Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Why do some people think it's ok to vape indoors?

2»

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,155 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    My own personal belief is that vaping should be treated exactly like smoking and should be banned from any indoor place until its proven safe. That's my belief but that's just me. Vapers are perfectly entitled to vape in cinemas and pubs if the venue permits it. The last government was left wanting in its control of vaping and the sale of vaping products.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,026 ✭✭✭grindle


    The visibility - and the activity - bothers me indoors. I guess I've no choice but to put up with it outdoors. But no, my point was how come such a huge cloud of vapour is needed to get the same nicotine hit as someone used to be able to get from an ordinary cigarette. I guess if it's all coming from a couple of blasts as opposed to 5 minutes of smoking an ordinary cigarette the volumes would be roughly equal, though.
    Ecigs are also inefficient for dosing nicotine relative to cigarettes, cotinine measures 30-40% of the typical cigarette smoker, smoke particles are smaller and get deeper into alveoli.
    What studies? Conducted by whom, published where, and what were the sample sizes? Tobacco industry studies used to claim that smoking and nicotine were good for you, then that they were harmless, and that they were certainly harmless for secondary smokers...
    This "but they said this about cigarettes" argument has been done to death and negates both the facts that science & the means of chemical analysis have advanced and the amount of data collected has proliferated to an extreme extent.

    Nicotine itself is a vasoconstrictor on the same level as caffeine except you can control the dosage much better so you're much less likely to get the jitters, it's addictive but relatively harmless unless you have a heart condition/very high blood pressure.

    Here's a big waffle-post from back when these kinds of posts were exhaustingly regular and I had more motivation and time to waffle whenever people were spouting crap. The study linked at the beginning of that post has been lost from that original server, but I found it again!
    It was funded by CASAA, a consumer advocacy group for ecigs, but the study itself is much like the Royal College of Physician's much touted (and very positive) study, an examination of many previous studies variously funded by pharmaceutical, tobacco & ecig companies, aiming to give a frame of reference re: output of ecigs and whether or not the vapour produced exceeds Public Exposure Limits.
    Even when compared to workplace standards for involuntary exposures, and using several conservative (erring on the side of caution) assumptions, the exposures from using e-cigarettes fall well below the threshold for concern for compounds with known toxicity. That is, even ignoring the benefits of e-cigarette use and the fact that the exposure is actively chosen, and even comparing to the levels that are considered unacceptable to people who are not benefiting from the exposure and do not want it, the exposures would not generate concern or call for remedial action.

    If you want to stay up-to-date or be informed about ecigs:
    http://www.ecigarette-research.org/research/index.php
    (cardiologist who approached ecigs expecting to lambast them, became a vaper)
    http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/
    (the researcher whose studies were responsible for the world's second-hand-smoking bans and many billions being taken from tobacco companies

    One of the points you bring up indirectly is the sheer quantity of juice consumed. Thanks to nicotine being vilified and conflated with the harm of cigarettes, many people (including very many vapers) think reducing nicotine to low levels but increasing volume of juice inhaled is safer for them for some reason, whereas they're introducing more of the compounds we know least about when heated and inhaled, the flavours. Still harmless and below PELs for "second-hand vapers" but it's the area that needs most study.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,324 ✭✭✭JustAThought


    frightening cases coming out of the US with vaping and kids getting (incurable) popcorn lung from it. Few years back several consultants got together in cork university hospital and issued a statement to say they had now directly experienced over 30 cases of lung damage done to children by vaping. By all
    means poision yourself and fill your home,
    clothes and upholstery with peach or bubblegum or pineapple flavour chemical infested goo - but keep it to yourself. no, vaping is not acceptable. Poison yourself - not me or or mine.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,026 ✭✭✭grindle


    frightening cases coming out of the US with vaping and kids getting (incurable) popcorn lung from it.
    Nope.

    Few years back several consultants got together in cork university hospital and issued a statement to say they had now directly experienced over 30 cases of lung damage done to children by vaping.

    This is the closest thing I could find to whatever you're on about, so if it's what you're on about:

    1. Those kids ingested as in swallowed that ejuice.
    2. Dr. Chris Luke, whenever he acts as a talking head about ecigs, ignores data in favour of preventive medicine, which is not a smart way to give up smoking.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,401 ✭✭✭jonski


    Thanks Grindle ,

    I started looking for the studies and I knew roughly where to find them but then I remembered I was done trying to justify my vaping to some random person on the internet . Maybe some of the posters here are genuinely interested but there are others that have already made up their minds based solely on headlines from the Daily Mail ( kinda unfair to name the daily mail when other more reputable news outlets have been as bad ) or the like .

    And before anyone says anything ...I'm in my fifties .......I'm entitled to be grumpy .


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,026 ✭✭✭grindle


    jonski wrote: »
    I remembered I was done trying to justify my vaping to some random person on the internet . Maybe some of the posters here are genuinely interested but there are others that have already made up their minds based solely on headlines from the Daily Mail ( kinda unfair to name the daily mail when other more reputable news outlets have been as bad ) or the like

    Yeah, bit of a banging-head>brick-wall vibe to it, but lurkers exist and are the majority so I have to pipe up every once in a while in case they're misled by people who still believe ejuice causes popcorn lung or whatever other suspiciously-sourced crap has been printed - which is generally unedited PR blurb put out on behalf of a pharma company.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,756 ✭✭✭Thecageyone


    Did this thread get kicked from another area to here? This kind of thing just promotes silly smack talk and scaremongering tbh. But in a way, it's good that those who are so easily led by the likes of The Sun, can get some actual solid advice and calm TF down


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,082 ✭✭✭TaurenDruid


    grindle wrote: »
    ...or whatever other suspiciously-sourced crap has been printed...

    But studies funded and published by tobacco, nicotine and e-cig and vaping companies are beyond reproach?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,401 ✭✭✭jonski


    But studies funded and published by tobacco, nicotine and e-cig and vaping companies are beyond reproach?

    I don't believe anyone on here said that .


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,026 ✭✭✭grindle


    But studies funded and published by tobacco, nicotine and e-cig and vaping companies are beyond reproach?

    I certainly didn't say or imply that at all, you need to keep your biases in check.

    All studies no matter the source, should be, have been and are being pored over for signs of inconsistent methodology. These days ecigs have gotten well-known enough that it's become much harder for companies/lobbyist interests to outright scam results in a study or post generally favourable data yet the authors mysteriously write a negative conclusion (these studies usually have a tie to a man who used to work with Dr. Siegel named Stan Glantz, a truly revolting human being whose manipulation of truth you can read about on Siegel's blog).
    Trusting an opinion espoused by a newspaper where the article's "author" has literally copy-pasted blurb from the PR company tasked with sending whichever company's study conclusion out to print is as brainless as it gets.

    At the start it was both the pharma and tobacco companies manipulating test methodology to get a desired result, like having your inhalation machine fire an atomiser with thin wire @ 15-20w for 10 second bursts with a few seconds between bursts which meant the juice couldn't wick fast and ended up burning, while those atomisers are meant to be fired @ 5-10w for a few seconds and vaped like a normal human would (humans wouldn't continue vaping burnt juice and charred silica, or cotton nowadays). That was the worst study that came out about ecigs (well... not really, because the methodology was broken and designed for failure, but I digress), the one which was still taken into account as a worst-case-possible when the Royal College of Physicians and took ecigs down to "only" 95% safer than cigarettes.

    There was a turning point for tobacco companies and their studies once they saw the threat of ecigs to their business and decided they should control the market by lobbying for tighter regulations because they can afford to do idiotic things like paying $100k per strength per flavour for their juice (thankfully gotten around by selling nic and flavours separately) but now they want to lock down device choice more than they already have.

    A majority of these studies are available for you to read through pubmed or BMJ, come to your own conclusions based on available data rather than PR blurb. As it stands you're pontificating about and vilifying something which helps to keep millions of people off of cigarettes -a known killer where the cold turkey method of quitting has a 95-97% failure rate - based on... Being suspicious of them? Not liking fruity flavours? Very incorrectly assuming they pose a grave danger to your health?
    Should the cloud-chuckers be more polite? Yup, I've gotten a face full of cloud before, thought the guy was a wánker. Should vapes be considered and treated as being as dangerous as cigarettes? If you're illiterate, maybe.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,894 ✭✭✭TinCool


    The only place I sub-ohm is in the smoking area at work and that's not all the time I might add. It's a few tokes for a quick hit of flavour and nic. Everywhere else, mostly in the car or in the bog at home, I MTL. If I were to break it down, probably 90% of the time its MTL and 10% sub-ohm. I prefer the hit and experiencec you get from MTL.


    Someone posted previously that the bigger the cloud, the more flavour you get. This may be true for the most part, but I get some seriously good flavour from my MTL setup of a KFL 2019, more so than the raptor sub-ohm tank I use.


    I don't agree with the people who walk around town with plumes of vape coming off them. I don't do this, and rarely vape outdoors. I don't vape in front of my kids. I don't want them picking up bad habits. In fact, they don't even know I vape. I've been living in the UK for years now, and there's a massive difference generally between UK and Ireland. You will rarely see people vaping, say in a pub over here, whereas in Dublin, when I come home, it seems pretty normal. As for vaping in the National Concert Hall. Seriously? People should show some respect. It would never cross my mind to do such a thing.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,082 ✭✭✭TaurenDruid


    TinCool wrote: »
    As for vaping in the National Concert Hall. Seriously? People should show some respect. It would never cross my mind to do such a thing.

    Yup. This was at the acoustic Bell X-1 gig in the NCH in November '18, 5 minutes before the band took to the stage. It was an acoustic gig, they didn't use dry ice...


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,845 ✭✭✭Antares35


    OH and I are both WFH and he has started vaping in the house. Am 35 weeks pregnant and I really would prefer if he didn't. He insists it's "just vapour" and I shouldn't be annoyed by it. But what if there are risks that come to light after? Is there not nicotine in vaping products?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭corkie


    Antares35 wrote: »
    OH and I are both WFH and he has started vaping in the house. Am 35 weeks pregnant and I really would prefer if he didn't. He insists it's "just vapour" and I shouldn't be annoyed by it. But what if there are risks that come to light after? Is there not nicotine in vaping products?
    Is second hand vapor dangerous?

    Looking at the vaping studies mentioned above and others, Public Health England’s 264-page review of available evidence of vaping risks concluded that “to date there have been no identified health risks of passive vaping to bystanders.”

    Igor Burstyn’s study of the dangers of second hand vaping attempted to “estimate potential exposures from aerosols produced by electronic cigarettes and compare those potential exposures to occupational exposure standards.” He concluded that “Exposures of bystanders are likely to be orders of magnitude less, and thus pose no apparent concern.”


    Is Second Hand Vapor Harmful to Breathe?


    If your googling, you will probably come across allot of misinformation published by the anti-vaping crowds.

    Crack a window open in the room he is vaping in or request he does it in another room to you.



    Edit: - [publichealthmatters blog gov uk] Clearing up some myths around e-cigarettes
    MYTH 4 - Exposure to e-cigarette vapour is harmful to bystanders

    The evidence is clear that exposure to second hand smoke is harmful, which is why the UK has laws prohibiting smoking in enclosed public places and workplaces. These laws do not cover vaping and organisations are free to make their own policies on the use of e-cigarettes on their premises.

    E-cigarette liquid is typically composed of nicotine, propylene glycol and/or glycerine, and flavourings. Unlike cigarettes, there is no side-stream vapour emitted by an e-cigarette into the atmosphere, just the exhaled aerosol.

    PHE’s 2018 evidence review found that to date, there have been no identified health risks of passive vaping to the health of bystanders.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,082 ✭✭✭TaurenDruid


    Antares35 wrote: »
    OH and I are both WFH and he has started vaping in the house. Am 35 weeks pregnant and I really would prefer if he didn't. He insists it's "just vapour" and I shouldn't be annoyed by it. But what if there are risks that come to light after? Is there not nicotine in vaping products?

    There is, that's the whole point of them.

    "E-cigarettes create vapor made of fine and ultrafine particles of particulate matter, which contain propylene glycol and/or glycerin, usually nicotine and flavors, and small amounts of toxicants, carcinogens, heavy metals, metal nanoparticles, and other substances." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_cigarette


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭corkie


    ^^^
    E-cigarettes create vapor made of fine and ultrafine particles of particulate matter,[9] which contain propylene glycol and/or glycerin, usually nicotine and flavors, and small amounts of toxicants,[9] carcinogens,[10] heavy metals, metal nanoparticles, and other substances.[9] Its exact composition varies, and depends on several factors including user behaviour.[notes 2] There are also pod mod devices that use protonated nicotine, rather than free-base nicotine found in earlier generations.[11]

    Above is what a vapor absorbs on vaping themselves majority of it absorbed by them and not pass on in the exhaled vapor.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,082 ✭✭✭TaurenDruid


    corkie wrote: »
    ^^^



    Above is what a vapor absorbs on vaping themselves majority of it absorbed by them and not pass on in the exhaled vapor.

    So not all, then. Thanks for proving my point.

    I used to be an asshole too, I used to smoke indoors. I got better. You can too.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,980 ✭✭✭s1ippy


    Loads of the staff in the special school where I work had to be told to stop vaping openly at lunch in the staff room. They were doing it in the staff toilet instead up to the lockdown :D

    I'm a smoker myself so I didn't really care but I can see why people complained them, someone else's vape isn't really be something you should have to inhale on your break.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,026 ✭✭✭grindle


    So not all, then. Thanks for proving my point.
    There wouldn't be enough nicotine leftover to have even the most minor physiological effect (unless she's got an extreme case of asthma, maybe the particles could set it off).

    Here, I made a post about this for you about 6 years ago. I'm thoughtful like that.

    You shouldn't call somebody an asshole before you have facts and figures. Or at all I guess, although I fall foul of it myself when somebody's actually being an asshole. Anyway, smoking indoors is incomparable to vaping and will have zero effect on her child.

    However, if she feels he's being a díck and she just doesn't like vaping because she doesn't like the nice flavours and they stress her out or whatever, he should stop out of politeness if not for his own sanity, because bickering with a pregnant lady is even more debilitating than bickering with people who haven't read a single study on vaping.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭corkie


    So not all, then. Thanks for proving my point.

    I used to be an asshole too, I used to smoke indoors. I got better. You can too.

    Seems you may still be but for a different reason. You assume that I smoke (and or vape big clouds) around people, I don't. (Maybe years ago when no bans on smoking).

    But when we get to name calling, your points/post lose all meaning.
    grindle wrote: »
    ......
    Here, I made a post about this for you about 6 years ago. I'm thoughtful like that.

    You shouldn't call somebody an asshole before you have facts and figures. Or at all I guess, although I fall foul of it myself when somebody's actually being an asshole. Anyway, smoking indoors is incomparable to vaping and will have zero effect on her child.

    Do you honestly think, he/she(or it) will take the time and effort to click that and actually read?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,026 ✭✭✭grindle


    corkie wrote: »
    Do you honestly think, he/she(or it) will take the time and effort to click that and actually read?

    99% probably not. They might pop back and tell us facts are obnoxious or something, some/most boardsies are funny like that.

    "This doesn't suit my ill-conceived notions, maaaaan, step off brah!"

    :rolleyes: Whatever.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,082 ✭✭✭TaurenDruid


    Did yer man ever finish his research into whether nicotine outside cigarettes was addictive or not?

    Bottom line, smoking indoors, especially when you've been asked not to, makes you an asshole. Don't do it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 472 ✭✭Shinobollo


    Did yer man ever finish his research into whether nicotine outside cigarettes was addictive or not?

    Bottom line, smoking indoors, especially when you've been asked not to, makes you an asshole. Don't do it.

    You still haven't grasped the difference between smoking and vaping.
    Might I suggest you go do a little reading before making any more of your well thought out and superbly researched contributions to the vaping forum


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,026 ✭✭✭grindle


    Did yer man ever finish his research into whether nicotine outside cigarettes was addictive or not?
    Yip
    Some e-cigarette users were dependent on nicotine when used in e-cigarettes, but these products were less addictive than tobacco cigarettes. E-cigarettes may be as addictive or less addictive than the nicotine gum, which itself is not very addictive.

    The study was about how addictive it is outside of cigarettes, not about if it is at all. It's a mild stimulant, a reward to your nervous system for no work done. Stimulants are addictive.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭corkie


    Did yer man ever finish his research into whether nicotine outside cigarettes was addictive or not?


    Who/What/When maybe you could link the source of this information?


    Most/Majority of doctors admit Nicotine is addictive.


    Why are you picking on nicotine now?



    Nicotine No Worse Than Cup Of Coffee - Report
    New research suggests nine out of 10 people falsely believe nicotine is very harmful to their heath.
    ....

    The worst damage to health is caused by the tobacco in cigarettes, which - when burning - exposes users to chemicals such as tar and arsenic.


    ....

    Tobacco also contains some nicotine, but according to the new report, nicotine itself isn't harmful.

    Nicotine replacement products, like gum, patches and e-cigarettes, are therefore significantly less harmful than cigarettes themselves, according to the research.

    I am aware that Nicotine can have negative effects on developing brains (teenagers/fetus) and to be avoided while pregnant.

    Back to the pregnant lady's question, she would not absorb enough of it by second hand vapor for it to be a concern.
    It would be another mater if he is DIY ejuicing and leaves high concentrated nic on surfaces.

    I suppose your next thought or question is why vaping is not an official NRT?
    ^^^ Follow the money Big T & Big Pharma + Anti-vaping groups blocking it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,082 ✭✭✭TaurenDruid


    grindle wrote: »
    Yip



    The study was about how addictive it is outside of cigarettes, not about if it is at all. It's a mild stimulant, a reward to your nervous system for no work done. Stimulants are addictive.

    Thanks for the coherent response. Some of the other people on this forum are majorly defensive and sensitive. They should chill ;-)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,401 ✭✭✭jonski


    Thanks for the coherent response. Some of the other people on this forum are majorly defensive and sensitive. They should chill ;-)

    To be fair , you are in the vaping forum, what did you expect from guys that are constantly batting away negative opinion ?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1 rencempriceus


    I completely agree with this—such an interesting topic to read, though.



Advertisement