establish laws/controls, over our lives, such as banning VP, because it may "offend" some people, then we are giving up rights. There is something called due process. It has not been proven that PVs are a public health hazard, the interest of the Government is not at stake (other than loss of revenue since they aren't heavily taxed), the only thing at loss here is our liberty.

Where did I state "Big bad Government"? You are making an assumption my friend......

We appreciate your service. And relish the rights we have. In this case, we are talking about private establishment bans. Which are, by right, not governed. It's the rights you protect that make it possible for private business to ban the use of PV in their buildings.

The government has not banned vape based on 'offending' other people.

Besides. That's not the topic.

 

[oldsoldier]

Hence the term "tried in the court of public opinion". Whether we like it or not it is a fact, public opinion is a tool wielded by by sides in almost any legal battle. Public opinion is even a part of how the supreme court chooses which cases it will hear. Though the supreme court won't admit it, it is very clear that they will hear cases based on the current public concerns as well as their own feelings of what is "worthy".

In my opinion, it is pretty naive of folks to think that science alone will win the battle. Positive PR and using the system legally will profit the "cause" more in the long run. Our liberties are constantly under attack, not necessarily by the boogieman or evil government, but by shortsightedness of local officials and personal agendas that blind folks to the bigger picture.

Just my YMMV

 

[Levitas]

Interesting. I have read several posts stating that until there have been long-term (about 20 year) studies that show whether vaping around others is 100% safe or not 100% safe, we should not vape around others.

Then I read that if an establishment or place of work says it's OK to vape inside - well that's great - vape away. Since that establishment could not have had long-term studies on vaping, how does their decision/policy, all of a sudden, make it OK? - Definite conflict in positions.

Maybe the establishment giving the OK to vape inside read the studies that already exist (provided by one of us), combined with reasoned common sense, and concluded it was safe, as the majority of us believe. I believe in a nut-shell that is what many of us have been advocating for and stating is what we need to work towards.

Alright, let me clarify what you've read, because it doesn't seem like you're really trying to understand my position but rather dismiss it.

I said I will not vape around others until uncircumstantial, 100% proof on how safe it is or isn't. And this applied to public indoor establishments. I said nothing about you, I said go ahead and do what you please. I also said, that if the establishment allows vaping, go for it, I never said to stop. So what if I feel that vaping around others that do not wish to be around it is, in my opinion, rude. Why do you even care?

I need to edit this in as well, because this seems to be a favorite of yours. Not 100% safe or 100% unsafe, but know 100% for sure, how safe it is, or isn't. Can you understand the difference?

No conflict in positions what-so-ever. You're picking out bits and pieces of my posts to give your attempt to do, whatever it is you're doing, (certainly not contributing to the subject, you're merely trying to deface my posts and opinions... great job, once again) some level of validity.

I don't even know why I am repeating myself over and over again... I'll just be called out on that as well. Some will call it beating a dead horse, others will call it unnecassary sparring... but you for some reason don't seem to get it, or you're fishing for me to exchange some sort of pitiful argument with you, on my own opinions. Why not just leave my posts alone? Can you not carry on the conversation without trying to debunk every single word that I, or anyone else for the matter being, types? Anyone can read what I've typed, they don't need you to attempt to recite my own words.

Move on man, seriously, just move on.

 

[oldsoldier]

The only reason that this thread has not been moved to the outside is it is e-cig related. But lets take a moment to reflect on the rules. This thread has run a very erratic course, but the Mods have allowed it to continue and we will allow it to continue as long as folks can be civil.

 

[Colonel]

Hence the term "tried in the court of public opinion". Whether we like it or not it is a fact, public opinion is a tool wielded by by sides in almost any legal battle. Public opinion is even a part of how the supreme court chooses which cases it will hear. Though the supreme court won't admit it, it is very clear that they will hear cases based on the current public concerns as well as their own feelings of what is "worthy".

In my opinion, it is pretty naive of folks to think that science alone will win the battle. Positive PR and using the system legally will profit the "cause" more in the long run. Our liberties are constantly under attack, not necessarily by the boogieman or evil government, but by shortsightedness of local officials and personal agendas that blind folks to the bigger picture.

Just my YMMV

Well said.

 

[ricks]

I say close it down, its been going on for way too long and we stand divided and it will not change a thing with both sides.

 

[Yankees2011]

Do we really know for certain that what we exhale is not harmful? I don't think any of us even knows what the heck is in this juice that we are getting for purposes of refills or what we are getting from the pre-filled ones. Anyone see a detailed ingredient list? No, corporate secrets, etc.

None of the companies we buy from existed yesterday, no idea what their offices or labs or store rooms or kitchens look like. We have no idea who is filling these things. What conditions they are working under.

We are all rolling the dice and in many ways this is a miracle that one can go from addicted to analogs to using this is great, but lets not pretend this is safe for us or those around us. We simply do not know.

Treat vaping like smoking, do it away from others and where it is allowed, be grateful you can have a drink and "smoke" at some places.

 

[WAC_Vet]

We appreciate your service. And relish the rights we have. In this case, we are talking about private establishment bans. Which are, by right, not governed. It's the rights you protect that make it possible for private business to ban the use of PV in their buildings.

The government has not banned vape based on 'offending' other people.

Besides. That's not the topic.

First off, this thread has covered many topics, and the response that you quoted was in reference to the post concerning people being "offended by the act of vaping"! Second, HAD you read post #497, you would know that I feel privately owned businesses should not be required by law to be smoke-free, vape-free, as they are PRIVATELY owned. Now, if a privately owned business is renting/leasing the property, then they would have to abide by any rules enacted by the owner of the property. Starbucks, from my understanding, would be considered privately owned. Third, I stated the possibility of explaining the possible financial benefits to them, the studies that have been conducted so far, that there would be a chance of a change of policy. It was later posted that someone called Starbucks Corporate Office and was informed that there was no such vaping ban in Starbucks.

The Federal Government has not banned vaping at all, as far as I know. I could understand banning non-stealth vaping on airplanes, due to the risk of passengers thinking someone was a terrorist! Now, City, County, State.....that's a different story. It is well known that the non-smoking zealots, want any and all forms of tobacco use/nicotine use, to be banned, and the only reason I can think of is, because it "offends" them. Why else would they want to totally outlaw the use of any such product? Vaping has not be proven to be hazardous to the person vaping, nor has it been proven to be hazardous to those around the vaper. Public opinion has/does influence our Public Officials!

 

[Colonel]

First off, this thread has covered many topics, and the response that you quoted was in reference to the post concerning people being "offended by the act of vaping"! Second, HAD you read post #497, you would know that I feel privately owned businesses should not be required by law to be smoke-free, vape-free, as they are PRIVATELY owned. Now, if a privately owned business is renting/leasing the property, then they would have to abide by any rules enacted by the owner of the property. Starbucks, from my understanding, would be considered privately owned. Third, I stated the possibility of explaining the possible financial benefits to them, the studies that have been conducted so far, that there would be a chance of a change of policy. It was later posted that someone called Starbucks Corporate Office and was informed that there was no such vaping ban in Starbucks.

The Federal Government has not banned vaping at all, as far as I know. I could understand banning non-stealth vaping on airplanes, due to the risk of passengers thinking someone was a terrorist! Now, City, County, State.....that's a different story. It is well known that the non-smoking zealots, want any and all forms of tobacco use/nicotine use, to be banned, and the only reason I can think of is, because it "offends" them. Why else would they want to totally outlaw the use of any such product? Vaping has not be proven to be hazardous to the person vaping, nor has it been proven to be hazardous to those around the vaper. Public opinion has/does influence our Public Officials!

Uh. Yeah. All I said was that if a coffee shop wants to ban vaping, they are allowed.

 

[wv2win]

Do we really know for certain that what we exhale is not harmful? I don't think any of us even knows what the heck is in this juice that we are getting for purposes of refills or what we are getting from the pre-filled ones. Anyone see a detailed ingredient list? No, corporate secrets, etc.

None of the companies we buy from existed yesterday, no idea what their offices or labs or store rooms or kitchens look like. We have no idea who is filling these things. What conditions they are working under.

We are all rolling the dice and in many ways this is a miracle that one can go from addicted to analogs to using this is great, but lets not pretend this is safe for us or those around us. We simply do not know.

Treat vaping like smoking, do it away from others and where it is allowed, be grateful you can have a drink and "smoke" at some places.

There have been a number of studies done by private and public organizations that have analized both the liquid and the vapor. There have been no dangerous substances found in levels that are harmful to humans. You need to read them. Your statement is not accurate.

 

[WAC_Vet]

Do we really know for certain that what we exhale is not harmful? I don't think any of us even knows what the heck is in this juice that we are getting for purposes of refills or what we are getting from the pre-filled ones. Anyone see a detailed ingredient list? No, corporate secrets, etc.

None of the companies we buy from existed yesterday, no idea what their offices or labs or store rooms or kitchens look like. We have no idea who is filling these things. What conditions they are working under.

We are all rolling the dice and in many ways this is a miracle that one can go from addicted to analogs to using this is great, but lets not pretend this is safe for us or those around us. We simply do not know.

Treat vaping like smoking, do it away from others and where it is allowed, be grateful you can have a drink and "smoke" at some places.

Some of us mix our own juice, so we're aware of what's in it. From the studies listed, we learn that 98% of inhaled nicotine is absorbed by the person inhaling it. PG and VG have fact sheets, compliments of our Government. The only variable is the flavoring, and as I illustrated in another post, using a formula for caramel apple, 10 ml bottle, we are talking (literally) drops of flavoring per 10 ml bottle. That would make the contents (mostly PG in flavoring) of our exhaled vapor mostly PG, or VG or a combination of both, and possibly, a miniscule amount of flavoring.

 

[scinsc]

Some of us mix our own juice, so we're aware of what's in it. From the studies listed, we learn that 98% of inhaled nicotine is absorbed by the person inhaling it. PG and VG have fact sheets, compliments of our Government. The only variable is the flavoring, and as I illustrated in another post, using a formula for caramel apple, 10 ml bottle, we are talking (literally) drops of flavoring per 10 ml bottle. That would make the contents (mostly PG in flavoring) of our exhaled vapor mostly PG, or VG or a combination of both, and possibly, a miniscule amount of flavoring.

I can speak to second hand nicotine vapor. My wife who has never smoked and I are both at home 24/7. After almost 15 months being exposed to my high nic vapor she showed level zero on a Cotinine (nicotine) test. My test was level 5 nicotine user. Not a controlled scientific test but it's a practical indicator that confimed my research.

 

[Colonel]

I can speak to second hand nicotine vapor. My wife who has never smoked and I are both at home 24/7. After almost 15 months being exposed to my high nic vapor she showed level zero on a Cotinine (nicotine) test. My test was level 5 nicotine user. Not a controlled scientific test but it's a practical indicator that confimed my research.

Speaking of which. I just had a blood draw for cotinine testing. For insurance purpose, but I'm hoping I can get detailed results as to the levels. I'd like to compare them to levels of a pack a day smoker.

I feel like they should be higher just because of how much I vape and the mg/ml I use. But have seen many posts stating that many have produced results showing much less nic levels than active smokers.

 

[Scottitude]

I say close it down, its been going on for way too long and we stand divided and it will not change a thing with both sides.

I concur. Not much can be said... by anyone... that hasn't already been said.

 

[wv2win]

I can speak to second hand nicotine vapor. My wife who has never smoked and I are both at home 24/7. After almost 15 months being exposed to my high nic vapor she showed level zero on a Cotinine (nicotine) test. My test was level 5 nicotine user. Not a controlled scientific test but it's a practical indicator that confimed my research.

SC, are you sure you don't want to wait for the 20 year study on second hand vapor before you vape around your wife? Maybe only vape a couple of miles away, deep in the woods, after you have dug a 10 foot deep trench to stand in?

 

[WAC_Vet]

I can speak to second hand nicotine vapor. My wife who has never smoked and I are both at home 24/7. After almost 15 months being exposed to my high nic vapor she showed level zero on a Cotinine (nicotine) test. My test was level 5 nicotine user. Not a controlled scientific test but it's a practical indicator that confimed my research.

I'm sorry SC, but I just find that too hard to believe..... You are home with your wife 24/7, and she doesn't throw you out of the house at times???
As for the nic results..... I have no doubt the same result would be seen by others in the same type of situation!! But I still doubt your with your wife 24/7, and she's maintained sanity.......

 

[WAC_Vet]

I can speak to second hand nicotine vapor. My wife who has never smoked and I are both at home 24/7. After almost 15 months being exposed to my high nic vapor she showed level zero on a Cotinine (nicotine) test. My test was level 5 nicotine user. Not a controlled scientific test but it's a practical indicator that confimed my research.

I'm sorry SC, but I just find that too hard to believe..... You are home with your wife 24/7, and she doesn't throw you out of the house at times???
As for the nic results..... I have no doubt the same result would be seen by others in the same type of situation!! But I still doubt your with your wife 24/7, and she's maintained sanity.......

 

[scinsc]

I'm sorry SC, but I just find that too hard to believe..... You are home with your wife 24/7, and she doesn't throw you out of the house at times???
As for the nic results..... I have no doubt the same result would be seen by others in the same type of situation!! But I still doubt your with your wife 24/7, and she's maintained sanity.......

Well we do have different errands to run and on rare occasions she will visit relatives on a weekend so I might have exaggerated just a touch. But I give her a lot of credit for sticking with me for 29 years.

 

[Ande]

KNow what you're saying, SC.

Mine has only stuck through ten or so, so far.

Which is a LOT less than I hope to get, but ten more than I deserve.



Ande