Why Vapers are getting a BAD NAME.

[Jman8]

At my work originally we vaped anywhere, higher ups decided not in the shop do to some people being irritated by four vapors keeping the break room so misty during lunch along with an allergy which I was fine with, those were logical reasons and I abide by it

That appears to me as decent reason not to do it at work.

Though, I would be seeking consistency on this. As in, if other odors are found in break room, and they were even slightly bothersome, I may report it, seeking to either get rid of them under same principle or to get vaping to be allowed under same justification given that amounts to, 'it's no big deal.'

As I have vaped around many people, in an enclosed space, without any problem (read as zero); and who have shown up to me as fairly sensitive to SHS, then it is challenging to see how SHV would suddenly be deemed a problem except for them being told (brainwashed) into thinking SHV is problematic to inhale. When that sort of reasoning has entered the picture, I'll exercise my 'right' to be offended by slightest smells and faintest odors, and hope all can remain consistent with the new found respect we have for each other. All under the guise of being courteous to one another.

 

[ambeck22]

Obviously, vaping is strongly feared/disliked because: 1) People have been told it's evil and as bad as smoking, and 2) because people can see it. It's been mentioned several times here that people wouldn't mind public vaping if they couldn't see the vapor. If you vape 100% PG and produce no vapor but release the same amount of "chemicals" as, say, 80/20 or 70/30 e-juice, not a word would be said, though you would look pretty dumb. It's not the smell, it's not because it's harmful, it's not because there are children around. It's because they can see it. Just think if people with the flu exhaled green breath or people with mono exhaled pink breath or people with pneumonia exhaled blue breath. It would look like China's SIRS epidemic because everyone would be wearing masks. Would these people be asked to go outside to breathe? Yes, breathing is a necessity and not a convenience or addiction, but it's about the visual and not about the actual health risks. Extremely harmful things are all around us and that goes by the wayside, yet something related to what used to be a very socially acceptable act is being thrown under the bus because you can see it. My mom is dying of cancer and a person with pneumonia or the flu could kill her faster than vapor, so I'd take something vaping around her over a sick person any day. The silly penguin person seems to get it.

 

[Myk]

So I was sitting on a plane waiting for takeoff and this lady sat next to me, smiled and proceeded to fix her makeup. I'm thinking.. oh god I hope she doesn't want to talk. Then she pulls out some little bottle and spritzes her god awful perfume all over herself and me. I felt like gagging and I guess I gave her a look. She looks at me and says.. but it's cartier..

I'm new here and don't know the politics but it seems to me that blowing a cloud of anything at another person is kinda rude. If I was in a doctor's waiting room with my sick kid, I would be the first to say something if someone blew a cloud anywhere near my kid. I don't care what it is.. don't be blowing clouds in a doctors office.. someone in this room is not well.. and one more cloud in my kids face will get that mod shoved down your throat..

I vape because I'm a nicotine addict and I can step outside just like the guy that needs a smoke. A little bit of courtesy really does go a long way.

This mentality of "just because it isn't known to be harmful so I will vape whenever and wherever" that will bring legislation down on vapers for sure. All anyone has to do is appeal to the ignorant masses.. just like they are doing successfully now.

Vapers may know better.. or not.. but vapers are a minority and minorities get trampled more often than not.

educate first, then demonstrate.

I'm not well and the same reason I'm in the doctor's office is the reason I still use nicotine.
If I had asthma would you tell me not to use my inhaler around your kids? I've seen people using inhalers exhale vapor and I'm sure if your kid took a puff off someone else's inhaler it wouldn't be a good thing.

I thought it was rude that someone brought a herd of kids to an adult doctor's office but I didn't shove their stroller down the parent's throat.
It would really suck embarrassing someone in front of their kids if they tried to escalate to violence over someone vaping but I guess a doctor's office would be the best place to make a stupid move like that, at least they could get a trach placed before the person suffocated and give them pain meds for the broken leg and the kids would get an important lesson about being violent that they obviously aren't going to get at home.

For the record I haven't vaped in a doctor's waiting room or office. The closest I got was in the ER shortly after quitting when I fondled and sucked on an ecig without firing.
My medical group actually does have a no ecig policy which I know about (most wouldn't, it's not on the signs). The only time I wouldn't follow that would be if I was admitted to the hospital if I could get away with it or if medical personnel asked me to demonstrate.

I assume you're wanting to keep your kids away from vapor on the statistically insignificant chance that it might harm them based on what you've been told about SHS.
Did you know that the study used to claim SHS was dangerous actually showed a statistically insignificant PROTECTION against lung cancer later in life? It's a known fact that PG is a germicide and cleans the air. I would think you'd want to protect your kids.

 

[zanedog]

lol, vaping idiots, and then cry when everyone has to check their stuff into baggage.

Like why would you even vape on a plane unless it's allowed?

The rule breakers will be the ones that give bad publicity, the ones that fight for their right to do damage to normal people that just wish to get along.

It is smoking as far as most people are concerned.

let public knowledge make that different, vaping in places that smoking is not alllowed is just a challenge for those that don't like rules.

I really do not like posting in some one else's thread because they start calling me out, but I agree with you 100 percent. I think no-one should vape where you cannot smoke. All these vapers are doing is giving the powers that be more ammunition to use against vaping. I actually read somewhere that someone was vaping on a plane. How dangerous is that? Tell it like it is, but of course you will be bashed for it.

Vapers are some of the most intolerant people I have ever met on this forum...You can almost be assured that this thread will be closed which is sad.

 

[BillyTheWild]

A friend of mine has cancer and I take him to get infusions once a month that lasts about 3 hours. It's a large room with lots of recliners and cancer patients sitting around, all hooked up to IV's. I would not dream of vaping or stealth vaping in there. […]

Actually I'm looking to be in that same room eventually. […]
If I can't even put an ecig that looks more like a flashlight than a cigarette to my mouth than I want all those people getting radiation and poisons pumped into their veins to go outside because "I just don't know what's in them". […]

But they are “getting radiation and poisons pumped into” “their veins”, not yours. Nor are they spraying the “radiation and poisons” into the air for everyone to inhale. On the other hand, your vapor is in the air.

 

[BillyTheWild]

Do you realize that people are blowing clouds of something every single time they exhale? How's that sit with you?

[…] The avg non tobacco user exhales formaldehyde, acetone, ISO-something, and other volatile organic ingredients on a daily basis. […]

Comparing vaping to normal respiration is unfair. One doesn’t have a choice to NOT breathe (inhaling and EXHALING) but on the other hand a vaper can choose not to vape. Respiration is a normal and vital bodily function while vaping is not.

And, how about comparing vaping with gems and cooties that other persons may or may not exhale during normal respiration or sneezing, etc., like these posts suggest:

[…] Yet, in elevators we seem to tolerate the idea that 15 people can stand in a room that is 5 x 5 ft, and live to survive another day even while we have no way of knowing what others are exhaling (i.e. germs, viruses, cooties).

I hear what you are saying but let me get this straight. You (the royal you) are in an enclosed space filled, throughout the day, with little Typhoid Mary's. […]

[...] What, with the CO2 emissions, the flatulence, halitosis, colds, flu's and any other number of personal space invaders. […]

[…] Just think if people with the flu exhaled green breath or people with mono exhaled pink breath or people with pneumonia exhaled blue breath. […]

These posts make the argument that "why can't we vape in public indoor area when every Tom, Dic k and Harry are exhaling god-know-what in the air wherever they want."

But it's not true though. it is considered rude to NOT cover your mouth when you sneeze, cough and yawn. And if you are really sick with a contagious disease, it is considered rude, to say the least, for you to even go out in public. Schools and offices routinely ask sick persons to not, and even prohibit them from going to the school or office.

[…] It would look like China's SIRS epidemic because everyone would be wearing masks. Would these people be asked to go outside to breathe? […]

Actually, even worse, in cases like SIRS, the sick persons would be quarantined.

So it's illogical to argue that since we are going to breathe in whatever the general public breathe out anyway, vapers should be allowed, or even should, vape in public indoor settings. Besides being illogical, this kind of argument actually makes the case for the need to be courteous by avoiding vaping in public indoor settings. While we expect a degree of courtesy from the general public, like not going out in public when you're sick with a contagious disease, so, how come vapers can’t give the same degree of courtesy to the general public? And don’t tell me it’s b/c vapor is harmless. To that I’ll say, so is music. Music is harmless but you just don’t use your audio devices in public w/o earphones, right? Because it’d be rude otherwise. It’s a courtesy thing.

 

[YoungMichael88]

The facts, the science, the statistics, the studies etc. all mean absolutely nothing unless people are aware of them. They aren't aware of them. What's worse is even if you went as far as to show physical, black and white reports and studies with doctors signatures or whatever proving their legitimacy, the skeptics will STILL believe what they see in the media and remain skeptics. Like it or not, this is what we are dealing with. And these people couldn't possibly care less about statements like "people breath out blah blah blah harmful things every day". In their world, no matter how crazy it may be, out of sight out of mind trumps all else. But once again, I still think some exposure (SOME) might begin to take the edge off for SOME of these people. Or it could backfire. Who knows. Not me. Not you. Another thing we don't have going for us is even if 98% of the people in any given room don't care or mind people vaping, they probably won't say a word to anyone, whereas maybe half or a quarter of the 2% who are bothered might. And thus the skepticism grows.

 

[Jman8]

Comparing vaping to normal respiration is unfair. One doesn’t have a choice to NOT breathe (inhaling and EXHALING) but on the other hand a vaper can choose not to vape. Respiration is a normal and vital bodily function while vaping is not.

And yet, both activities include exhaling items that one can claim we have no way of knowing what's being put into the air. Which is the comparison that was being made.

And if you are really sick with a contagious disease, it is considered rude, to say the least, for you to even go out in public. Schools and offices routinely ask sick persons to not, and even prohibit them from going to the school or office.

And again, I would say if position is we have no way of knowing whether people all around us are sick or not, or if they even know if they are sick or not, then arguably everyone in public is acting rude, simply by being in public. Not to mention the point that we have no way of knowing what our exhaled air contains, or so the argument that is at the core of vaping in public comes down to.

So it's illogical to argue that since we are going to breathe in whatever the general public breathe out anyway, vapers should be allowed, or even should, vape in public indoor settings.

And yet, I would say it is logical based on what you are saying here, and what I've said above in this post. If other people's exhaled air and SHV are both shown to be relatively harmless, then it is plausible to say no one is intentionally or inherently acting rude in either case. But as it is possible that SHV could contain some harm, just as it is plausible that anyone around us could be sick (and we would have no way of knowing) and thus pose a harm to all persons in their vicinity, then it would be logical to say that not everyone is intentionally being rude/disrespectful, and that instead it is hypersensitive people amongst us that have the issue, and/or persons exploiting the hypersensitivity that are creating an undue panic / concern where there really is none.

Music is harmless but you just don’t use your audio devices in public w/o earphones, right? Because it’d be rude otherwise. It’s a courtesy thing.[/B]

I hear music when out in public often. Like in a grocery store, department store, cafe. None of these places are in the business of selling music. And sometimes I really don't care for the music being played. But because I'm not hyper sensitive to the music in public nor claim it to be rude to hear music in public, I am likely to keep going to that location. IMO, the music position would be akin to saying that as music could bother me and others, then all people in public ought to refrain from conversations as their voices could be disturbing. I'm not willing to go there, but I could see going there if the music thing is carried to some extreme or one similar to how SHS was perpetuated based on deceptive tactics, and now we are in a world reality where relatively harmless vapor is deemed inherently rude regardless of the public circumstances.

IMO, the people/fellow vapers who make the case for not vaping indoors in public because it is rude/disrespectful could be same type of people who would be on board for not vaping in outdoor public places. It obviously couldn't be about the harm there, but if same people were being consistent with their stance, one would have to conclude it is equally disrespectful/rude to vape in any outdoor place, with possible exception of own property. But even then, neighbors may say it is rude there as well. So, I would ask, where would vaping be not rude/disrespectful for you if it is deemed inherently rude in certain locations?

 

[Jman8]

The facts, the science, the statistics, the studies etc. all mean absolutely nothing unless people are aware of them. They aren't aware of them. What's worse is even if you went as far as to show physical, black and white reports and studies with doctors signatures or whatever proving their legitimacy, the skeptics will STILL believe what they see in the media and remain skeptics. Like it or not, this is what we are dealing with.

And as this has degree of truth to it, in what we are up against, I then advocate for vape everywhere, with respect.

Contrary to some, I would go as far as to do it (and suggest doing it) in places where it has been conveyed as not okay. Because it is the way to confront the ignorance, change the perception. What I am saying could be argued as truly giving a bad name to vapers, but in my neck of the woods, I have yet to see this occur. I'm not saying it doesn't happen anywhere, but I feel fairly confident that even amongst us vapers who would recognize instantly what the person is up to, that most of us do not encounter the in your face, I'm going to do vaping just because you said not to, type of vaper. Or as fellow ECFer, Edd, has referred to as the BCMV (Ban Causing Militant Vaper).

If going this route of vaping where you are told not to, it would be wise to have some sort of plan in mind of why you are doing it there, but one that could possibly work to change minds, and have it realized that you are/were being treated entirely unfair.

I also would say, like it or not, people are going to vape in public (indoors) and will always find a way around rules that say not to. I think that needs to be acknowledge in this conversation as much as the point of, "like it or not, some people will remain ignorant and not want you to vape anywhere near them."

In my experience with 'everyday people' the vast majority do not have an issue with vaping. That point ought to trump anything we are discussing here. Instead, it is because of the extreme minority that COULD have a problem with vaping that we even have this sort of discussion. And as the science and overwhelming anecdotal evidence thus far shows no undue harm coming to any person who has encountered SHV, it truly seems fair to say that the persons who are acting hypersensitive to vaping are precisely those who are giving a bad name to vapers/vaping.

Another thing we don't have going for us is even if 98% of the people in any given room don't care or mind people vaping, they probably won't say a word to anyone, whereas maybe half or a quarter of the 2% who are bothered might. And thus the skepticism grows.

Agreed, and it is the SHS myth all over again. Cause as some previous smokers on this forum know, from experience, there was once a reality where you could smoke everywhere and people acted as if it was not a problem. Today, if any indoor location went back to that, and had any hope of attracting non-smokers to that location, it wouldn't work. But it used to, and it wasn't treated as the enormously huge deal that it is today.

I feel there is enough manipulation in how science works in our culture that it is very likely a report will be generated showing SHV as dangerous to people. One that the vaping community will scrutinize and likely debunk within a week, but the type of research that is like the 2009 report by FDA, that shows eCigs contain anti-freeze. And one that will suddenly have many in society rethinking if they would ever want to be in the vicinity of SHV.

Which is why I see this period as a golden era. I think, like SHS, it'll get to a point where it wouldn't matter if science came out and conclusively showed that it poses no significant harm to anyone after a larger deception was allowed to permeate and influence perception. So IMO, now is the time to vape everywhere, while that isn't the case. We are in the golden era of vaping and now is the time to enjoy that to its fullest.

Thinking things could get better over time, with the number ANTZ has done on tobacco, and given the reality that they perpetuate messages that say vaping and smoking are no different, it would be naive to think if we refrain now and act courteous, that one day in the future the public will be entirely on our side. For that to happen, ANTZ, BP, governmental regulators and the like would all have to stop cold doing what they are doing, and our message would need to get magically better from the place that already has science, popularity and lots of anecdotal evidence clearly on our side.

 

[KenD]

If I was in a doctor's waiting room with my sick kid, I would be the first to say something if someone blew a cloud anywhere near my kid. I don't care what it is.. don't be blowing clouds in a doctors office.. someone in this room is not well.. and one more cloud in my kids face will get that mod shoved down your throat..

Yeah, because vaping in public (even at the doctor's office) is so much worse than violence (or threatening to get violent)... The latter is illegal, and will actually hurt someone - possibly badly, whereas the former is neither illegal nor dangerous.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

 

[jwoode]

Comparing vaping to any medical inhaler is ludicrous.
Blowing a cloud of anything in an enclosed area is what will get vaping banned.. and personally, I think it should.

 

[CabinetGuyScott]

YoungMichael88 said in post 147:

... even if 98% of the people in any given room don't care or mind people vaping, they probably won't say a word to anyone, whereas maybe half or a quarter of the 2% who are bothered might.

The facts, the science, the statistics, the studies etc. all mean absolutely nothing unless people are aware of them.

... the skeptics will STILL believe what they see in the media and remain skeptics.

... I still think some exposure (SOME) might begin to take the edge off for SOME of these people.

Jman8 - post 149

... needs to be acknowledge in this conversation ... "like it or not, some people will remain ignorant and not want you to vape anywhere near them."

And as this has degree of truth to it, in what we are up against, I then advocate for vape everywhere, with respect.

... suggest doing it in places where it has been conveyed as not okay. Because it is the way to confront the ignorance, change the perception.

... If going this route of vaping where you are told not to, it would be wise to have some sort of plan in mind of why you are doing it there, but one that could possibly work to change minds...

These quotes above capture some key points that have risen to the top of the discussion from the pro-vape in public perspective.

Which leads to a few questions/observations/comments...

The majority (Michael's 98%?) of the population are either:

• 'Vape-aware' and are neutral
• Vaper knowledgeable & supportive - vapers themselves, and those who have learned the facts and recognize the tremendous opportunity for people to have a safe alternative (save their lives in the process!)

So who do we focus our campaign of persuasion on?

• The 2% (who are likely to dismiss all efforts to educate)
• vapors themselves
• vape neutral / agnostic

Seeing is believing?

"Seeing" though is an opportunity to:

• Raise awareness,
• 'Normalize' - creating a new view that vaping is normal
• Educate - experience & fact sharing. For some, that will be the first information they learn, for others it will be compared to the misinformation they have heard 'somewhere'
• Inspire that person to become an enthusiastic vaping advocate - Most likely to share & spread the word to their smoking loved ones!

Michael is right in that the 2% will deny the truth/facts/evidence and continue to fight to never have to see someone commit an act that looks like smoking.

Accept them as part of the 'baseline' and not give pause nor concern to them.

Focus our energies & effort to those who we have opportunity to share our experiences of saving our lives with this safe alternative

And to paraphrase Jman8, we should view this period as a golden OPPORTUNITYera.

Hopefully this effort to wrapping these pieces together into a more concise bundle to help people understand (and maybe embrace to some degree) the "pro-vape-in-public" philosophy.



NOTE: I kinda rushed through the epilogue here because I have a whole new thought and question I want to toss out. And if I don't get to starting that new thread soon, I stand a good chance of forgetting what it was! (darn short-term memory thing!

Teaser: "why"

I invite everyone in this thread to find the new one, posing a different question about vaping in public and join in

 

[p.opus]

The only response I keep hearing is.. Blowing a big cloud is rude.

Ok. So answer this.

If I inhale, then hold it, and inhale again so that NO visible cloud is exhaled, do you still have a problem with it?

Let's say the vaper in question, has successfully pulled a stealth vape, and the only thing you can see is someone sucking on an ecig like device and then exhaling nothing.

Is this still a problem?

Be honest here. I'm willing to believe that it's the cloud that people find offensive. The odor while present is not really perceived unless you walk right up and vape in someones face.

So you're sitting across the room. Woman sucks on her APV and releases nothing. Is this a problem? Is it still rude?

Now same scenario. Woman is in the doctors office, she takes out her Nicotrol Nicotine Inhaler. Is this a Problem? Is it still rude?

 

[jwoode]

Maybe what it all comes down to is the idea of personal space.

I think the issue really is the visible cloud.

 

[Myk]

But they are “getting radiation and poisons pumped into” “their veins”, not yours. Nor are they spraying the “radiation and poisons” into the air for everyone to inhale. On the other hand, your vapor is in the air.

Not too up on the whole medical and radiation thing are you?
Take this sealed jar, go into that room, open jar, take pill, go straight home, do not talk to any of us, when you get home do not sleep with anyone for a week, do not prepare food for anyone. And here's a piece of paper explaining why you're radioactive in case you need to fly.
Granted that's an extreme treatment but I don't know what those people are emitting and this is all about humoring other people's ignorance isn't it?

You're also not too up on the whole ecig thing. We're not "spraying poisons" into the air either. Why do we humor one ignorance but not the other?

The facts, the science, the statistics, the studies etc. all mean absolutely nothing unless people are aware of them. They aren't aware of them. What's worse is even if you went as far as to show physical, black and white reports and studies with doctors signatures or whatever proving their legitimacy, the skeptics will STILL believe what they see in the media and remain skeptics. Like it or not, this is what we are dealing with. And these people couldn't possibly care less about statements like "people breath out blah blah blah harmful things every day". In their world, no matter how crazy it may be, out of sight out of mind trumps all else. But once again, I still think some exposure (SOME) might begin to take the edge off for SOME of these people. Or it could backfire. Who knows. Not me. Not you. Another thing we don't have going for us is even if 98% of the people in any given room don't care or mind people vaping, they probably won't say a word to anyone, whereas maybe half or a quarter of the 2% who are bothered might. And thus the skepticism grows.

Exactly as we see displayed in this thread from fellow vapers wanting to blame fellow vapers.

So is it better to allow that 2% to have their way and spread their ignorance, which they have been doing long before there were enough vapers for anyone to see or do we reinforce the idea that the 2% is nuts to the other 98%?

Comparing vaping to any medical inhaler is ludicrous.
Blowing a cloud of anything in an enclosed area is what will get vaping banned.. and personally, I think it should.

Of course because it doesn't support what you WANT to believe.
It's obvious your tendency towards violence is misdirected and it should be aimed at yourself because of the brainwashing to denigrate smokers has you hating yourself because you're an evil smoker and even though you don't smoke you still harbor that thinking.

 

[BillyTheWild]

Comparing vaping to normal respiration is unfair. One doesn’t have a choice to NOT breathe (inhaling and EXHALING) but on the other hand a vaper can choose not to vape. Respiration is a normal and vital bodily function while vaping is not.

And yet, both activities include exhaling items that one can claim we have no way of knowing what's being put into the air. Which is the comparison that was being made.

And if you are really sick with a contagious disease, it is considered rude, to say the least, for you to even go out in public. Schools and offices routinely ask sick persons to not, and even prohibit them from going to the school or office.

And again, I would say if position is we have no way of knowing whether people all around us are sick or not, or if they even know if they are sick or not, then arguably everyone in public is acting rude, simply by being in public. Not to mention the point that we have no way of knowing what our exhaled air contains, or so the argument that is at the core of vaping in public comes down to.

You seems to be saying that since the normal respiration and vaping are equal in the sense that “we have no way of knowing what's being put into the air”, then the 2 activities should enjoy the same privilege.

To that, I’ll say that even if we agree that vaping and breathing are the same (which I don’t agree), still vaping produces clouds of vapor that normal breathing doesn’t. Clouds of vapor is a source of annoyance to non-vapers in general. My wife gets annoyed when I vape too close to her in the house and so I refrain from doing so. I don’t look at it as conceding to anything, instead I look at as being considerate to her.

Additionally, as I mentioned, one cannot choose not to breathe while a vaper can choose not to vape.

So it's illogical to argue that since we are going to breathe in whatever the general public breathe out anyway, vapers should be allowed, or even should, vape in public indoor settings.

And yet, I would say it is logical based on what you are saying here, and what I've said above in this post. If other people's exhaled air and SHV are both shown to be relatively harmless, then it is plausible to say no one is intentionally or inherently acting rude in either case. But as it is possible that SHV could contain some harm, just as it is plausible that anyone around us could be sick (and we would have no way of knowing) and thus pose a harm to all persons in their vicinity, then it would be logical to say that not everyone is intentionally being rude/disrespectful, and that instead it is hypersensitive people amongst us that have the issue, and/or persons exploiting the hypersensitivity that are creating an undue panic / concern where there really is none.

The difference is that breathing is a normal, regular bodily function which all living human being have to do while vaping is extracurricular. If you are sick and you don’t afford people around you some considerations, then you are rude. If you don’t know that you are sick or that you don’t know what exactly you are exhaling at any particular moment, we can’t flaw you for that b/c you are just doing something normal and regular. On the hand, vaporing is extracurricular and that you do have control over it.

Anyway, I think compare breathing to vaping is arguing to the extreme and it is an argument for argument’s sake which doesn’t add value to the debate and the understanding of the situation. Sure, nobody knows what exactly they exhale during normal respiration at any given moment. But if you use this to justify vaping in public, then you may use just about everything people use and do in daily life to justify vaping and EVEN SMOKING. And why not? If the argument is:

“It is unreasonable for you to ask me to refrain from vaping in public when god-only-knows what you are polluting my air and poisoning me with when you breathe out in normal respiration. So, if you are allowed to breathe, I should be allowed to vape.”

Then one can use the same argument to say:

“It is unreasonable for you to ask me to refrain from SMOKING in public when god-only-knows what you are polluting my air and poisoning me with when you breathe out in normal respiration. So, if you are allowed to breathe, I should be allowed to vape SMOKE.”

As a matter of fact, this argument was used by some smokers during the introduction of indoor smoking ban! It didn’t make sense when applied to SMOKING and it doesn’t make sense when applied to vaping.

Music is harmless but you just don’t use your audio devices in public w/o earphones, right? Because it’d be rude otherwise. It’s a courtesy thing.

I hear music when out in public often. Like in a grocery store, department store, cafe. None of these places are in the business of selling music. And sometimes I really don't care for the music being played. But because I'm not hyper sensitive to the music in public nor claim it to be rude to hear music in public, I am likely to keep going to that location. IMO, the music position would be akin to saying that as music could bother me and others, then all people in public ought to refrain from conversations as their voices could be disturbing. […]

You are comparing mall, store, etc. music with a personal music player, etc. The difference is that mall, store, etc music are background “sound” just as an airplane flying by or the traffic noise on the road. You cannot control it and it would be unreasonable for me to ask you to control it. On the other hand, it is up to you entirely to choose to be rude and pump out loud music from your personal music player or to have a loud face-to-face or phone conversation. And it’s entirely up to you to be courteous and considerate and choose to use earphones in public or keep your voice at a reasonable level in public. The point is you HAVE the control over it.

 

[BillyTheWild]

But they are “getting radiation and poisons pumped into” “their veins”, not yours. Nor are they spraying the “radiation and poisons” into the air for everyone to inhale. On the other hand, your vapor is in the air.

Not too up on the whole medical and radiation thing are you?
Take this sealed jar, go into that room, open jar, take pill, go straight home, do not talk to any of us, when you get home do not sleep with anyone for a week, do not prepare food for anyone. And here's a piece of paper explaining why you're radioactive in case you need to fly.
Granted that's an extreme treatment but I don't know what those people are emitting and this is all about humoring other people's ignorance isn't it?

Maybe you’re right that I don’t know the whole radioactive thing. But even taking your words as the truth, still comparing vaping to radiation cancer treatment is an extreme. If we are to go to the extreme, then we should ban just about everything and every activity people use and do in modern society. Or, you can use just about everything to justify vaping in public b/c nothing under the sun is 100%, absolutely safe. The argument that "This and that we do every day is not 100%, absolutely safe and if this and that are allowed, so should be vaping" is an argument for argument’s sake that add nothing to the debate and understanding of the issue on hand.

 

[BillyTheWild]

You're also not too up on the whole ecig thing. We're not "spraying poisons" into the air either. Why do we humor one ignorance but not the other?

Why are people being labeled as ignorant when they disagree with your position on SHV’s harmfulness? Before I switched to vaping, I had done tons of research on it simply b/c I didn’t want to substitute one poison with another. And I continue to do research on this. So far, although I agree that vaping is more likely than not to be harmless but I have not seen concrete evidence that would allow me to announce to the world unequivocally that vaping is not a concern. It’s not always that one side is ignorant when two parties disagree. We just disagree.

 

[BillyTheWild]

There are quite a few vapers who think that confrontation with the general public is a good way to “educate” the “ignorant” people – the “Golden Opportunity” as someone puts it.

I disagree. There are many ways to fight for one’s cause and confrontation is the least effective. Think about it, even we the vapers who know the products are having heated arguments among ourselves in this forum all the times. So, why do you think that confrontation is effective with the general public who know less than we do?

I’ll ask the vapers on the pro-confrontation side what else have they done to “educate” the public or otherwise fight for the cause they so seemingly passionate about?

Sure, you post in this forum. Sure, you sign partitions and write to your congress-persons. These are good channels. How about putting up a website or blog? Nowadays, there are many free tools and free hosts for anyone who want to do that. How about organizing educational events in your communities? How about uploading educational videos on YouTube? Etc., etc. IMO, these are more effective ways to really educate the general public than to seeking out or coming upon confrontations in public.

Think about it, you don't use confrontation as a mean to educate kids, do you?

 

[Jman8]

You seems to be saying that since the normal respiration and vaping are equal in the sense that “we have no way of knowing what's being put into the air”, then the 2 activities should enjoy the same privilege.

I am suggesting that, yes.

Yet, I do believe we have a way of understanding what both activities are putting into the air for others to breathe and that in vast majority of cases, it is relatively harmless on both counts. That we know this from science. We might not be 100% certain, but at that standard, there is nothing earthly that meets that criteria.

To that, I’ll say that even if we agree that vaping and breathing are the same (which I don’t agree), still vaping produces clouds of vapor that normal breathing doesn’t. Clouds of vapor is a source of annoyance to non-vapers in general. My wife gets annoyed when I vape too close to her in the house and so I refrain from doing so. I don’t look at it as conceding to anything, instead I look at as being considerate to her.

Additionally, as I mentioned, one cannot choose not to breathe while a vaper can choose not to vape.

But if the exhaled breathing thing was carried forth with courtesy being prime factor, we would all wear various forms of mouth filters. A simple mask or one that is elaborate. Either way, we would seek to do this if courtesy was prime. That we don't, and instead just breath willy nilly into the air, and just trust the overwhelming anecdotal evidence says a lot, I believe, in what we consider rude and a matter of respect/courtesy.

One can choose to have a filter on their mouth at most, if not all times. Assuming we cannot vape, eat or drink in public, then there really ought to be no reason given as to why this couldn't occur, unless we are just resorting to idea of, 'exhaled air isn't that big of a deal.'

The difference is that breathing is a normal, regular bodily function which all living human being have to do while vaping is extracurricular. If you are sick and you don’t afford people around you some considerations, then you are rude. If you don’t know that you are sick or that you don’t know what exactly you are exhaling at any particular moment, we can’t flaw you for that b/c you are just doing something normal and regular. On the hand, vaporing is extracurricular and that you do have control over it.

Again, my mouth filter thing noted above presents something I don't think you considered when writing all this. All people could wear a mouth filter and thus minimize / eliminate chance of air borne items being passed along from their exhaled air.

Also, people who are sick in pretty much my entire life will balance it out with 'must go to work' or must do some activity that they committed to. If I'm just starting to get a cold or just getting over one, I'm still carrying, but might feel good enough to be out and about. Even if I weren't feeling well enough, there would be the societal pressure of 'must work if able to' and so all that is in play with what we are discussing. I've also seen enough people in my life who are sick, go to work, and are treated as heroic for doing so. The opposite of being rude, they are persevering and not letting a little cold hold them back.

If the argument is:

“It is unreasonable for you to ask me to refrain from vaping in public when god-only-knows what you are polluting my air and poisoning me with when you breathe out in normal respiration. So, if you are allowed to breathe, I should be allowed to vape.”

Then one can use the same argument to say:

“It is unreasonable for you to ask me to refrain from SMOKING in public when god-only-knows what you are polluting my air and poisoning me with when you breathe out in normal respiration. So, if you are allowed to breathe, I should be allowed to vape.”

As a matter of fact, this argument was used by some smokers during the introduction of indoor smoking ban! It didn’t make sense when applied to SMOKING and it doesn’t make sense when applied to vaping.

With smoking, it was the scientific research that did it in, more so than the annoyance factor. And the research was manipulated, which is perhaps a discussion for another thread. But we have scientific research about what people are generally exhaling and research about what people exhale in the form of SHV. We don't have 100% certainty around any of these things (or really anything). But many of us know that at one point smoking was generally accepted in almost all public places, and now is accepted in almost no place, including own property. I know of smokers who will not smoke in their own place. I attribute that to the scientific research that has lead to a brainwashing of sorts.

With vaping the research has been conducted. It may not be umpteen hundred studies, but coupled with the anecdotal evidence, it is comparable to breathing exhaled air, and not with smoking. A key aspect with smoking and the annoyance factor, I believe, is the lingering effect. Otherwise, we would be allowed to still have designated smoking areas, especially as ventilation systems are able to make it so no 'particles' would be present for non smokers. But because of the brainwashing, just the smell now is enough to send most people into a tizzy and treat it as if they were just exposed to contagious cancer. An expert scientist and doctor could be present, run tests, prove to them that the risk is insignificant, and still the person, based on smell alone would feel they are infected and they don't care what anyone says. With vaping, there is either no lingering effect or very little.

You are comparing mall, store, etc. music with a personal music player, etc. The difference is that mall, store, etc music are background “sound” just as an airplane flying by or the traffic noise on the road. You cannot control it and it would be unreasonable for me to ask you to control it. On the other hand, it is up to you entirely to choose to be rude and pump out loud music from your personal music player or to have a loud face-to-face or phone conversation. And it’s entirely up to you to be courteous and considerate and choose to use earphones in public or keep your voice at a reasonable level in public. The point is you HAVE the control over it.

I decided not to remove your bolding, but did want to include emphasis on the loud, cause you didn't go there before, but now you have.

Loud music is, based on research, understood to be harmful. And yet, there are clubs I've been in, and for sure concerts I've attended, where music was obnoxiously loud.

As music is all around us, it is similar to vaping, but I'd actually say normal volume music is comparable to average vaping experience in public. If vaper is taking a puff, walking right up to someone and intentionally exhaling inches from nostril of stranger, that would be akin to the loud music thing. Otherwise, average vaping is akin to background music, and is what I'd go with for this discussion.

And again, you do HAVE the control to filter your exhaled air. We could live in that world, and if we are being consistent with the vaping argument, we would move in that direction.