Stupidity has reached a new level: NYC bans e-cigs in public places

[Balthazar]

New York's City Council has approved extending the city's strict smoking ban to include electronic cigarettes, which emit a vapor.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

E-cigarettes emit harmless (to others, at least) vapor and no odor, why the hell would they ban them in public places? Even forbidden in public parks! HAHAHA! "Bad example for the kids". Unbelievable bullshit.

Only logical explanation is Big Tobacco lobby.

 

[chayton]

That's the same mayor who was going to outlaw large sodas, isn't it?

 

[incrediblestuff]

Didn't really read the article but what springs to mind are increasing reports of exploding cheap ass e-cigs, and of course not all people making use of them are actually smoking the non harmless variants..

 

[Balthazar]

Didn't really read the article but what springs to mind are increasing reports of exploding cheap ass e-cigs, and of course not all people making use of them are actually smoking the non harmless variants..

It has absolutely nothing to do with explosive e-cigs and it might be harmful (to a small degree) for the smoker (nicotine) but there's no such thing as "second hand vapor" or anything like that. Hence banning them from public places is vile and disgraceful.

They should be allowed everywhere, including in planes. Heck, the government should actively promote them to current tobacco smokers since they dont destroy the lungs and throat, as opposed to cancer sticks.

 

[incrediblestuff]

Like i said mate, didn't read the article but idespite that the market flood with cheap ass e-cigs is not to be waivered as non existant, and since they can explode it is a public safety issue

Here's is a random google about the possible risks of e-cigs, just for arguments sake:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Mind you i have nothing against them, and also am surprised they would be banned where-ever, but i also don't really know much about them: do you?

 

[Balthazar]

Like i said mate, didn't read the article but idespite that the market flood with cheap ass e-cigs is not to be waivered as non existant, and since they can explode it is a public safety issue

Here's is a random google about the possible risks of e-cigs, just for arguments sake:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Mind you i have nothing against them, and also am surprised they would be banned where-ever, but i also don't really know much about them: do you?

They explode as much as electric cars explode (ie: non-issue). As for the "danger", it's because they aren't regulated and they have tested some Chinese crap.

 

[LaHutti]

There has been so many tests and so much research on these e-cigarettes, every single one showing that they're 1000 times less harmful to smokers, than tobacco cigarettes, and there is absolutely zero "second hand" problem.
Not a single test has shown the opposite. The continuing bashing is only about one thing : money.

Big Pharma and the tobacco industry is losing huge amounts, and have been lobbying like no one has ever been lobbying in history, to get stories in the media, like the one you linked to above.

The only chemical in question is Nicotine, and that is comparable to caffeine, so I guess coffee should be the next on the ban list.

I have been following it very closely for about a year, and it is simply mind blowing to watch.

I anyone is interested, I can link to several lab tests performed by highly recognized heart surgeons and brain specialists.

 

[bigjohn]

From someone who lives in the US it doesn't seem to be related to money or lobbying or big tobacco or health issues. To me it seems like our government just likes to randomly ban things that people enjoy.

It's all about some legislator imposing his/her personal view of what is 'right and moral' on the citizenry.

 

[rockycatt]

witch mayor is really on crack

PS tooth picks make you look like a mobster better ban those also [N Y is long on sex nuts in office ]

 

[incrediblestuff]

They explode as much as electric cars explode (ie: non-issue). As for the "danger", it's because they aren't regulated and they have tested some Chinese crap.

Remember, just for arguments sake, but tell that to the guy who had half of his face blown off

 

[vinylweatherman]

There has been so many tests and so much research on these e-cigarettes, every single one showing that they're 1000 times less harmful to smokers, than tobacco cigarettes, and there is absolutely zero "second hand" problem.
Not a single test has shown the opposite. The continuing bashing is only about one thing : money.

Big Pharma and the tobacco industry is losing huge amounts, and have been lobbying like no one has ever been lobbying in history, to get stories in the media, like the one you linked to above.

The only chemical in question is Nicotine, and that is comparable to caffeine, so I guess coffee should be the next on the ban list.

I have been following it very closely for about a year, and it is simply mind blowing to watch.

I anyone is interested, I can link to several lab tests performed by highly recognized heart surgeons and brain specialists.

Tobacco is banned in public too, so it's not as though smoking the e-Cigs in the park is displacing tobacco cigs, you can't smoke them either! Next they will be banned in the privacy of your own home!

 

[thebigs]

Best thing ever

Ive been smoking the liquid e-cigs for nearly a year now.Really enjoy them and to be able to have a quick puff at work is great and of course can smoke in the home without worrying about the crap that was in the real cigs.Costs me about 9 euro a week instead of the 90 euro a week i used to spend on proper fags.Yes there might be something in them thats not good for you but a damn lot less harmful than the real ones.
Anyway i would rather give my few extra shillings that i save weekly to a casino than giving it to these ripping off governments.

 

[LaHutti]

I'm pretty sure, if you search deep enough, you can find a story about ONE guy, who had his ear blown of, by the battery in his cell phone exploding.

A battery, however safe it's supposed to be, CAN explode, but the risk is extremely small. It's the nature of batteries, and not only batteries in an e-cigarette.

I remember several stories about lighters exploding in peoples pockets, and I haven't seen anyone suggesting that we ban those.
I know several people, who died from smoking tobacco, and definitely many people unable to breathe normally, and still, I don't see a ban of tobacco coming any time soon (One can only wonder why (money again ? ), as it has been proven, without a doubt, that it kills people by the thousands).

Edit: Did a quick search on exploding cell phones, and found a story about them, a lot like the one you posted earlier about e-cigarettes. Should we ban cell phones now ?

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Remember, just for arguments sake, but tell that to the guy who had half of his face blown off

 

[vinylweatherman]

I'm pretty sure, if you search deep enough, you can find a story about ONE guy, who had his ear blown of, by the battery in his cell phone exploding.

A battery, however safe it's supposed to be, CAN explode, but the risk is extremely small. It's the nature of batteries, and not only batteries in an e-cigarette.

I remember several stories about lighters exploding in peoples pockets, and I haven't seen anyone suggesting that we ban those.
I know several people, who died from smoking tobacco, and definitely many people unable to breathe normally, and still, I don't see a ban of tobacco coming any time soon (One can only wonder why (money again ? ), as it has been proven, without a doubt, that it kills people by the thousands).

Edit: Did a quick search on exploding cell phones, and found a story about them, a lot like the one you posted earlier about e-cigarettes. Should we ban cell phones now ?

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Better ban laptops too, there was a recall a while ago because many were prone to detonation due to a batch of faulty batteries.

 

[Googobucs]

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

A study published in 2012 in the journal Indoor Air looked at the contents of e-cigarette vapor and found that exhaling the vapor releases measurable amounts of carcinogens and toxins into the air, including nicotine, formaldehyde, and acetaldehyde. The authors concluded that e-cigarettes are a new source of chemical and aerosol exposure and their potential health impact is a concern that should be investigated further.

Thank you NY. Now if we can get smoking banned in Casino's too, that would be nice. But as was mentioned previously, it's all about the money, so I don't expect that to happen any time soon.

 

[LaHutti]

I'm sorry, but people need to be VERY careful trusting "articles" like these. and potentially have a ban on the safest, best working alternative to tobacco smoking ever.
Please, at least let people know who did the "study", and how was it made. Anything else is propaganda (and there is a LOT of that going around).

Now articles like these 2, performed under realistic conditions, and by several actual scientists, at least to me, would be considered to be a reliable source of information:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

A study published in 2012 in the journal Indoor Air looked at the contents of e-cigarette vapor and found that exhaling the vapor releases measurable amounts of carcinogens and toxins into the air, including nicotine, formaldehyde, and acetaldehyde. The authors concluded that e-cigarettes are a new source of chemical and aerosol exposure and their potential health impact is a concern that should be investigated further.

Thank you NY. Now if we can get smoking banned in Casino's too, that would be nice. But as was mentioned previously, it's all about the money, so I don't expect that to happen any time soon.

 

[Googobucs]

I'm quite sure we can spend all day googling for articles that support our own point of view and hail the quality of the science, but I think the bottom line is that there has not been enough time or research done to support either side, so i prefer to ere on the side of my health.

I'm sorry, but people need to be VERY careful trusting "articles" like these. and potentially have a ban on the safest, best working alternative to tobacco smoking ever.
Please, at least let people know who did the "study", and how was it made. Anything else is propaganda (and there is a LOT of that going around).

Now articles like these 2, performed under realistic conditions, and by several actual scientists, at least to me, would be considered to be a reliable source of information:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[LaHutti]

That's fine, and in that case, I would like a ban on hot coffee. Steam is released from that, and that steam probably contains traces of caffeine, which can be compared to Nicotine, ergo steam from your coffee, could potentially harm me.

We really need to NOT just ban anything that someone else enjoy, just because we can. And especially if a ban could harm a lot of people, who could quit smoking with these things. We know tobacco kills, and to keep people on tobacco, because some big companies are spreading propaganda, to avoid losing money, just isn't right. Besides you're wrong in saying, that no research has been done. There has been LOT'S of research done, and new research is being done every day. Unfortunately a lot of it is being ignored, because the results are not the ones a lot of people want to see.

Other than that, my personal view is, that way too many people are way too busy telling other people what they can and should do. That's a totally different matter, but just as important.

I'm quite sure we can spend all day googling for articles that support our own point of view and hail the quality of the science, but I think the bottom line is that there has not been enough time or research done to support either side, so i prefer to ere on the side of my health.

 

[vinylweatherman]

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

A study published in 2012 in the journal Indoor Air looked at the contents of e-cigarette vapor and found that exhaling the vapor releases measurable amounts of carcinogens and toxins into the air, including nicotine, formaldehyde, and acetaldehyde. The authors concluded that e-cigarettes are a new source of chemical and aerosol exposure and their potential health impact is a concern that should be investigated further.

Thank you NY. Now if we can get smoking banned in Casino's too, that would be nice. But as was mentioned previously, it's all about the money, so I don't expect that to happen any time soon.

Quite, but this mad mayor has obviously not understood that the park is OUTdoors, and hence such studies are irrelevant.

If we banned EVERYTHING that was equally as risky to health as the chemical traces in e-Cig vapour, we would have to knock down all the building built with "modern plastics" as they have been found to cause this odd "sick building syndrome" among office workers through the steady release of traces of various chemicals over their lifetime, many of which are carcinogenic (well, they are if fed to lab rats at 1000x the concentration). His limo would also have to be replaced with a bike, or he could even walk. There would be no buses, trams, or trains, as the internal combustion engine is far more polluting than e-Cig vapour, and forget the electric variants as the power generation plants are also banned because of their emissions.

We would have to go back to all natural materials, stuff our bodies are designed to cope with in the environment. Each small community would elect a chief, and we can do away with the mayor, all the senators, congressmen, MPs, delegates, etc.

This is the end result of banning everything that research shows to have a non zero health or safety risk.

 

[bigjohn]

Gentlemen, gentlemen.

Laptops, cellphones, e-cigs, hot coffee, plastics, please stop giving our Government new ideas on what to ban next.

 

[Googobucs]

what you all fail to mention is that smoking is already banned in the park. Smoking, is smoking is smoking. In any form. But since some people don't get that concept, we have to waste tax $$$ to redefine what smoking means. Comparing it to coffee steam ....is just ridiculous sensationalism.

This is the end of my rant on this topic.
have a great holiday week

 

[vinylweatherman]

what you all fail to mention is that smoking is already banned in the park. Smoking, is smoking is smoking. In any form. But since some people don't get that concept, we have to waste tax $$$ to redefine what smoking means. Comparing it to coffee steam ....is just ridiculous sensationalism.

This is the end of my rant on this topic.
have a great holiday week

Not so, smoking is simply one method of taking Nicotine, the same as coffee is one way of taking Caffeine. Caffeine is available in pill form, marked as "equivalent to n cups of strong coffee". It's not the taking of nicotine that causes the problem in smoking, it's the burning of tobacco to release it that causes a couple of thousand other compounds to be released which can then affect those who choose not to take nicotine, nor the other risks associated with taking it in tobacco form.

Provided nicotine itself remains a legal drug, one cannot say that any form of taking it should be outlawed whilst still allowing it to remain legal.

Alcohol is also legal, but some people seriously affect the wellbeing of others by choosing to binge on it, and then create a nuisance of themselves outside other people's houses at 1am.

It is best to promote the least risky way of taking such drugs whilst they remain legal.

It is plain silly to even ban tobacco outside, let alone eCigs.

Here in the UK e-Cigs remain legal indoors and in the work place, but individual establishments are free to set their own policies on e-Cigs. There is no absolute right to use an e-Cig in a restaurant here, and some have set policies that ban their use inside because it creates conflict with other customers. The problem with a ban at government level is that it prevents a business from deciding it will cater for e-Cig users and gain for themselves a pool of customers that find they can't use them in other establishments. Pubs here even campaigned to be allowed to provide separate "smoking bars" in order to keep hold of the hardcore smokers who also drank there, rather than lose such customers to supermarket bought alcohol drunk outside or at home.

The pressure is REALLY intended to stamp out tobacco completely, and get people to quit nicotine altogether, rather than using e-Cigs when out, and smoking proper ones when they can. Weaning people completely off nicotine will NOT suit the tobacco companies as there will be less demand for their tobacco products for home use.

 

[ChillBill]

Was at the A&E (or ER for US people) a few days ago. A guy presents who had a heart attack 3 month earlier, complaining of abdomen pain. In the consultation it's revealed he had lung cancer a few years previous, from that, a piece of lung tissue was removed and further treatment caught it in time. Now you'd think that would be a huge motivator to throw the cigs in the bin, huh! Nope the guy is still smoking.

Cigarettes are more additive than heroine. But banning smoking e-cigs or anything else isn't the solution. Many of us here could, I'm sure, brainstorm any number of ideas to help those who smoke, to stop smoking, if they wished. But these preventative measures, would ultimately kill the blood money earned by those, fighting hammer and nail, to keep the tobacco industry alive.

Unfortunately when large sums of money are involved and people's well-being is the price, capitalism wins every time. Hopefully the younger generation moving up through the ranks, will not sell out to the devil, like these pompous nitwits holding government positions these days.

 

[weesie]

This is the end of my rant on this topic.
have a great holiday week

I certainly hope so.

Most smokers I know are very caring about their habit and try not to offend anyone. I myself do NOT smoke in the house at home, do NOT smoke in the car, do NOT smoke in other peoples cars, and try VERY HARD NOT to smoke around non-smokers.

Vaping seems to be the thing many, many people have been able to switch to in order to kick the actual "smoking" habit. I say good for them!

But, it seems some people are NEVER happy. Do you only ride a bicycle to get where you are going? Do you live out in the woods, away from car, factory exhaust? Perhaps under a rock?

Sorry, I just take offense when people seem so damn self righteous!

 

[Balthazar]

what you all fail to mention is that smoking is already banned in the park. Smoking, is smoking is smoking.

Here's a good analogy for the current situation:

Imagine a place where they'd ban motorcycles because of the noise and pollution then later on decide to ban bicycles because they look like motorcycles.

Because, you know, riding, is riding is riding.

 

[LaHutti]

That is exactly what it's about.

E-cigarettes involve absolute zero smoke. I think that's what the anti's fail to understand, and it's SO frustrating, not being able to get the message through.

Here's a good analogy for the current situation:

Imagine a place where they'd ban motorcycles because of the noise and pollution then later on decide to ban bicycles because they look like motorcycles.

Because, you know, riding, is riding is riding.