Vapping banned at work, but the ignorant statements...

[Lurch]

This.

Take the EU example: the ban on swedish Snus has NOT been lifted in Europe in the new TPD.

AFAIK, Sweden is the only country in the EU where snus can be used.

But snus use is spread along other Scandinavian countries as well.

Long-term studies/statistics show us that:

Those countries have the lowest rate of smokers and smoking-related ilnesses in all Europe.
Those countries have the lowest smoking prevalence in Europe.
None of the arguments used against the e-cig became true with snus. for example, "The 'childrun' will start using snus and then
moving to tobacco cigarettes". Yes, that argument was used before...


Anyway, "in our best interest", the EU is about to sue Denmark for still allowing the sale of snus.
In a country were few people smoke, where smoking is legal, and where snus is clearly responsible for keeping a lot of people away from deadly tobacco.

So, no. The Comission is NOT concerned about European citizen's health.
ELECTED officials have turned down the attemped e-cig medicalization route on the last 08th October.
A month and an half after, NON-elected bureoucrats lobbied to have e-cigs included in the new TDP, and to keep the snus ban.
That's "democracy" and "concern" for you...

EU sues Denmark for failing to ban snus - The Local

As they always say, "follow the money!"

 

[DC2]

Fight what is not right.

 

[zoiDman]

Fight what is not right.

I think you quoted it Earlier DC2...

If you are Not Part of the Solution... You are Part of the Problem.

 

[JasonK94Z]

WOW!! I am truly sorry for posting this subject and not coming back here for some time. I've been swamped at work and at home.

Anyways, I actually sent out some emails to the people who wrote this policy. I questioned their "facts" in the policy and asked for referenced to back them up. I WAS IGNORED.

I also questioned a person in HR. All that got me was a story how she used to smoke and quit cold turkey.

I need my job.
This whole deal made me feel like punching people in the face.
I decided to just sit in my office with the door shut, blinds closed, and vape away until I want to pass out.
To hell with their policy!

I can't stand ignorant people.

Edit to add: I also shut up because I remembered there is a $6xx annual fee added to insurance if your a tobacco user. I don't want to spotlight on me when the time comes to renew insurance. I don't pay that ridiculous fee. The insurance is crappy enough as it is.

 

[freeatlast!]

I'm soooo glad I'm retired and not having to put up with that! I was so angry when they banned smoking in our offices. Thankfully one could still smoke outside, at least at that time.

Hopefully they don't do nicotine tests at your work place, if you're continuing to vape with nicotine. Other than that, seems like vaping with your office door closed should be workable, but be careful. Jobs aren't necessarily that easy to get these days.

 

[jpargana]

Do you have any studies on 2nd hand vaporized PG, VG, flavoring, sweeteners and all possible wick materials? Please post those. Thanks.

From the original post:

"Electronic cigarettes (e.g “e-cigarettes”, “vapes”, etc) are battery-powered or other
devices that provide vaporized doses of nicotine, or other narcotics, to the user. Like
tobacco products, the nicotine contained within contributes to a number of adverse
health effects such as coronary artery disease and hypertension. Unlike approved
nicotine replacement therapies, such as gum or lozenges used to help the tobacco-
user quit, these devices are not a proven cessation aid according to the World Health
Organization. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has also warned that they are
unsafe, and many countries have banned these devices. For these reasons, electronic
cigarettes are also prohibited as part of this policy."

If you read it carefully, you'll realize they NEVER have dressed second-hand PG/VG as a "problem", have they?
No, it's just the "demonic" nicotine and "other narcotics"...

That's why I posted only nicotine-related studies.

But if you really need studies on "second-hand" vape, maybe you can start with the Drexel University study, by Dr Igor Burstyn.

It's not that hard to find...! Even I managed to do just that...

 

[Aaron1100us]

Basically the same thing I got at my work. They wont allow vaping unless the FDA approves it. Yet staff can use nicotine gum and patches and patients can use nicotine inhalers. So stupid. Good thing I'm the only one in my department at night, I vape all night long in the shop

 

[jpargana]

I wonder what Category they put an Overweight Smokers who has AIDS that dies in a Motor Vehicle Collision as a result of being Drunk and Accidentally Shooting Himself with a Firearm?

That's an easy one:

If someone "with AIDS that dies in a Motor Vehicle Collision as a result of being Drunk and Accidentally Shooting Himself with a Firearm" had a single cigarette in his entire lifetime, ANTZ's will link that death with tobacco...

QED...

 

[jpargana]

Basically the same thing I got at my work. They wont allow vaping unless the FDA approves it. Yet staff can use nicotine gum and patches and patients can use nicotine inhalers. So stupid. Good thing I'm the only one in my department at night, I vape all night long in the shop

I would be more relaxed if management banned the "safe" and "FDA approved" Chantix...

 

[mwjones]

My work banned the use of vapes inside the building as well. Not because they're unsafe or cause cancer or have second hand health effects. Because it violates the company's employee comfort policy, as well as the company's no scent policy.

Seriously, guys.... I'm all about the fight for social justice, but come on. You couldn't smoke a cigarette at your desk, so why would you be allowed to vape? Other people don't like the smell. Breathing your second hand clouds MAY be bad for you, and if the chance that it might be makes them uncomfortable, then that's their right to feel that way until there is widely accepted, conclusive evidence otherwise.

People that constantly push the envelope are the ones that ruin it for everyone. It's not the 70s anymore. It's not about fighting for what's right anymore. If one person decides they don't like something, our society has to sugar coat and bubble wrap everything just for that person. I'm not saying it's right. I'm not saying it's fair. I'm just saying, it is what it is. Vape on your break like a grownup, not a spoiled child, and save your righteousness. Respect other people.

 

[dmetzcher]

Maybe you can ask them to read proper studies:


Nicotine Propaganda
The Great Nicotine Myth
Is Nicotine Addictive ?
Nicotine Clinical Trials: Why Aren't There Any?

Long-term effects of inhaled nicotine.
Long-term effects of inhaled nicotine. [Life Sci. 1996] - PubMed - NCBI

Nicotine and Health
Nicotine and Health

Nicotine, the Wonder Drug?
Nicotine, the Wonder Drug? | DiscoverMagazine.com


(I'm so tired of hearing nonsense from people who believe to be 'experts', when they really have no clue...)

Thanks for the links. I've been collecting links for a few weeks now (here) and have added yours to the page.

 

[DC2]

Breathing your second hand clouds MAY be bad for you, and if the chance that it might be makes them uncomfortable, then that's their right to feel that way until there is widely accepted, conclusive evidence otherwise.

I would say that it is reasonably "conclusive" already...
BMC Public Health | Abstract | Peering through the mist: systematic review of what the chemistry of contaminants in electronic cigarettes tells us about health risks

Background
Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are generally recognized as a safer alternative to combusted tobacco products, but there are conflicting claims about the degree to which these products warrant concern for the health of the vapers (e-cigarette users). This paper reviews available data on chemistry of aerosols and liquids of electronic cigarettes and compares modeled exposure of vapers with occupational safety standards.

Methods
Both peer-reviewed and “grey” literature were accessed and more than 9,000 observations of highly variable quality were extracted. Comparisons to the most universally recognized workplace exposure standards, Threshold Limit Values (TLVs), were conducted under “worst case” assumptions about both chemical content of aerosol and liquids as well as behavior of vapers.

Results
There was no evidence of potential for exposures of e-cigarette users to contaminants that are associated with risk to health at a level that would warrant attention if it were an involuntary workplace exposures. The vast majority of predicted exposures are < <1% of TLV. Predicted exposures to acrolein and formaldehyde are typically <5% TLV. Considering exposure to the aerosol as a mixture of contaminants did not indicate that exceeding half of TLV for mixtures was plausible. Only exposures to the declared major ingredients -- propylene glycol and glycerin -- warrant attention because of precautionary nature of TLVs for exposures to hydrocarbons with no established toxicity.

Conclusions
Current state of knowledge about chemistry of liquids and aerosols associated with electronic cigarettes indicates that there is no evidence that vaping produces inhalable exposures to contaminants of the aerosol that would warrant health concerns by the standards that are used to ensure safety of workplaces. However, the aerosol generated during vaping as a whole (contaminants plus declared ingredients) creates personal exposures that would justify surveillance of health among exposed persons in conjunction with investigation of means to keep any adverse health effects as low as reasonably achievable. Exposures of bystanders are likely to be orders of magnitude less, and thus pose no apparent concern.

 

[Lilvapie]

The ignorance stated in the policy has really ...... me off!

Electronic cigarettes (e.g “e-cigarettes”, “vapes”, etc) are battery-powered or other
devices that provide vaporized doses of nicotine, or other narcotics, to the user. Like
tobacco products, the nicotine contained within contributes to a number of adverse
health effects such as coronary artery disease and hypertension. Unlike approved
nicotine replacement therapies, such as gum or lozenges used to help the tobacco-
user quit, these devices are not a proven cessation aid according to the World Health
Organization. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has also warned that they are
unsafe, and many countries have banned these devices. For these reasons, electronic
cigarettes are also prohibited as part of this policy.


Please, somebody stop the earth, I want off. Wait, what? So the USP Nicotine in vaporizers is bad, but the USP nicotine in gum and lozenges is safe? The people in our HR dept are barely smart enough to make it to work on their own.

I highlighted the part in red and replied asking them to cite their reference. So far I have not received a response. I understand it is their building, their rules, and I respect that. However, the clear misinformation I DO NOT respect.

Second hand tobacco smoke has no danger at all, which has been proven by medical science. So second hand vape really does nothing, its just annoying. Banning ecigs or cigs indoor is like banning specific type of music form a scientific perspective.....

 

[Ms82082]

All of the places I work banned e cigs because of the ignorance of vapors. Most abused any situation were they could use it indoors. I say respect other if they don't smoke they may not Vape either so take it outside with the rest. I think it's only fair to have respect for others around u.

 

[John Lever]

I'm coming to believe that the only reason anyone goes into working for the gov't is because they're FAR too stupid to get any other kind of job -- even at McD's, you have to know how to follow directions.

Andria

Please don't tar a lot of extremely intelligent Federal employees with the same brush reserved for those less diligent ones that you're referencing. For example, consider scores of PhD scientists researching e.g. Meteorology, Precise Time, Astrometry (yes, spelled correctly), and scores of other topics. Your statement confirms your ignorance of these endeavors. Most Feds aren't the bad guys.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[jpargana]

My work banned the use of vapes inside the building as well. Not because they're unsafe or cause cancer or have second hand health effects. Because it violates the company's employee comfort policy, as well as the company's no scent policy.

Well, the problem with the OP is exactly the reasoning behind the e-cig ban. Management did not say they were banning it because of some company policy. Instead, they used the usual lies and misinformation about the "demonic" nicotine to enforce it. Heck, they did not even adress the possible effects of second-hand VG and PG vapour...! Nicotine alone seems to be the problem.

Sooner than later, the OP's co-workers will start spreading those lies too: How nicotine is so bad for you, that management even had to ban e-cigs from the workplace to protect employees health. That's my main concern here.

Seriously, guys.... I'm all about the fight for social justice, but come on. You couldn't smoke a cigarette at your desk, so why would you be allowed to vape? Other people don't like the smell. Breathing your second hand clouds MAY be bad for you, and if the chance that it might be makes them uncomfortable, then that's their right to feel that way until there is widely accepted, conclusive evidence otherwise.

I do not advocate that we should be allowed to vape freely at our desks whenever we want (it may depend on circunstances - why not vape if you're alone or with a fellow vaper, away from costumers, for example? ), but I also must disagree. For one, vaping is not smoking. And, in some places, you were once actually allowed to smoke at your desk - at a time when there was already plenty of evidence on the harms of tocacco smoke. Banning vaping just because it may be somewhat harmful until it's proven safe seems overkill to me - is Wi-Fi radiation totally safe?

People that constantly push the envelope are the ones that ruin it for everyone. It's not the 70s anymore. It's not about fighting for what's right anymore. If one person decides they don't like something, our society has to sugar coat and bubble wrap everything just for that person. I'm not saying it's right. I'm not saying it's fair. I'm just saying, it is what it is. Vape on your break like a grownup, not a spoiled child, and save your righteousness. Respect other people.

I remember reading about the first vaping bans in the US long before there were that many of us. Some governor even said something like "Now that we thought we had tobacco under control, a new and terrible threat has risen".

The e-cig was a "threat", of course, to Government, Tobacco and Pharma coffers. They realized that long before there were that many vapers out there

 

[Jman8]

Thanks jpargana for addressing that misguided post and saving me time from doing the same.

 

[eratikmind]

All of the places I work banned e cigs because of the ignorance of vapors. Most abused any situation were they could use it indoors. I say respect other if they don't smoke they may not Vape either so take it outside with the rest. I think it's only fair to have respect for others around u.

Until the above is understood, vaping will always be a black sheep.

 

[DrMA]

in reply to Ms82082

I say respect other if they don't smoke they may not Vape either so take it outside with the rest. I think it's only fair to have respect for others around u.

Until the above is understood, vaping will always be a black sheep.

Don't you think we, vapers, deserve some respect as well? Why is it respectful to us to be banished to the corner of the parking lot, out in the rain or burning sun and surrounded by 2nd and 3rd hand tobacco smoke?

All scientific evidence to date indicates vapor poses no appreciable risk to bystanders, but you seem to think it should be banned. In contrast, auto exhaust is extremely and demonstrably dangerous, but nobody is trying to ban that, or even avoid breathing it in. Are you really proposing we bow to the moral panic of the Establishment and banish ourselves out with the smokers? Out of respect for the purity of the ANTZ ideology? Nonsense!

Vaping is not disrespectful, and viewing it at such signifies uncritical acceptance of ANTZ propaganda swallowed whole - hook, line, and sinker. Intentionally blowing vapor in someone's face is a different matter altogether, but it still is the same as blowing regular breath in their face, in terms of both risk and respect.

 

[Ms82082]

Nope just common decency and respect of others. It makes people uncomfortable and I don't feel that's OK in any work place! We choose to Vape they don't. why is it our place to subject people to something that makes them uncomfortable. Just my opinion.