Risk profiles.. or the lack thereof

[steffijade]

@steffijade I have read many of your posts and I agree with many of the basic principles of what you say, but I do find you have a tendency to be militant in the way you express yourself lol.

I have read all of the WHO report and personally I think their proposed regulations are draconian and counterproductive. Not because they would make current vapers go outside. After all we had to do that when we were smokers and whilst it was sometimes inconvenient it didn't effect my personal choice to continue to smoke. I disagree with them because they would have the effect of discouraging current smokers from switching to vaping. The negligible risk to non vapers/non smokers is to my mind far outweighed by the benefits of reduced healthcare costs for the population as a whole.

I think we should all be able to breathe clean air free from contaminants not of our choosing. I think car manufacturers should be continually pressurised to lower emissions. I think manufacturing companies should have strict controls to prevent them from polluting the atmosphere.

You aren't vaping indoors to avoid the risk of combusted tobacco. You are vaping indoors because you can and because you enjoy it. Personally I feel the choice regarding vaping indoors should be left to the owner of a given premises and that nonvapers should be tolerant because they want themselves and future generations to be free from the healthcare burdens of tobacco use. If me vaping indoors encourages other smokers to switch then the risk/benefit analysis of continuing to permit indoor vaping is met.

The interesting question is what happens if all smokers were to switch to vaping. Where would we be then lol.

I freely admit to being a bolshy cow when I perceive that injustice is in progress.. I guess I'm an idealist at heart but turned into a cynic by a world run by control freaks.

If all smokers turned to vaping it would mean a gaping hole in the pockets of government and big pharma and the tobacco control industry would all be out of work. The only way to maintain the status quo would be to classify eliquid as a tobacco product and attempt to bring vaping under the umbrella of tobacco control regulation. Where would we be if that were to happ... oh, wait a minute.. it's already begun.

Apologies if my bolshyness offends but I think the greatest weapon those who oppose vaping have is our own complacency and inaction and they'll exploit it to the fullest extent... if we allow them to.

 

[Diche]

steffijade I quite enjoy your bolshyness and these little debates. They make me THINK and consider my viewpoints and preconceptions and the last thing I want is to end up like a sheep herded into one way of being for the benefit of corporate toss pots and at the detriment of free thinking humanity. I am not a stranger to standing up and being counted, I quite enjoy it

 

[steffijade]

@steffijade I quite enjoy your bolshyness and these little debates. They make me THINK and consider my viewpoints and preconceptions and the last thing I want is to end up like a sheep herded into one way of being for the benefit of corporate toss pots and at the detriment of free thinking humanity. I am not a stranger to standing up and being counted, I quite enjoy it

Please accept this brand new, shiny tinfoil hat.

 

[Diche]

Please accept this brand new, shiny tinfoil hat.

Hmmm....... benefit/risk analysis of the paper hat vs tinfoil hat vs lead lined hat

 

[South Coast Vaper]

How about we just go back to.... if somebody asks you to stop doing something because it's bothering them, then you should do so, out of respect, as long as they asked you respectfully.
This can all be a lot simpler than everyone is making it out to be, is my point.

Spot on. Have to agree with this point whole heartedly. If vaping is to be seen in the light in which most of us see it then by being reasonable and accommodating we will not alienate those in which we are trying to educate. As ex smokers (many of us) we know the benefits all to well but for non smokers I can understand the uncertainty of health risks. Particularly around children or those with low immune systems, etc.


Here's one I made earlier using Planet of the Vapes

 

[nikki from mars]

Midnight Toker if the whole argument were not politicised to hell and back then I am sure we would all rather do this... Unfortunately there are people out there who just want to shut vaping down and will use any means they can to achieve this. ..

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Planet of the Vapes mobile app

 

[VaperCaper]

Mr Antz is not, as far as I can tell, wanting us to give up vaping but to not vape in an enclosed space with him in it because we do not understand the risks associated to it in terms of his health.

Its obvious that he is not a vaper and as such any risk to his health from our vape is a risk which he doesn't wish to take. This seems like a reasonable stance to me as regardless of the level of risk it is not one he chooses or wishes to take.

Except it's not reasonable at all.

I'm not saying that vapers should be allowed to vape anywhere they please. It's unreasonable to force a ban in public spaces though because of unintended consequences.


For example, work vehicles. It's illegal to smoke in a vehicle used for work. Even if you own the vehicle and you are the only person who ever uses it you still break the law smoking in it. A vape ban would introduce similar stupidities for vaping.

The single biggest problem with such a law is vape shops. If a customer walks into a vape shop they reasonably expect to be able to test one or two flavours before making a purchase. How does testing out flavours work in vape shops with a blanket ban in place?

how do juice makers test liquids they are making if they can't vape them at work?

How many smokers who fancy giving vaping a go maybe, might not do so because they couldn't go into a vape shop and try some stuff out first?

Owners of buildings should be free to choose whether or not they permit vaping in them or not. It shouldn't be forced on people unless there is a clear reason for it.

Removing freedoms should not be undertaken lightly as they are much harder to reinstate than they are to legislate away.

 

[Danny K]

Except it's not reasonable at all.

I'm not saying that vapers should be allowed to vape anywhere they please. It's unreasonable to force a ban in public spaces though because of unintended consequences.


For example, work vehicles. It's illegal to smoke in a vehicle used for work. Even if you own the vehicle and you are the only person who ever uses it you still break the law smoking in it. A vape ban would introduce similar stupidities for vaping.

No it's not ! If you are the only one in said vehicle at the time it's OK, of you have a passenger you still can if they say it's OK.


The single biggest problem with such a law is vape shops. If a customer walks into a vape shop they reasonably expect to be able to test one or two flavours before making a purchase. How does testing out flavours work in vape shops with a blanket ban in place?

The same way most pubs and clubs got round the no smoking law !

how do juice makers test liquids they are making if they can't vape them at work?

See above !

How many smokers who fancy giving vaping a go maybe, might not do so because they couldn't go into a vape shop and try some stuff out first?

What if they try it in said vape shop and still don't like it ?

Owners of buildings should be free to choose whether or not they permit vaping in them or not. It shouldn't be forced on people unless there is a clear reason for it.

Most vape shops are leased or rented therefore not owned so this is down to the leaser.

Removing freedoms should not be undertaken lightly as they are much harder to reinstate than they are to legislate away.

Nothing is free..


I've said my bit, night all


Sent from my D2303 using Planet of the Vapes mobile app

 

[Mawsley]

He likes to apply this black and white approach to a real world that works on shades of grey (no, not those shades of grey you filthy minded vapers ).

He and the others like him need to be called out on this unrealistic attitude and their demands for 100%, absolute safety need to be exposed for the unattainable, unreasonable bullcrap that they are.. hence the title of risk profiles ...or the lack thereof.

And it is this world view that stops me from having discussions with people, they aren't open to reason or debate - and so I will take the piss, launch into vitriol or amuse myself at their expense.

When asked I will give my perspective but I won't debate it with those I see as intellectually incapable of discourse. I let others with far more patience than I can muster do it for me.

I have a PhD in Cuntology.

 

[South Coast Vaper]

Midnight Toker if the whole argument were not politicised to hell and back then I am sure we would all rather do this... Unfortunately there are people out there who just want to shut vaping down and will use any means they can to achieve this. ..

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Planet of the Vapes mobile app

I agree on the political front and wish there was not so many bigoted arseholes in this world. I for one would be truly gutted if there was a public ban introduced on vaping. I agree there is no substantial justifiable scientific argument to implement this just fear of the unknown. I guess the point I wanted to make in agreement with BucketMod is that it should be down to those who vape to have consideration for others and make an informed decision as to if it's a suitable place/time to vape and not those with their heads firmly up their political arse. Apologies if my points are sometimes muted by grammatical weakness I am no scholar as you can most likely tell. I would be first in line to stand up for the right to vape and just wanted to try and make my stance on this clear.
Let's just hope common sense can prevail.


Here's one I made earlier using Planet of the Vapes