Banned From Vaping?

[Gonloopy]

@Chiefnutter. I completley understand that you want to protect those around you that you love from any potential harm.
As do I.
I have spent a long time researching vaping, and one thing that comes out time again across many studies is the risk to others by passive vaping is infinitesimally small.

Have a look here The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary: First Study to Examine Passive Vaping Under Real-Life Conditions Finds No Chemicals of Concern in Room Air

Or if you can't be bothered, here is the key outcome

The researchers compared the constituents of room air during passive vaping to those present during passive smoking. During passive smoking, levels of chemicals were as follows (all in micrograms per cubic meter):


Nicotine: 34
Acrolein: 20
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: 9.4
Carbon monoxide: 11
Xylene: 0.2
Toluene: 1.7


The detected levels of these same chemicals during the passive vaping session were as follows:


Nicotine:0
Acrolein: 0
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: 0
Carbon monoxide: 0
Xylene: 0
Toluene: 0


(Romagna G, Zabarini L, Barbiero L, Bocchietto E, Todeschi S, Caravati E, Voster D, Farsalinos K. Characterization of chemicals released to the environment by electronic cigarettes use (ClearStream-AIR project): Is passive vaping a reality? Presented at the 14th Annual Meeting of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2012, Helsinki, Finland.)


And there are a lot more trials that back this up.....
​

 

[Diche]

The trials, studies and analysis you mention in your first post exist as Gonloopy has illustrated with one of what is quite a large body of work. I think the problem is you haven't read them yet. If you are waiting to see the results posted in the media and a more accessible format, I wouldn't hold your breath. There are too many vested interests at work here for that to really happen in the near future. I have read a lot of the reports in the last 3 months, and many of the original scientific papers on which those reports are based. I am happy to vape in public whether in the open air or in an enclosed space. That is not to say I do so without asking permission from the owner of a building, and I must admit I am wary of doing so with extremely strong smelling juices. Not because I believe it will harm those around me, but just because I think it is impolite. I wouldn't drench myself from head to toe in perfume either. Nor would I eat garlic bread on a bus. Those things are not harmful, but they can be a little bit rude.

 

[corinna]

​the problem is anyone can ban anything on there premises

 

[Chiefnutter]

Thanks guys, thats some really good replies & thanks for that info Gonloopy ;-), Its also nice to know a larger percentage of vapers would be polite & mature enough to ask the people sitting around them if they minded them vaping instead of just having the ignorant attitude of just doing it because they think they know its safe :-)

 

[Colonelboom]

Thanks guys, thats some really good replies & thanks for that info Gonloopy ;-), Its also nice to know a larger percentage of vapers would be polite & mature enough to ask the people sitting around them if they minded them vaping instead of just having the ignorant attitude of just doing it because they think they know its safe :-)

here is a massive amount of info for you to digest:

Evidence submitted to the FDA concerning electronic cigarettes

Straight from Dr Farsalinos

 

[Panter]

@Chiefnutter. I completley understand that you want to protect those around you that you love from any potential harm.
As do I.
I have spent a long time researching vaping, and one thing that comes out time again across many studies is the risk to others by passive vaping is infinitesimally small.

Have a look here The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary: First Study to Examine Passive Vaping Under Real-Life Conditions Finds No Chemicals of Concern in Room Air

Or if you can't be bothered, here is the key outcome

The researchers compared the constituents of room air during passive vaping to those present during passive smoking. During passive smoking, levels of chemicals were as follows (all in micrograms per cubic meter):


Nicotine: 34
Acrolein: 20
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: 9.4
Carbon monoxide: 11
Xylene: 0.2
Toluene: 1.7


The detected levels of these same chemicals during the passive vaping session were as follows:


Nicotine:0
Acrolein: 0
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: 0
Carbon monoxide: 0
Xylene: 0
Toluene: 0


(Romagna G, Zabarini L, Barbiero L, Bocchietto E, Todeschi S, Caravati E, Voster D, Farsalinos K. Characterization of chemicals released to the environment by electronic cigarettes use (ClearStream-AIR project): Is passive vaping a reality? Presented at the 14th Annual Meeting of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2012, Helsinki, Finland.)


And there are a lot more trials that back this up.....
​

I'm slightly intrigued by the 0 nicotine! Did they give reporting limits with that data?

EDIT: Actually, I'll stop being lazy and go look!

EDIT again: No, they don't. There are some very shaky stats there, it is pretty meaningless in reality. Going by the link from Plumeblu above, the figure should have been around 3.4ug/m. But, if the reportling limit was 5, it would explain a 0 result.

Obviously, I'm a vaper, and support it as much as I can. But, I think that unless these studies have a solid foundation with facts and figures, they're too easily picked apart by those trying to enforce unjustifiable bans and therefore maybe even more destructive.

 

[Gonloopy]

I'm slightly intrigued by the 0 nicotine! Did they give reporting limits with that data?

EDIT: Actually, I'll stop being lazy and go look!

EDIT again: No, they don't. There are some very shaky stats there, it is pretty meaningless in reality. Going by the link from Plumeblu above, the figure should have been around 3.4ug/m. But, if the reportling limit was 5, it would explain a 0 result.

Obviously, I'm a vaper, and support it as much as I can. But, I think that unless these studies have a solid foundation with facts and figures, they're too easily picked apart by those trying to enforce unjustifiable bans and therefore maybe even more destructive.

Im afraid Panter, we going to have to agree to disagree on this one. The source article can be found here

In my view this is a well constructed trial. The methods used are clearly described and baseline measurements were taken


I am am not too sure where you are coming from with reference to reporting limits, in this trial a zero is not equalling a null entry?.

 

[ZT]

​the problem is anyone can ban anything on there premises

and to an extent rightfully so.

Vaping is all about choice to me .. the choice to vape .. rather than smoke - but the same thing should work the other way around in a fair society .. if someone says to me "you can't do that in here" it should be respected, because that is their choice .. if its on their premises

If however I'm in a vape friendly place - and Im asked to stop by someone who doesnt own it "because they don't like it" they can frankly bollocks

 

[Panter]

Im afraid @Panter, we going to have to agree to disagree on this one. The source article can be found here

In my view this is a well constructed trial. The methods used are clearly described and baseline measurements were taken


I am am not too sure where you are coming from with reference to reporting limits, in this trial a zero is not equalling a null entry?.

Ah, no, that's far more comprehensive, thank you.
That study details the nicotine concentrations used, duration, room volume, variables etc that weren't in the original link.
What looked "suspect" was a value of 34ug/m of nicotine after cigarette used, but 0 when e-cigs were used. If the study below yours is representative, you'd expect a value of ~ 3.4ug/m rather than 0.
All analysis will have a limit of determination (LOD,) that is the lower limit that either the instrumentation, the sample collection methods, or usually both can work to usually based upon how repeatable results are by RSD.

I don't have time to go through the whole article (nor do I want to having worked on analysis methods all week!) but it looks as if all the parameters are specified.
Thanks for the link, I will have a read through at leisure next week

 

[anthonyb]

I feel I must apologize for kicking off earlier in this thread.

I forget that others are not so knowledgeable on the proper science done on e-cigs. And the shear volume of bull crap dished out by the anti's, leads others to believe that bull crap.

I have a lot going on at a personal level, at the moment, and that is clouding my judgment. So I think it's best if I read only, and refrain from commenting, for the time being.