[Closed] These E Cigarettes in the office??

It doesn't. It emits vapour just like a kettle.

Assuming you are boiling nicotine in the kettle.

The smell doesn't hang. At all.
Does anyone vape around you? Do you work in my office?

Look they smell and they emit stuff
You dont care, which is fine, so please dont pretend it is not doing anything.

Thankfully my office is in my house so my rules, I've never seen anyone vaping in any office I have been to in the last 2 years and I go to a lot of places. Most people I know are polite enough to take their habit elsewhere. I've wandered past a few and there were a collection of smells coming from them - not water. The other major concern is normalising it smoking used to be so that we end up with another generation of nicotine addicts to keep the cig industry happy.

To be fair though, vaping makes me chuckle; as you look like you are fellating a robot's special parts.

I'm not pretending anything, truth is nobody knows. I very much doubt there is any risk from the passive aspect as I know what's in the stuff, but as I said ill happily respect anyone's wishes not to be caped around but I won't listen to an opinionated person with zero knowledge or experience telling me to "take it outside" just because the interweb entitles them to an opinion.
BTW; the cig industry hates vaping. They are funding some research of their own.

Do people actually use the term vaping whilst speaking?

"Fancy coming outside for a vape" 😯

BTW; the cig industry hates vaping. They are funding some research of their own.

Tobacco manufacturers initially dismissed electronic cigarettes as a fad; however, the purchase of blu by Lorillard for $135 million in April 2012 signaled their entry into the market.

I very much doubt there is any risk from the passive aspect as I know what's in the stuff, but as I said ill happily respect anyone's wishes not to be caped around but I won't listen to an opinionated person with zero knowledge or experience telling me to "take it outside" just because the interweb entitles them to an opinion.

You are not an opinionated person who read a list of ingredients then...

TBH it is a debate with nowhere to go we dont know for sure what the effects are on you or on anyone nearby. Given this the prudent thing is to not smoke it indoors / public spaces.

Woke up from my ankle surgery last year in the QE Hospital in Gateshead to find the man opposite smoking a cigarette shock horror!! 😯 , 'its Gateshead' I thought where people go to Tesco in there underpants 'nothing to see here'. The ward sister calmed my impending rage by informing me it was a falsey and wasn't a problem.

Got a feeling these things are being promoted the same as cigarettes were in the 50's by Laramie man 'safe, healthy and what a real man smokes'

EDIT: as a non smoker I couldnt give a monkeys, just fear that people are being mislead once again.

[img] [/img]

You can never argue with hard Dr facts!!!

I will declare an interest first as I use them. However, I do find these threads pretty depressing. Ecigs are a fantastic innovation, they are weaning people off cigarettes, improving their health, improving their bank balance, probably will reduce the cost of providing nicotine replacement therapy to the NHS - overall it is good news. Yes, an industry body to regulate would be a good idea to weed out the charlatans, but the big picture is great.

In this context, I do think wanting to ban it because of a bit of smell and a high unlikely and certainly unproven secondary health risk comes across as pretty small minded. It is not beyond the wit of man to come up with a compromise that works for everyone.

It is remarkable how keen so many liberals are on banning things.

Mixing your own liquid makes a massive difference.

I mix my own with glycerin, distiller water, menthol crystals and a tiny bit of nicotine extract.

It tastes like extra strong mints but doesn't smell at all when exhaled.

I know exactly what's in it, and in what quantities, It also has the benefit of been massively cheaper than buying mass produced Chinese made crap off the market or in one of the thousands of shops that have popped up selling Chinese made stuff with rebranded labels on.

That's the stuff that stinks and is potentially full of stuff not listed on the ingredients label.

Ecigs are a fantastic innovation, they are weaning people off cigarettes, improving their health, improving their bank balance, probably will reduce the cost of providing nicotine replacement therapy to the NHS - overall it is good news. Yes, an industry body to regulate would be a good idea to weed out the charlatans, but the big picture is great.

I do think wanting to ban it because of a bit of smell and a high unlikely and certainly unproven secondary health risk comes across as pretty small minded

Pitiful use of the "liberal" attack. Is it really illiberal to object to inhaling the fumes of you feeding your addiction in a "healthy" way? Christ what would you say if we banned you being a drug addict ?

IMHO the swapping of the method of remaining addicted to fags gets me as excited as watching a heroin addict become a methadone addict.
If i had to guess i would go for
It probably is healthier than fags - almost anything will be
It probably is not healthy

[quote=mefty ]In this context, I do think wanting to ban it because of a bit of smell and a high unlikely and certainly unproven secondary health risk comes across as pretty small minded. It is not beyond the wit of man to come up with a compromise that works for everyone.There already [i]is[/i] a compromise. They're not banned. Just don't "inflict" them on others.

TBH it is a debate with nowhere to go we dont know for sure what the effects are on you or on anyone nearby. Given this the prudent thing is to not smoke it indoors / public spaces.

Yes it may help people quit actual smoking but still leave them nicotine dependent.

Anyway, somebody give me 10 grand so I can buy this please;
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/BONNEVILLE-T100-BY-MACCOMOTORS-/291307098645?pt=UK_Motorcycles&hash=item43d3419215

I had a summer job at school once upon a time doing stock taking and cleaning in the labs. One of the lab technicians told me the most dangerous thing there was a tiny bottle of nicotine.

The youth risk need to be monitored but there doesn't seem to be much evidence that this is a significant issue at the moment.

I don't think my liberal wording was weak. I guess I am of the view that a general attitude of live and let live is a pretty good idea and if I find someone's behavior annoying I will address it by finding a way that works for both of us. I think the ACAS note addresses the issues quite sensibly.

I guess I am of the view that a general attitude of live and let live is a pretty good idea and if I find someone's behavior annoying I will address it by finding a way that works for both of us.

The ACAS note is very good and balanced but still makes it clear that you can just ban it completely.

As for the youth the Alcohol and Tobacco industries targeted young people I'd expect these to follow on very soon. They are becoming a lot more than a nicotine alternative/reduction device and more of an accessory.

[quote=wrecker ]I was being a grumpy pants. I'm shit when [s]I'm hungry.[/s] I need my nicotine fix

Fixed.

If you are doing something annoying, stop it and I let you live.

Gosh you are frightfully tough.

I am I took down several tough guys from behind the safety of my keyboard just last week.

I find it the only way.

To be fair though, vaping makes me chuckle; as you look like you are fellating a robot's special parts.

Banned in my workplace from all spaces including canteen, rules state if you want to use them you are to use the smoking zone outside at the back of the carpark like the other smokers.

Please take me back to pre 2007 (driving in my golf r) and let me blow real cigarette smoke in your faces in the pub

Please take me back to pre 2007 (driving in my golf r) and let me blow real cigarette smoke in your faces in the pub

I like drinking tea.

How'd you like that 2nd hand? C'mon, it's mostly water, and urea isn't anywhere near as toxic!

So, four pages in and no science or evidence to quantify risk from passive exposure?

shows a complete lack of dedication!

any to quantify the absence of risk? Perhaps people don't want to have to inhale whatever flavored smells the guy next to you is smoking today.

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/14/18/

Think of all the toxic chemicals you inhale from perfumes, after shave and deodorant on a daily basis.

if I went in to HR asking for them to be banned at work, what do you think they would say to me?

Think of all the toxic chemicals you inhale from perfumes, after shave and deodorant on a daily basis.

Any science or evidence to quantify this?

if I went in to HR asking for them to be banned at work, what do you think they would say to me?

If your nicotine addiction means you need to be hooked up to one of these all day long then perhaps that is an issue.

Any science or evidence to quantify this?

😀

I've done a bit of research, and going of on a tangent, found out that you can get a li-ion battery powered one, specially designed for weed.
Much healthier than smoking and no more need for tobacco. Portable, odourless and very discreet, more efficient and effective.

I'm getting the Lupine equivalent (German, fully programmable and suitably expensive) delivered tomorrow......

[quote>

That's contact allergy not that same then.

Link to the high tech german one please

Think of all the toxic chemicals you inhale from perfumes, after shave and deodorant on a daily basis.

If I came into the office and sprayed a can of lynx into the air every half hour through the day I imagine I'd get told to piss off fairly sharpish.

I haven't read the whole 4 pages so apologies ..

Why do people pinch on e-fags rather than hold them in the more conventional between the finger style of normal fags?

Weird.

My girlfriend has one, it's allowed in most restaurants bars etc. Some places ask her not to use it as they say it creates problems with real cigarettes as people want to light those up. She's had them a few years and she buys genuine batteries and has never had an issue with "explosions". The cost of the fluid is about 15% of the cost of equivalent cigarettes and you can vary the strength of the nicotene, they are very good for cutting down/giving up.

As a non smoker I don't notice the vapour at all - it doesn't bother my eyes, nose etc, the e-cig is allowed in the car !

Also of note is the politics around this.

The tobacco companies are loosing huge amounts of potential sales as people switch. bad for profits.

governments are loosing huge amounts of potential tax receipts as e-cigs attract VAT but none of the other substantial duties, as I posted e-cig fluid costs 15% of the cost of cigarettes.

In France the pharmacists wanted it regulated like a drug so they would have a captive market in selling them (like the do with nicotene patches etc), they lost their test case.

So all the "vapour is dangerous" and comments about potential health impacts come directly or indirectly from the huge vested interests in the tobacco industry and government.

As someone who's lived with a "vaper" for the last 2 years I can say there are zero notable effects of the vapour, it leaves no residue not even on the device never mind car, furniture etc.

as I posted e-cig fluid costs 15% of the cost of cigarettes.

17ml of expensive, high quality juice costs me £9 (that's about as pricey as it gets) and lasts 10 odd days.
a pack of 20 Marlboro lights is £9, whis is one days' fags.
£9 vs £90. In ten days. £243/month.
Some companies (and the govt) are losing a LOT of money. Vaping has some very powerful enemies.
Outfits like nicorette aren't over the moon either.

Outfits like nicorette aren't over the moon either.

Diversification is the key there.

Google "vaping" and see what the first advert is!

So all the "vapour is dangerous" and comments about potential health impacts come directly or indirectly from the huge vested interests in the tobacco industry and government.

This pseudo-conspiracy stuff is rubbish

@kona - the government makes a profit from smoking, the tax collected exceeds the health related issues. Also, being quite controversial here, people dying younger saves the government a huge amount in future pension costs and old age care provision.

Planes. Some airlines have a policy against e-cigs many do not. What I can say is that they don't set off any alarms and done discretely no one notices. IMO an e-cig is no more likely to explode than a phone/tablet.

I mix my own with glycerin, distiller water, menthol crystals and a tiny bit of nicotine extract

I bet a lot of smokers wouldn't buy none-branded fags, I wonder if those buying vaping stuff are similarly careful about the sources.

BTW vaping may get people off cigarettes, bit specious to suggest they help people "quit smoking" tho, they are still addicted to nicotine and with the ability to inhale nicotine in places you didn't used to, it is likely to push peoples intake higher than ever.

[quote=jambalaya] As someone who's lived with a "vaper" for the last 2 years I can say there are zero notable effects of the vapour, it leaves no residue not even on the device never mind car, furniture etc.

Well you wouldn't notice would you 😉

@aracer you have no idea how OCD I am about my car, I would notice 😉

- the government makes a profit from smoking, the tax collected exceeds the health related issues

It's cost around £6Bn a year to treat smoking related illnesses, money that would be better spent elsewhere.

They need to control vaping now before they find out it's not safe. Cigarettes were considered safe at one time and even promoted as a health product.

@Drac, yes I understand that but without smoking they wouldn't have all that tax and duty would they ? Its arguable that alcohol causes more damage to health as well as social issues than does smoking.

If you suspect vaping is unsafe then conduct some more proper research, there has been quite a lot done to date and it's all been pretty constructive (ie its safe). Also if you "control vaping" your are likely to drive some people back to cigarettes.

Nicotene isn't bad, its all the other tar and sh-one-t in cigarettes which is unhealthy.

Drac - Moderator
- the government makes a profit from smoking, the tax collected exceeds the health related issues
It's cost around £6Bn a year to treat smoking related illnesses, money that would be better spent elsewhere.

They need to control vaping now before they find out it's not safe. Cigarettes were considered safe at one time and even promoted as a health product.

government takes in £12.3billion a year from smokers.

Regards to vaping, the need to regulate the manufacturing of it. and start the research. Banning is ridiculous.

Nicotene isn't bad, its all the other tar and sh-one-t in cigarettes which is unhealthy.

I don't disagree that there's lots of other unhealthy stuff in fags aswell btw.

Like alcohol?

In case you weren't aware, lots of things are addictive, and nearly everything is a poison.

I said this before, but in my previous work is banned primarily because of appearance. We had client's in the office quite a lot and the management didn't think the look of the minions kicking back and puffing away was what they wanted to project to clients.

There's alcohol in fags? Clearly I'm missing out.

Like alcohol?

(and no one here is asking for alcohol or vaping to be banned anyway, controlled yes banned no - or atleast I haven't seen anyone suggesting a ban)

D0nk, You intimated that consumption of addictive poisons was de facto unhealthy

I reckon you've never heard of hormesis

aracer, anisyl alcohol is a common additive in cigarettes....

aracer - Member
There's alcohol in fags? Clearly I'm missing out.

D0nk, You intimated that consumption of addictive poisons was de facto unhealthy

Hormesis well I know the word now, thanks. Yeah a glass of red a week may help prevent heart disease I'm sure that's why we in the UK have got such a healthy relationship with alcohol and bugger all heart disease. Thing is great swathes of the population tend to overdo their drug/substance of choice be that caffeine, fags, booze, THC, codeine, take your pick, so outside of the "beneficial" dosage anyway.

I'm not allowed to get pissed in the office even with the very low chance of passive imbibing.

Thought it made my point clearer, sorry.

Thing is great swathes of the population tend to overdo their drug/substance of choice be that caffeine, fags, booze, THC, codeine, take your pick, so outside of the "beneficial" dosage anyway.

Sugar, pies, telly etc. too

Thing is that basing 'control' let alone prohibition on the fact that something might be overused/abused by some is of, at the very least, questionable effeciveness, a classic case of making the many suffer because of the actions of the few

The issue is of course not whether e-cigs or nicotine is theoretically poisonous, because nearly everything is, the question is whether there is any demonstrable harm to users, or even a realistic likelihood of harm (let alone passive users, whose exposure is magnitudes lower) - if there is, then of course controlling them is valid, however at the moment there is no evidence to that effect and we're stuck in a trap where people are calling for them to be regulated (at work for example) because they look like something that is banned, so must be dangerous (actually dangerous, not containing theoretically poisonous things, because as said, everything does and we are all exposed to low levels of poisonous things daily without batting an eyelid) which is just bonkers.

government takes in £12.3billion a year from smokers.

[url= http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/images/publications/cough%20up%20-%20march%2010.pdf ]Esitmated to cost the UK £14Bn.[/url]

Cost to UK "society", not actual cost. Note that this figure has been "calculated" by a couple of blokes who have estimated smoke breaks FFS.
I call strong BS on that entire "report" and I don't even smoke.

Caffiene is a poisonous addictive drug.

Sugar, pies, telly etc. too

*I'm not saying other industries are whiter than white

Drac - Moderator
government takes in £12.3billion a year from smokers.
Esitmated to cost the UK £14Bn.

Not a particularly convincing report.

Nice jump you've made from 6 billion to 14 billion though! 😆

It's against our worldwide corporate policy to use an e-cig in the office.

Didn't stop a contractor puffing away on one last week though.

Nice jump you've made form 6 billion to 13 billion though!

No I didn't. They're different figures.

Off the top of my head I notice that it doesn't factor in pension savings from people dying younger in it's final calculations.

Not all of them do though as we spend £6Bn keeping them going.

Drac - Moderator
Nice jump you've made form 6 billion to 13 billion though!
No I didn't. They're different figures.

Off the top of my head I notice that it doesn't factor in pension savings from people dying younger in it's final calculations.
Not all of them do though as we spend £6Bn keeping them going.

btw, I agree smoking is daft, there's a reason I switched to vaping! 😆

I think we can agree that smokers largely cover the financial impact of their own health problems?

Can we?

Drac - Moderator
I think we can agree that smokers largely cover the financial impact of their own health problems?
Can we?

Well the numbers seem to state they do.

[quote=seosamh77 said]I think we can agree that smokers largely cover the financial impact of their own health problems?

How did you work that out BTW ?

allthepies - Member
seosamh77 said » I think we can agree that smokers largely cover the financial impact of their own health problems?
How did you work that out BTW ?

(12 billion taken in tax + pension savings + normal health care costs that they would have used anyhow) - drac's dubious report =(suggests) that the cost is pretty neutral.

Nor the tax from the people employed by the tobacco industry, the suppliers (printers etc). Smoking is bad, I personally would be happy if it were banned outright. But it ain't a cost thing.

Well the numbers seem to state they do.

It costs the NHS £6Bn per year, so can you find the figures show the NHS gets over £6Bn from Tobacco?

[quote=seosamh77 said]
(12 billion taken in tax + pension savings + normal health care costs that they would have used anyhow) - drac's dubious report =(suggests) that the cost is pretty neutral.

Yeah, but how much of that tax take goes on healthcare ?

Drac - Moderator
Well the numbers seem to state they do.
It costs the NHS £6Bn per year, so can you find the figures show the NHS gets over £6Bn from Tobacco?

That's a governmental issue if they aren't passing it on to the NHS. Doesn't negate the fact that smokers pay enough for their health issues.

[quote=seosamh77 said]
That's a governmental issue if they aren't passing it on to the NHS.

😆

Well I suppose if ciggies were banned, we could have a smaller NHS so some savings could be made there.

[quote=allthepies ]Yeah, but how much of that tax take goes on healthcare ?

That's kind of like asking how much of the road tax is spent on building roads 😈