CTA: Thank you, Haven, Signatures

[Diche]

Three ways you can help vaping survive this week:

1. It looks like there won't be a ban on vaping in public places in England (No ban on e-cigarettes in English pubs after Wales reveals plan). Write to the Department of Health to thank them for this fantastic decision.
Why not include in your message why ecigs work for you?
Use this form:Contact DH

2. Haven Holidays need to know why this sign is so so wrong -

you could tweet (@haven), contact them via facebook (https://www.facebook.com/havenholidays) or use their live chat (Contact Us). Or, dare we suggest it, all three?

3. The Lib Dem "Stop Welsh Labour's e-cigs ban" needs a lot more signatures - Get 3 friends or family members to sign it: Stop Welsh Labour's e-cigs ban


http://vapersinpower.co.uk/call-to-action

 

[R rhabarbarum]

....

2. Haven Holidays need to know why this sign is so so wrong -

...............

Too right! That looks like a greengrocer's apostrophe in the bracketed part

 

[dotcodotuk]

Too right! That looks like a greengrocer's apostrophe in the bracketed part

*sharpens pitchfork*

Apart from the heinous usage of the aforementioned apostrophe, what exactly is the problem with the sign?

 

[Ment]

*sharpens pitchfork*

Apart from the heinous usage of the aforementioned apostrophe, what exactly is the problem with the sign?

It makes no sense. It's like comparing cyanide to air because they both contain oxygen.

 

[dotcodotuk]

It makes no sense. It's like comparing cyanide to air because they both contain oxygen.

Well, no, not really. Although perhaps if you'd said nitrogen you might have a point, however tenuous.

If the issue is comparing electronic cigarettes to real cigarettes because they both contain nicotine, which unless I'm missing something is on the balance of probability factually accurate, a more suitable analogy would be prohibiting the use of nicotine inhalers in the area in question.

Is that the issue at hand here? Linking vaping to smoking? Or is it because people are being told they can't vape somewhere?

Let's assume the bracketed section had been left out. Would that still have people up in arms?

 

[knome]

Haven: I've not addressed the sign issue but I've sent a message through their customer contact page regarding this smoking policy...

What is the smoking policy on the Parks and in the Holiday Homes?

My message...

Dear Haven
Your smoking policy states: "We do provide designated outside smoking areas. This also applies to those smoking E cigarettes."
Please could you explain the phrase "smoking E cigarettes" as you can't smoke an e-cigarette; there is no combustible material. Advising people who are trying to quit to use a smoking area is definitely the wrong message and needs to be reviewed by your company.

Although vaping in enclosed public spaces is not illegal it is perfectly acceptable for Haven to impose their own restrictions. A simple "using E cigarettes" or "vaping E cigarettes" would be preferable and acknowledge that vaping is not smoking and a healthier alternative.

Regards,

 

[R rhabarbarum]

Let's assume the bracketed section had been left out. Would that still have people up in arms?

But that's the best bit


"E-cigarette's [sic] still contain nicotine"

Do you not think nicotine is something of a red herring? Surely both non-smokers and non-vapers might be more bothered by other aspects of either habit, in an enclosed space.

 

[knome]

Also...

 

[Ment]

Well, no, not really. Although perhaps if you'd said nitrogen you might have a point, however tenuous.

If the issue is comparing electronic cigarettes to real cigarettes because they both contain nicotine, which unless I'm missing something is on the balance of probability factually accurate, a more suitable analogy would be prohibiting the use of nicotine inhalers in the area in question.

Is that the issue at hand here? Linking vaping to smoking? Or is it because people are being told they can't vape somewhere?

Let's assume the bracketed section had been left out. Would that still have people up in arms?

The issue is the suggestion that exhaled nicotine is harmful. Many studies have shown that exhaled vapour is of a higher quality than the air on a typical city street.

My less than tenuous point was that they have picked on a harmless ingredient in exhaled vapour as an excuse to ban vaping. Exhaled nicotine is not one of the harmful components of exhaled cigarette smoke so my analogy is correct.

 

[dotcodotuk]

The issue is the suggestion that exhaled nicotine is harmful. Many studies have shown that exhaled vapour is of a higher quality than the air on a typical city street.

But they haven't suggested that - you've jumped to that conclusion of your own accord. Nothing on that sign suggests a link between exhaled nicotine from a cigarette to an electronic cigarette.

What they have said is factually accurate - electronic cigarettes still contain nicotine. It is there for all to see, grocer's apostrophe and all. Whatever the underlying meaning might have been, that's all conjecture at this point.

And bringing in some unnamed study about the air on a typical city street would be another tenuous link; we're in a bar, presumably one that's air-conditioned, in a private building - not on a city street.

My less than tenuous point was that they have picked on a harmless ingredient in exhaled vapour as an excuse to ban vaping. Exhaled nicotine is not one of the harmful components of exhaled cigarette smoke so my analogy is correct.

Again, they aren't claiming that at all. And even if they were, they are still raising the issue with nicotine which would be present in both normal and electronic cigarette exhalation, would it not?

So no, I'm afraid your analogy was not correct. And not just because cyanide doesn't contain oxygen.

Look, I get your point. But the thing is, you're making something out of nothing for the sake of 'saving vaping' or whatever the hell the cause is. There really isn't anything to be making a fuss of here and by bothering Haven over something so trivial you're providing anyone with an agenda against vaping with masses of negative PR.

In a private environment, Haven are perfectly entitled to ask you to to whatever the hell they please. There really isn't any problem with that sign apart from the one that rhabarbarum initially pointed out.