[Closed] Vaping in the workplace

I've got dyslexia so to write a lenghty reply on a forum of the quality copy and pasted by Scapegoat takes a lot work from me, There will be somewhere evidence of long typed out responsses but not the standard you thought Scapegoat had typed but then that doesn't fit in with you having a cheap pop at me by saying I was being pissy by poitning out the weakness in your argument. Then you trying to be dead cleaver and claim CO2 stops you breathing so can't possbily be useful at all. Only to find yourself totally embarrasssed meant that you then decide to call me pissy as you looked such a tool, now added by you thinking Scapegoat had typed out his reply.

Hold I need one of these. 😛

nealglover - Member

Neal - I am a pedantic git if you haven't noticed whereas your doctor would be trying to give you the basics simply

I can't find anything in the links from the page you posted that says passive vaping is anything other than harmless/ of a risk.
I may have missed something as I haven't read it all. However I certainly haven't found any conclusions, as you suggested, that say it should be considered dangerous ?

It says no harm can be proved not that its safe - this is a very different thing

find yourself totally embarrasssed

's weird. I really don't feel embarrassment for anything I've written here today or yesterday or ever TBH. I have humility and can accept when I'm wrong. I'm just attempting to fit in by having laugh as most seem to do on this forum. Obviously DezB was correct when he claimed "as with all bants, it's who's doing it." or something. I don't understand that mentality.

As for your writing style and the dyslexia - my apologies. I wouldn't have ribbed you if I'd have known. Sorry.

Edit : And to be fair what you've written is pretty offensive stuff not to mention pretty wide of the mark and confirms the rather nasty side you display on this forum on quite a regular basis, particularly to those with whom you don't have "bants".

As for your writing style and the dyslexia - my apologies. I wouldn't have ribbed you if I'd have known. Sorry.

No offence taken you didn't take a cheap shot just claimed I was pissy due to my short responses.

I'm really not sure how you think I'm being offensive at pointing how you came across but maybe you were having "bants" I've no I"d past caring to be honest.

Anyway as I've say I'm not offended by your claim I can't write more amused to think a forum demonstrates people's writing skills.

pointing how you came across

It actually reads as if you're telling me how it is, to be honest.

But **** it. It's obviously an attempted laugh gone wrong so let's just leave it there, eh.

Sounds like a plan.

vaping in the workplace (or vaping in general IMO):

[img] [/img]

TJ, I'm sorry but your claim sounds like BS to me.

I was told by my Doctor that research has shown that there was no risk associated with passive vaping.

Every bit of research I've read on the subject concludes there is no risk.

You claimed you'd seen reasesrch where....

[quote=TJ]The conclusion was that it should be treated as dangerous

I can't find anything even close to that in any research, or NHS information, and it's the exact opposite of what I was told by the Doctor.

Neal - I am a pedantic git if you haven't noticed whereas your doctor would be trying to give you the basics simply

This doesn't really work either does it ?

You think my Doctor tried to make it "simple" by giving me the exact opposite of the advice generated by the NHS after the research they funded.

Either I've missed something, or you just made up the conclusion because it suited the one you already had.

that research has shown that there was no risk associated with passive vaping.

Does it matter? it's foul disgusting clouds of sickly smelling crap that lingers in the air.

It's plain antisocial puffing them in public.

Does it matter?

It does to me yes.
Thanks.

teasel and Drac
Don't fall out on my behalf! I included the reference to the material I had copied so that it was obvious I hadn't typed it out.

From my diver training days I simply remembered that some breath-hold or freedivers deliberately hyperventilate to increase O2 concentration, but this has the unfortunate side effect of flushing CO2 from the system. The carotid receptors work on both O2 levels which demand the body to breathe when O2 levels fall, but also when CO2 levels alter. It does this by rendering the body unconscious in order to kick-start the autonomous system whereby holding your breath is over-ridden. Thus some freedivers can increase their time under water by several minutes, with the risk that that time underwater can extend to several days. 🙁

Does it matter? it's foul disgusting clouds of sickly smelling crap that lingers in the air.

It's plain antisocial puffing them in public.

U OK HUN? XX

Taken from the link to the NHS website, posted above:

E-cigarettes release negligible amounts of nicotine into the environment, and no health risks to bystanders (e.g. passive smoking) [b]have been identified[/b]

I've highlighted the important bit. Just because the NHS study didn't identify any health risks from passive vaping, it doesn't mean there are none. This is also a long way from stating it's dangerous.

The short of it is that the jury is still out. All that is confirmed is that vaping and passive vaping are significantly less harmful than smoking and passive smoking (and to be absolutely clear - less harmful does not mean harmless).

We're best buddies now Scape. We take long walks and snuggle on the couch. No Netflix yet but I'm hopeful.

Back to the original point- banned everywhere on my site in Dundee, both all tobacco smoking and vaping, by staff, visitors and the public. So no vaping allowed anywhere within the well defined outer perimeter of an office complex with gardens and parking.
And guess what/ The vapers originally volunteered to join in with the pre-existing (Scottish) smoking ban, before our government issued its own guidance to include vaping within other forms of smoking. All smokers must leave the premises altogether.

If someone brought a 'kipper in I'd [s]have them both escorted from the premises.[/s] ask them to smoke it cos I'm planning on being back in time for breakfast. (-:

What a guy.

I've highlighted the important bit. Just because the NHS study didn't identify any health risks from passive vaping, it doesn't mean there are none. This is also a long way from stating it's dangerous.

I understand the phrasing, but my point is that no health risks have been found from passive vaping, and it's not just the NHS study, no other studies have identified any health risks either (and there have been a lot)

And it not like they aren't looking for them is it. Or that they don't know pretty much what to look for.

How TJ can take that information, and correct me to claim that the conclusion was "It should be treated as dangerous" !?

Well, as I said. Smells like BS.

I think, given what is known about passive smoking, it's reasonable to hold the position that passive vaping is a potential danger as there is simply no data on the effect of long term exposure. Therefore, steps should be taken to minimise the exposure to vaping for those who don't voluntarily partake in the habit.

I think, given what is known about passive smoking, it's reasonable to hold the position that passive vaping is a potential danger

Possibly. Although another way of looking at it, would be that after what was learnt, too late, about passive smoking, the research into passive vaping is far better structured and far more focussed and detailed.
So if they can't find any negative effects, then the chances are that there aren't any. ?

Just a thought.

Neal - because thats what it says in the report in waffle words

They'd be negligible compared to living in a city or driving a diesel car for balance with all the other fumes.

Most if not all the health damage from smoking tobacco is from burning organic matter and directly inhaling it.

Vaporising and inhaling a distinctively smaller range of chemicals, has several clear advantages, you're not breathing in a burned substance, and that substance has far fewer chemical constituents than a cigarette does.

Let's not forget it's not the nicotine that is the major health hazard in smoking, it is the burned inhaled organic matter that contains thousands of other chemical constituents.

Neal - because thats what it says in the report in waffle words

What you realll mean, is that [b]You [/b] have decided that's what it says ?

Despite it being fairly clear (to a Doctor for example) that it doesn't.

And in all the report conclusions I've read, they arrive at a different conclusion to you. (and I've read a fair few)

I'll wager you can't find a single independent report conclusion that says it should be considered Dangerous.

Neal - thats what the report actually says. Quite clearly

I paraphrase
No risks have been identified but no long term studies have been done yet due to the fact its new tech and in the absence of evidence proving safety long term it must be treated as if it is a risk

In a nutshell, best estimates show e-cigarettes are 95% less harmful to your health than normal cigarettes,

That does not say they are safe but safer than cigs significantly

None of the studies reviewed above alter the conclusion of Professor Britton’s 2014 review for PHE. While vaping may not be 100% safe,

There is no way on earth 95% less harmful = safe!

Lots of mis-information on this thread

1) Nicotine is addictive ... yes but it's actually not that addictive by itself. The effect and addictive parts are hugely enhanced by at least 2 other components that come from burning tobacco

2) Nicotine is toxic.. well yes it is... it's a toxin like caffeine and you wouldn't want either in significant quantities on your skin or elsewhere but a typical vaping fluid is only a few percent...
Lots of things are toxic - indeed almost anything in sufficient quantity...

3) Non smokers are nicotine free ... not unless they don't eat any of the nightshade family including potatoes and tomatoes... both contain nicotine

3) Significant nicotine is exhaled....significant can be couched in the above.. are people getting MORE nicotine than eating a packet of crisps or a tomato sauce???
The only viable published study published results and had panic, not on nictotine but on aluminium oxides....
What is really significant is questions were asked where this came from as it wasn't possible from the vaping...
After much ado it was discovered a test subject had used a spray deodorant before the testing....

The point is at the levels of detection no significant nicotine can be detected in the passive groups blood.... even when locked in a small closed room where the detection limits show that deodorant used hours before IS

It's vapour NOT particulates ... so what is inhaled stays in the "vaper" unlike cigarette smoke....and what isn't is not really significant in terms of do they get more than a tomato salad...

The idea of absolute proof of "no harm" isn't possible but it's like saying I might die because I get hit by a recumbent cycle someone buys at the other end of the UK.... I can't prove it won't be resold to someone local and I can't prove that one day I won't be crossing the road and ....

but the argument we should then ban all recumbent's isn't being made

For years using a CD player or laptop on a plane was POSSIBLY going to cause it to crash ... using a phone in a hospital may POSSIBLY cause all the life support to stop working .... a mobile phone is POSSIBLY going to ignite petrol vapour better than a spark plug (of which most cars have at least 4)... etc etc.

Neal - thats what the report actually says. Quite clearly

I paraphrase
No risks have been identified but no long term studies have been done yet due to the fact its new tech and in the absence of evidence proving safety long term it must be treated as if it is a risk

Rather than "paraphrase" why don't you just post a link to the report ?

Well I followed a bloke onto the station this morning who was producing a huge sweet, sickly smelling fog. I certainly wouldn't want that next to me indoors.

Neal - the links are there its easy to find
"We also do not yet have data on their long-term safety. However,the current best estimate by experts is that e-cigarette use represents only a fraction of the risk of smoking "
So lower risk than smoking but not risk free. NO knowledge of long term effects.

"regular exposure over many years is likely to present some degree of health hazard, though the magnitude of this effect is difficult to estimate"

I can't be bothered to find any more direct quotes

I can't be bothered to find any [b]more[/b] direct quotes

Can you find any quotes at all that are actually relating to passive exposure, which is what is being discussed.

Neal - the links are there its easy to find

So "Do your own research" eh?

You are jivebunny and I claim my €5

Well I followed a bloke onto the station this morning who was producing a huge sweet, sickly smelling fog. I certainly wouldn't want that next to me indoors.

Exactly, it's an antisocial habit, regardless of it being harmless or not.

Exactly, it's an antisocial habit, regardless of it being harmless or not.

It's not an "antisocial" habit.

Some people are antisocial in the way they use an ecig. Plenty others aren't.

Some people are antisocial in the way they eat. Other aren't. Eating isn't an antisocial habit. Microwaving kippers in the office is though.

If you got off your high horse long enough to realise that some people are actually trying to be responsible, by finding out the health implications, you might come accross as less of an opinionated dick.

(You were trolling for a reaction obviously, so there it is)

How is it on Planet Indignant this morning?

We all ok? Nobody exploded with incandescent rage at the constant injustices life heaps upon them, have they?

Nobody's had someone break wind within a 100 yard radius of them? Or anything else simply frightful like that that would, like, just TOTALLY ruin the rest of your day?

Good. Glad to hear it. Keep smiling!! I'm just having a vape. .... menthol, since you ask? 😀

[quote=tjagan]
"We also do not yet have data on their long-term safety. However,the current best estimate by experts is that e-cigarette use represents only a fraction of the risk of smoking "

I found this quote using google.

It's not related to passive exposure so it's not relevant to the discussion.

[quote=tjagain]"regular exposure over many years is likely to present some degree of health hazard, though the magnitude of this effect is difficult to estimate"

I have googled this, but can't find this quote anywhere.

Is it also not related to passive exposure? Where is it from?

Neal - we were obviously at cross purposes then. I thought we were discussing your GP saying it was safe.

On passive effects then the risks will clearly be very small but not absent

Second quote

www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/311887/Ecigarettes_report.pdf

menthol, since you ask?

Love monthol. I use menthol crystals dissolved in flavourless liquid.
Lovely and clean taste, not sickly at all.

[quote=tjagain]Neal - we were obviously at cross purposes then.

Really ?
Seems pretty clear to me what we were discussing.

[quote=nealglover]
And even related to its social acceptance, "passive vaping" has been studied independently and the conclusion so far is that it poses no risk.

[quote=tjagain]
neal - no actually the conclusion was they could not prove a risk. Not the same at all. Nor could they prove it safe.

[quote=tjagain] - Member
Neal - its really a semantic point. One of the conclusions from the report IIRC was it should be treated as dangerous as it has not been around long enough to know what the long term effects are.

I think it would be reasonable to assume that if inhaling from e cigs directly carries 5% of the risk of smoking then passive inhalation risks would be of a similar % of the passive risks of smoking which would be fairly negligible but not zero.

Who ****ing cares? Really?

Listen.... you're not going to get cancer. Well... not from people smoking e-cigs in your general vicinity anyway.

And I'm far less likely to get cancer than I was 2 years ago, when I was doing in 20 Bensons a day. In theory anyway.

To summarise.... in the nicest possible way.... can you please stop bleating FFS?!!

[img] [/img]

😀

Binners is Jeremy Clarkson and I claim my £5!

And I'm far less likely to get cancer than I was 2 years ago, when I was doing in 20 Bensons a day. In theory anyway.

To summarise.... in the nicest possible way.... can you please stop bleating FFS?!!

I think it would be reasonable to assume that if inhaling from e cigs directly carries 5% of the risk of smoking then passive inhalation risks would be of a similar %

So. you can't find any reasearch that backs up what you claimed about passive exposure then ?
That's it should be presumed to be dangerous. No.

(I am ignoring your frankly weak claim that you didn't know we were talking about passive exposure, because I've read back through the thread, and I've mention passive in just about every post)

I think it would be reasonable to assume that if inhaling from e cigs directly carries 5% of the risk of smoking then passive inhalation risks would be of a similar % of the passive risks of smoking which would be fairly negligible but not zero.

No it's not a similar percentage...
There is no zero risk... you presently have a non zero risk of being hit by a plane falling out of the sky... or being squirted by DOT fluid if someone riding next to you bursts a hose (and DOT fluid is a lot worse for you than the amount of nicotine in passive vapour)

Any vapour inhaled has no detectable nicotine output in passive people in the same room ... studies have tried but whatever isn't is lost in background noise. The most serious study detected aluminium oxides it turns out from deodorant used BEFORE the test ...

Well the perceived dangers may well be vanishingly small, which is great for smokers switching to vaping, but, they still stink, which isn't very good for the rest of us.

Who cares about the science papers is/isn't bad for you etc. Being addicted to a Dr Who sonic screwdriver and puffing out clouds of cherry vapour isn't cool and just shouts 'hey look at me I'm an addict but in a really obnoxiously obvious way and I just don't care'. Can't these bedwetters get their addict fix in the spaces set aside for fag smokers?
If I ran a communal workspace with a [b]P[/b]ersonal [b]E[/b]lectronic [b]N[/b]icotine [b]I[/b]nhalation [b]S[/b]ystem sucker I wouldn't let them blow their shite at work.

Well the perceived dangers may well be vanishingly small, which is great for smokers switching to vaping, but, they still stink, which isn't very good for the rest of us.

There are lots of benefits for non-smokers....
but to take the point of smell ..I honestly believe this is actually motivated by expectation. You can't smell the nicotine only the "flavouring" but if you were in a completely different context.... and ignore the fact its a e-cig (it could be a blueberry or forest pine air freshener) then most people would probably vary between neutral and actually pleasant... and way more people than might say Channel #5 is "pleasant or neutral" ...

Secondly it doesn't linger ... so it doesn't make clothes smell etc.

Being addicted to a Dr Who sonic screwdriver and puffing out clouds of cherry vapour isn't cool and just shouts 'hey look at me I'm an addict but in a really obnoxiously obvious way and I just don't care'. Can't these bedwetters get their addict fix in the spaces set aside for fag smokers?

Nooone I know (and I'd say the majority) thinks it's cool, just better than being addicted to something that definitely does do damage.

Equally most of them don't actually want to be in the spaces set aside for smoking... that's the addiction they are trying to actually break...

What stevextc said.

People like you kick off about people smoking, then when said people ween themselves off the fags, which is bloody difficult, with something that is generally (as far as we know) harmless, you get your petticoats all aquiver about that too.

When what you really mean by your angry, incoherent rant is simply: "ban everything I don't like!"

When what you really mean by your angry, incoherent rant is simply: "ban everything I don't like!"

It wasn't a heartfelt angry rant (My workplace has my rules so vaping/vapers are not an issue) couldn't give a toss about banning the fruity whizzy cloud pipes. Just don't do it near me. (I feel the same about any other intrusive activity like eating stinky greasy chicken wings on public transport, loud music playing on phones or not understanding how the shower/deodorant works)

Being addicted to a Dr Who sonic screwdriver and puffing out clouds of cherry vapour isn't cool and just shouts 'hey look at me I'm an addict but in a really obnoxiously obvious way and I just don't care'.

😆

And [i]you're[/i] calling people that use e-cigs bedwetters? When you take your nappy off, you might want to hoover all that sand out of your fanny too.

😆

By the sounds of it, given your likely blood pressure, I doubt you'll have to worry about any of it for too much longer.

You should chill out a bit...

[img] [/img]

What stevextc said.

People like you kick off about people smoking, then when said people ween themselves off the fags, which is bloody difficult, with something that is generally (as far as we know) harmless, you get your petticoats all aquiver about that too.

When what you really mean by your angry, incoherent rant is simply: "ban everything I don't like!"

The thing is it is [b]more than socially acceptable[/b] to have a go at smokers...or people trying to quit...

however complaining for the sake of it makes me feel it's like an electric car owner complaining about petrol/diesel fumes until people start cycling to work and then complaining that the roads are full of damned cyclists and people ware turning up to work sweaty and why should they put in a shower ..

Who cares about the science papers is/isn't bad for you etc. .... [blah blah]

The Grown Ups do.

Shush now.

So much angst. Best nip out and up your dose.
..ahhnd breeeath... 🙄

I think Mr. Personal (Safe) Space might have missed a few grains of sand. 😆

What's up? Did you smell someone's sandwich?

Hehe. The Charlie Brooker wannabe with his "hilarious" ranty rants accusing people of being angsty.

Just after moaning about the "stink" of blueberries or whatever, then accusing ecig users of being "bed wetters"

Priceless. 😆

Oh no! the big hitters are circling 😯

Aw, sweets. Are you feeling vulnerable? Can I smell wee again?

Jeez, you should have warned that you couldn't take a bit of what you love handing out here.

??? What do you mean "take" it's a couple of middle aged paperclip salesmen getting eggy over vaping.
Oh look I have shat my pants 😥

Can't these bedwetters get their addict fix in the spaces set aside for fag smokers?

Nah, because the cool kids won't let them play.

Oh look I have shat my pants

That's a bit too much information. You bedwetters - always oversharing. I think maybe you need to retreat into your safe space for now.

Awwwwwwww bless..... have the big boys given you a wedgie and nicked your dinner money again to buy [s]20 B&H[/s] some watermelon and mango flavour e-liquid?

it's a couple of middle aged paperclip salesmen

My shoes aren't comfy enough to sell paperclips for a living.