Results 1 to 7 of 7
Like Tree5Likes
  • 1 Post By Old Dog
  • 1 Post By dvietrod
  • 1 Post By pgscott
  • 2 Post By pgscott

Thread: Nanny government identifies a new target

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Melbourne's leafy outer East
    Posts
    3,656

    Nanny government identifies a new target

    But now, it seems technology is coming to smokers’ rescue. New, electronic cigarettes supposedly eliminate all the negative public effects of smoking, such as secondhand smoke. The devices use electronics to heat and vaporize a flavored, nicotine-laced liquid. Smokers inhale the vapor and get the nicotine they desire without all the other harmful components found in ordinary cigarette smoke.

    Now, smokers of these “e-cigarettes” are trying to come in out of the cold, fighting their way back into public spaces.

    It’s enough to make the nanny state tremble.

    Government isn’t going down without a fight, however. There’s new legislation here in Massachusetts designed to put e-smokers back in their place.

    EagleTribune.com : Editorial: Nanny government identifies a new target
    spud likes this.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Mill Park, Victoria
    Posts
    767
    I particularly like the closing passages of this article,

    "Smoking is prohibited in enclosed public spaces because anti-smoking advocates were able to argue convincingly that secondhand smoke poses a health risk even to nonsmokers.
    But there is no such evidence that the vapor exhaled by those who smoke e-cigarettes poses any health risks whatsoever.
    Banning smokers of electronic cigarettes reflects nothing more than an irrational fear of and animus towards those with personal preferences that differ from our own.

    While no sensible person would claim electronic cigarettes are a health device, some smokers use them to wean themselves off nicotine altogether. Some 1 in 5 smokers now report using e-cigarettes.

    Unless some hard evidence proves these devices pose some threat to nonsmokers, we ought to leave adult e-cigarette smokers alone."
    spud likes this.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Canberra, ACT
    Posts
    492
    I think it's fairly responsible for them to want to ensure e-cigs are 100% safe before allowing people to use them wherever they want. If they didn't do that they'd open themselves up for a shit-tonne of law suits if ever anything was found bad about e-cigs.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    740
    I think it's fairly responsible for them to want to ensure e-cigs are 100% safe before allowing people to use them wherever they want.
    Nothing on earth is completely 100% safe Caffeind. You (and the antis) are applying an impossible criteria.
    spud likes this.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Melbourne's leafy outer East
    Posts
    3,656
    Maybe they could commission some studies, although you'd be hard pressed to find academics that haven't been corrupted.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Canberra, ACT
    Posts
    492
    Well, I think too often that we allow things before we know if they are good or bad. Now, let me retract the 100% safe then, and just change it to 'not detrimental to ones health'.

    Is there anything wrong erring on the side of caution? Too often we jump in head first without any studies, then scream blue murder when we get hurt and no one told us it was going to happen.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    740
    Is there anything wrong erring on the side of caution? Too often we jump in head first without any studies, then scream blue murder when we get hurt and no one told us it was going to happen.
    The study, by Prof. Igor Burstyn, Drexel University School of Public Health, is available at the Drexel website, here (pdf). Burstyn reviewed all of the available chemistry on e-cigarette vapor and liquid and found that the levels reported — even in those studies that were hyped as showing there is a danger — are well below the level that is of concern. And that assessment applies to the vaper himself. The exposure to bystanders is orders of magnitude less and of no concern at all.

    The paper is technical, of course, but I believe it does a great job of communicating for readers at many levels. It puts the results in very clear and useful terms — exactly what policy makers need for making decisions.

    The above is a quote from this article - http://antithrlies.com/2013/08/08/br...ants/#comments
    Caffeind and spud like this.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4
Copyright © 2019 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
All times are GMT +11. The time now is 12:34 PM.