Support NeoGAF

[User 100115]

Wait, so even though most of them have no odor at all (some can have very light fragrance depending on the juice, and it's almost always pleasant like 'strawberry' or 'chocolate'), people are getting annoyed just by SEEING people vaping? Vaping is offensive to the eyes?

That's...a bit weird.

 

[ElectricBlanketFire]

Wait, wait, wait...

It's called "vaping" now?

 

[Reeks]

Until there is unequivocal proof that the secondhand vapor of this stuff is not harmful to others, I am fully behind such a law.

no carcinogens in vapor. at MOST you might (not likely at all) inhale trace amounts of nicotine and veggie glycerin. but if you don't cook an eggplant well enough before eating it, you'll also ingest nicotine...

 

[Dude Abides]

Alcohol is the most unhealthy legal drug. Unlike any common drug, legal or not, one can die directly from the withdraw symptoms - this isn't true of even heroin. Caffeine can be unhealthy and very addicting. I guess my point is, where is the line because it's certainly not drawn through a medical lens.

I'm not defending this decision. The only reason I support smoking bans in certain public places is because it exposes people to smoke who would prefer not to be, which e-cigs, as far as I'm aware, don't. Or at least not to nearly the same extent.

Bloomberg is a busybody. I'm simply pointing out that people who think he's doing this out of greed or lobbying influence, rather than run-of-the-mill paternalism, are showing some ignorance of his career.

 

[Willectro]

Have e-cigs been studied long enough to prove harmful?

 

[DonasaurusRex]

i wonder if e cigs are harmful , the big thing to me seems to be theres no more combustion getting fed into your lungs. Also what else is in a regular cig who knows what else they put on the tobacco to make a cig per brand. With an e cig you are vaporizing either veg oil or glycerine and some concentration of nicotine. I dont see how its even close to having something thats combusting being spewed into your lungs/body.

 

[GungHo]

Wait, so even though most of them have no odor at all (some can have very light fragrance depending on the juice, and it's almost always pleasant like 'strawberry' or 'chocolate'), people are getting annoyed just by SEEING people vaping? Vaping is offensive to the eyes?

That's...a bit weird.

Yes. They think it's a cigarette and then come to take it away from you. They're then pot-committed to oppressing you and you're likely pissed off, so it becomes a contention. Unfortunately, with ecigs, you can't just touch the little LED to someone's nose when they're being impertinent. Well, you can, bit it doesn't quite get the same reaction as a real burner.

i wonder if e cigs are harmful , the big thing to me seems to be theres no more combustion getting fed into your lungs. Also what else is in a regular cig who knows what else they put on the tobacco to make a cig per brand. With an e cig you are vaporizing either veg oil or glycerine and some concentration of nicotine. I dont see how its even close to having something thats combusting being spewed into your lungs/body.

You don't get the tar, but you do get the effects of nicotine or whatever chemical it is that you're mixing in with the oil. Theoretically it's less of a lung problem, but you wouldn't be walking away from the vascular issues.

 

[Dude Abides]

I had thought that nicotine itself was harmful but a little research suggests it's no worse than caffeine, so apparently there's no real public health justification for this.

 

[Reeks]

I'm not defending this decision. The only reason I support smoking bans in certain public places is because it exposes people to smoke who would prefer not to be, which e-cigs, as far as I'm aware, don't. Or at least not to nearly the same extent.

Bloomberg is a busybody. I'm simply pointing out that people who think he's doing this out of greed or lobbying influence, rather than run-of-the-mill paternalism, are showing some ignorance of his career.

have no issues with anything you're saying. in fact, i agree with you. i'm just not understanding why people in the thread support banning e-cigs because they don't like the sight of them or because they haven't taken the time to read about the actual effects. fact is, they do not appear to be very harmful to users. true, nicotine is addicting and can be dangerous in higher doses. some preliminary data suggests it might alter susceptibility to some forms of cancer- although this is very unclear and everything under the sun and including the sun does this. the main concerns seem to be with the standardization of nicotinic concentrations in different brands. i'm reading research articles on pubmed and can't seem to find anything that makes nicotine super dangerous in these low doses. read a couple articles that show that nano delivery of nicotine has possible neuroprotective properties in a Parkinsonian model (Gupta 2013). also read a couple articles that show nicotine can be instrumental in subsets of learning/memory/attention paradigms (Levin 2013).

An e-cig specific paper (CBC = complete blood count):
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512005030
"The results demonstrated that CBC indices remained unchanged during the control session and the active and passive e-cigarette smoking sessions"

 

[daw840]

I'm okay with this. The minute the government steps in to maintain a healthy population (who can therefore live longer, be more productive, and cause less strain on taxpayers) people become flaming libertarians and begin yelling about a "nanny state." Newsflash: people are better off without crazy amounts of sugar (soda ban), and quick hits of nicotine. Both affect the public well being in the longterm.

Until there is unequivocal proof that the secondhand vapor of this stuff is not harmful to others, I am fully behind such a law.

Shouldn't the unequivocal proof be thatt there IS harmful effects of secondhand vapor? Not just, it might be harmful so let's ban it?

 

[Lost Fragment]

Legislating without evidence is a bad idea.

"Hey let's do this while we do studies to see how safe or unsafe it is" is what they did when they made marijuana a schedule 1 drug. In the early 70s.

 

[Choke on the Magic]

So is NYC too jaded to give a shit anymore or do they not pay attention to the fact that they elected an asshat?

 

[Dude Abides]

So is NYC too jaded to give a shit anymore or do they not pay attention to the fact that they elected an asshat?

Streets are clean, crime is low, parks are nice, bike lanes are clear, so nobody cares if bodegas might have to put e-cigs below the counter.

 

[SlipperyMoose]

I hate cigarette smoke and tobacco does nothing for me, but this is just stupid. This is the same guy that banned large sodas as well. Dude, you're doing it wrong.

 

[Lost Fragment]

Looks like a vote on this is coming soon.

http://blog.casaa.org/2013/10/call-to-action-new-york-city-ordinances.html

 

[many places]

NYC is just like the US as a whole. Awesome, but we can never have nice things because of stuff like this..

 

[bluehat9]

i hate when people smoke e-cigarettes in stores that are non-smoking

like dude really

they are such rebels though

 

[linkboy]

I'm fully convinced that if Bloomberg could ban the sun for causing skin cancer, he would.

 

[LoneTraveler]

I'm fully convinced that if Bloomberg could ban the sun for causing skin cancer, he would.

Banning E-Cigs is kinda stupid personally but hey, they've gotten away with much worse so it's not surprising.

 

[lil smoke]

So is NYC too jaded to give a shit anymore or do they not pay attention to the fact that they elected an asshat?

That sounds like politics in America.