Irish Rail bans e-cigarettes

darkpagandeath

Hilly Bill wrote: »

It good that they are banned, why should someone breath in fumes that has come out of the mouth of someone else.

Like carbon dioxide and water vapor Coming out of it already ?

Hilly Bill

P_1 wrote: »

For the umpteenth time, smoking and vaping are two totally distinct things

Vaping banned on trains. Great .

VinLieger

God the ignorance of some people about a simple piece of technology that allows you to exhale scented air is astounding

DarkJager

VinLieger wrote: »

God the ignorance of some people about a simple piece of technology that allows you to exhale scented air is astounding

It's infuriating that some people are so thick they can't tell the difference.

Doublelime

P_1 wrote: »

For the umpteenth time, smoking and vaping are two totally distinct things

Yeah vaping that's what I meant... Maybe after there has been some solid scientific evidence that the exhaled vapor does not harm anyone then it should be allowed.

darkpagandeath

DarkJager wrote: »

It's infuriating that some people are so thick they can't tell the difference.

Yeah it's the same people sitting outside schools in their SUV's with the engines on waiting for their kid to come out. Not realising they are exposing other peoples children to dangerous fumes. That's apparently fine but scented air ....

Red Crow

Some people don't want vapour exhaled in their faces thanks that smells of coffee or caramel thanks.

darkpagandeath

Doublelime wrote: »

Yeah vaping that's what I meant... Maybe after there has been some solid scientific evidence that the exhaled vapor does not harm anyone then it should be allowed.

Some people will choose to ignore any data that goes against their agenda. I mean some people still believe pylons cause cancer.

Red Crow wrote: »

Some people don't want vapour exhaled in their faces thanks that smells of coffee or caramel thanks.

You know food makes your breath smell of what you have eaten as well... And who are these people going out of their way to blow vapor in peoples faces ?

DarkJager

Red Crow wrote: »

Some people don't want vapour exhaled in their faces thanks that smells of coffee or caramel thanks.

Get over yourself, there's much worse scents you're exposed to on public transport.

mathepac

Gongoozler wrote: »

... Irish Rail have banned them from their train and DART services ....

Excellent news.

cordni

I have never got a smell from vapour. Not sure where all these claims of smells come from.

Carawaystick

Tiddlypeeps wrote: »

Perfume is a chemical. We have all stood next to someone on public transport that seems to have thought it was a good idea to wear half a bottle. This is not banned.

However, some of the ingredients in Perfume are being banned by the EU as a few people are allergic to them. IÉ don't seem to mind this though....


http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/13/lk-perfume-eu-idUSL5N0LI4BQ20140213

Senna

The liquid in e-cigarettes contains dihydrogen monoxide and that's a fact, do you really want to run the risk of that being breathed in by your children.
Ban them now.

P_1

Doublelime wrote: »

Yeah vaping that's what I meant... Maybe after there has been some solid scientific evidence that the exhaled vapor does not harm anyone then it should be allowed.

Ingredients found in exhaled vapour.

Nicotine - I think I've already explained how negligible an amount is exhaled.
Flavouring - Passes the same standards that food flavourings does. You'd have as much to fear from somebody exhaling after taking a bite from a muffin.
PG and VG - Commonly found in bottled water. Do you fear for your health after somebody exhales after taking a sip of Ballygowan?

despot

They should be banned in public places. Speaking as someone who used one for some time, I only smoked it where I would've smoked cigarettes. As opinion shared by many people I met who used them. Mainly because I didn't want the hassle of "whats that what are you doing???" but also because before I got mine I saw people smoking them walking around shopping centres and such and just thought they looked like tossers.

If you're that desperate to smoke an e-cig that you need to do it walking around dunnes stores or in a cafe then you can stop fooling yourself that you gave up anything.

Edit; Before anyone tries to reply with DO YOU KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SMOKING AND VAPING yes, I do. I don't see why people want to do it where they wouldn't smoke a cigarette however. Especially ex smokers.

darkpagandeath

Senna wrote: »

The liquid in e-cigarettes contains dihydrogen monoxide and that's a fact, do you really want to run the risk of that being breathed in by your children.
Ban them now.

I see what you did there :P

You know who I hate. People who vape in cinemas. Dickheads

kippy

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You know who I hate. People who vape in cinemas. Dickheads

This is why the same laws as cigarettes need to be applied.

darkpagandeath

kippy wrote: »

This is why the same laws as cigarettes need to be applied.

Why ? they are not cigarettes.

kippy

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Why ? they are not cigarettes.

Because its as ignorant a habit as smoking.
Ive seen people in lectures vaping. Idiots.

darkpagandeath

kippy wrote: »

Because its as ignorant a habit as smoking.
Ive seen people in lectures vaping. Idiots.

One has been medically proven to be really bad for you.

The other with all current reports has zero to little if any affect on anyone breathing it in.

And who are they hurting ? or do you have information saying they have health implications ? And the habit part is a bit petty I don't do it so you cant either.

mardybumbum

darkpagandeath wrote: »

One has been medically proven to be really bad for you.

The other with all current reports has zero to little if any affect on anyone breathing it in.

And who are they hurting ? or do you have information saying they have health implications ? And the habit part is a bit petty i don't do it so you cant either.

The onus is on the vapers to prove otherwise.

kippy

darkpagandeath wrote: »

One has been medically proven to be really bad for you.

The other with all current reports has zero to little if any affect on anyone breathing it in.

And who are they hurting ? or do you have information saying they have health implications ?

I have a problem with someone vaping an unknown (to me) substance. Thats one issue. Secondary issue is simple manners.

darkpagandeath

mardybumbum wrote: »

The onus is on the vapers to prove otherwise.

The cry of the "Think of the children" brigade how about the other way around ?

dr.bollocko

kippy wrote: »

I have a problem with someone vaping an unknown (to me) substance. Thats one issue. Secondary issue is simple manners.

Needlessly obtuse.

As disgusting as smoking?

Catch a clue before the train leaves.

P_1

mardybumbum wrote: »

The onus is on the vapers to prove otherwise.

The individual components have been proven to be safe on countless occasions. Logic dictates that the sum of the parts should also prove to be safe and recent studies have indeed suggested that they are safe to use.

What more do you want?

darkpagandeath

kippy wrote: »

I have a problem with someone vaping an unknown (to me) substance. Thats one issue. Secondary issue is simple manners.

By that logic you don't eat out as you don't know exactly what is in the meal you are being served.

kippy

dr.bollocko wrote: »

Needlessly obtuse.

As disgusting as smoking?

Catch a clue before the train leaves.

Are you trying to put words in my mouth.....thats not at all what I said.

kippy

darkpagandeath wrote: »

By that logic you don't eat out as you don't know exactly what is in the meal you are being served.

Its not at all the same logic.

mardybumbum

darkpagandeath wrote: »

The cry of the "Think of the children" brigade how about the other way around ?

When you structure your sentence in a grammatically correct fashion then I may be able to answer what I assume is a question. It makes no sense to me currently.

mardybumbum

P_1 wrote: »

The individual components have been proven to be safe on countless occasions.

No they have not.

Logic dictates that the sum of the parts should also prove to be safe and recent studies have indeed suggested that they are safe to use.

Yes because when chemical reactions occur with benign substances they always lead to the formation of benign products. I'm being sarcastic here just in case that wasn't evident.

What more do you want?

Just for the above to be addressed in a more convincing fashion.

darkpagandeath

mardybumbum wrote: »

When you structure your sentence in a grammatically correct fashion then I may be able to answer what I assume is a question. It makes no sense to me currently.

So that's a no to having an answer. As pointing out grammar is pretty petty.

godwin

Just use them in the jacks, the smell of poo poo in there trumps anything out of an E-Cig

mardybumbum

darkpagandeath wrote: »

So that's a no to having an answer. As pointing out grammar is pretty petty.

It is petty usually, and I detest grammar nazi's/spellcheckers as much as the next, but I actually couldn't make head nor tails of what you said. Sorry

Stavros Murphy

A fit of the Vapers. Used to mean somthing else, now it's a descrition for a ticket inspector spotting someone sucking on their wafty flute. As a smoker (gasp, you devil, do you not know blah blah, feck off) I happen to think Vapers look like Gandalf impersonators. I'd rather suck on an actual flute, tbh. And I'd rather not do that either, thanks all the same. Ban ahead, I'll be on the roof, having a fag. And ducking for bridges.

darkpagandeath

mardybumbum wrote: »

It is petty usually, and I detest grammar nazi's/spellcheckers as much as the next, but I actually couldn't make head nor tails of what you said. Sorry

The cry of the Think of the children brigade. How about the Anti vapers prove it has any health effects at all ? Currently most evidence says no effect. May make more sense now.

VinLieger

I detest the smell of babies and young children BAN THEM!!!!!!

Oh wait.......

mardybumbum

darkpagandeath wrote: »

The cry of the Think of the children brigade. How about the Anti vapers prove it has any health effects at all ? Currently most evidence says no effect. May make more sense now.

Think of the Children Brigade?
Why, yes I will. I'll also consider teenagers, young adults, the middle aged and OAP's also. Why would I restrict my concern to a specific age bracket.

The fact that you believe that it is up to the anti vapers to prove that there is no harm to 3rd parties is ridiculous and doesn't deserve a response.
Thankfully, most sensible adults would be of the position that where there is uncertainty as to the safety of a certain practice, then it should of course be up to those who partake in the practise to allay the fears of those who are concerned.

A lot of talk of evidence on this thread. Anybody mind linking to some scientific literature.

mikeym

I dont smoke or vape and I see nothing wrong with vaping on trains or buses especially when Ive had to put up with smelly dirty individuals who are afraid of soap.

darkpagandeath

mardybumbum wrote: »

Think of the Children Brigade?
Why, yes I will. I'll also consider teenagers, young adults, the middle aged and OAP's also. Why would I restrict my concern to a specific age bracket.

The fact that you believe that it is up to the anti vapers to prove that there is no harm to 3rd parties is ridiculous and doesn't deserve a response.
Thankfully, most sensible adults would be of the position that where there is uncertainty as to the safety of a certain practice, then it should of course be up to those who partake in the practise to allay the fears of those who are concerned.

A lot of talk of evidence on this thread. Anybody mind linking to some scientific literature.

It's not what I believe. The only papers that I have seen are generally quackery by anti groups saying it's may have some effect at some stage better ban it just in case. Plenty of papers that show individual ingredients meet current standards and present no health Risk. This is why I am saying it’s up to the other side who believe they cause problems to prove it.

Cookie_Monster

stevenmu wrote: »

The really funny thing here is that the e-cigarette vapour is far less harmful than the diesel fumes produced by the train itself, which contains all kinds of nasty chemicals and carcinogens.

I didn't know Irish Rail started pumping exhaust directly into the carriages

maybe they will ban Asthma Inhalers next.
just in case some people dont want second hand medication.

El_Dangeroso

I'm amazed how easy people are to scare-monger.

darkpagandeath

Jake1 wrote: »

maybe they will ban Asthma Inhalers next.
just in case some people dont want second hand medication.

The propellant in deodorants well most of them is toxic lets ban them too :pac:

mardybumbum

darkpagandeath wrote: »

It's not what I believe. The only papers that I have seen are generally quackery by anti groups saying it's may have some effect at some stage better ban it just in case. Plenty of papers that show individual ingredients meet current standards and present no health Risk. This is why I am saying it’s up to the other side who believe they cause problems to prove it.

Hold on. Your first and final sentence contradict each other. I'm not really sure where you stand on the burden of proof issue with such inconsistencies.

mardybumbum

Jake1 wrote: »

maybe they will ban Asthma Inhalers next.
just in case some people dont want second hand medication.

Have yet to meet an asthmatic who exhales their salbutamol/steroid post ingestion.

mardybumbum

mardybumbum wrote: »

Have yet to meet an asthmatic who exhales their salbutamol/steroid post ingestion.

Sorry, mardy, I was trying to be a smart ass...

kippy

It's not just the health side of things as I have said.

I've seen people vape in classrooms (adult classrooms) - it shows a complete lack of respect or decorum and looks ridiculous.
I know of a number of colleges that have banned it inside for this reason alone.


You've got to ask yourself why you vape if the nicotine content is "negligable". If you are getting nothing from it why not just use a piece of plastic with no vapour?

I've seen people vape who are trying to give up the fags vaping through a serious amount of liquid in a week, which was meant to last for a month......is he better off vaping through this amount than going cold turkey?

The amount of strawmen on this thread is unreal, from asthmatics to BO to eating food in a restaurant.

P_1

mardybumbum wrote: »

No they have not.

Yes they have, how else would they be allowed to be added to the food we eat and the drinks that we drink?

Yes because when chemical reactions occur with benign substances they always lead to the formation of benign products. I'm being sarcastic here just in case that wasn't evident.

No way, sarcasm? Really?

Nonetheless, the majority of reputable suppliers would have tested their products prior to their release on the market to ensure that all chemical reactions lead to the formation of a chemically benign product.

Just for the above to be addressed in a more convincing fashion.

http://www.clivebates.com/
This chap is far better at getting the point across than I am. He used to be the head of ASH UK so I'd imagine that he has a reasonable idea of what he's talking about.

dj jarvis

cruizer101 wrote: »

My problem with how this is being reported is that all articles that I read on it state: There is no evidence that the devices cause any harm to anybody standing close to them

But there is also no evidence that they don't cause harm.

For years there was no evidence that smoking normal cigarettes caused any harm, if anything they were advertised as being good for your health.

Also just because they may no contain all the tar and other potentially harmful parts of cigarette smoke doesn't meant I want to be inhaling your nicotene from them.

I have also read that certain liquids contain various other components that are carcinogenic.

I wouldn't jump to any conclusions or decisions yet but there definitely does need to be some research into these and possibly legislation regarding them also

as a e cig user i 100% agree , but i find it perplexing that we do know for certain that smoking tobacco DOES kill you or makes your life and those in close contact with you worse and in the latter stages a living hell,

So why have they not been banned outright ?

off OP , but i was in a restaurateur in Helsinki at Christmas , and as i sat down i took my Vaporizer out of my pocket so i did not break it , and a waitress nearly fell over 2 tables to get to me , to make sure i knew i could not use it , its also banned on Finnish public transport , they very same on a German bus last weekend , my German mate warned me not to use it , but would never indoors other than a pub , and even then blow it down to the floor .

** i was not in a restaurateur , rather a restaurant - just want to clear than up :-) **