Comment by praxeologist | Hacker News Reader

Comment by praxeologist | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

A - You sometimes get a whiff of the smell. 90%+ of the time a nonsmoker is going to like the smell because people vape things like cake and fruit flavors. Even smells people might find objectionable dissipate quickly. The stench doesn't hang on the users' clothing at all like regular cigarettes. I'm not sure what sort of situation you would have to be in to be bothered...

B - Got some proof that secondhand vapor causes harm? Here is reference to a published indoor air quality study showing:

"Comparisons of pollutant concentrations were made between e-cigarette vapor and tobacco smoke samples. Pollutants included VOCs, carbonyls, PAHs, nicotine, TSNAs, and glycols. From these results, risk analyses were conducted based on dilution into a 40 m3 room and standard toxicological data. Non-cancer risk analysis revealed “No Significant Risk” of harm to human health for vapor samples from e-liquids (A-D). In contrast, for tobacco smoke most findings markedly exceeded risk limits indicating a condition of “Significant Risk” of harm to human health. With regard to cancer risk analysis, no vapor sample from e-liquids A-D exceeded the risk limit for either children or adults. The tobacco smoke sample approached the risk limits for adult exposure."

http://www.ivaqs.com/

There's more and more very positive research all the time. Ecig users shouldn't have to prove that it is 100% safe. It is pretty clearly far safer than smoking and a great benefit to the health of people who are unable or unwilling to quit.

C - "that very well may result in an increase of smoking."

Pure speculation on your part. "

You pointed towards a study commissioned by an e-cigarette users group in order to lobby their government. They use a completely arbitrary threshold of what is considered to not have considerable health risks. The study is only being published in an ecig industry journal.

The smell is disgusting, regardless of what the flavor is. The flavor is only there to try to mask the underlying smell, which is gross. Your assumpions about nonsmokers liking the smell are pretty baseless. Everyone i have talked to about it has disliked it intensly.

It is very nice that ecigs appear to be safer than cigarettes, but that does not mean i should be forced to breathe them. I already do not smoke.

"They use a completely arbitrary threshold of what is considered to not have considerable health risks."

No, this was done by researchers using established methods for assessing indoor air quality. It's pretty obvious that you are just a dishonest person, didn't crack open the research and just generally know nothing about this subject.

"The smell is disgusting, regardless of what the flavor is. The flavor is only there to try to mask the underlying smell, which is gross."

Nicotine, propylene glycol, glycerine and water are all basically odorless materials. The last 3 are ingredients in the types of fog machines used at concerts and also common food ingredients. You are either imagining things or lying.

>Your assumpions about nonsmokers liking the smell are pretty baseless.

Most people don't notice at all. I discretely but not secretly vape in restaurants/stores/etc. and have never once been told to stop doing it in over two years using ecigs. I have never once been told that someone was offended by the smell.

> Most people don't notice at all.

No, it's definitely noticeable, but currently rare enough that a lot people won't be able to identify it.

And very very weak. But don't bother saying that.

As others say, the smell is far weaker that after-lunch booze, deodorant, BO, auto exhaust, bad breath, leather, hand sanitizer, and to a vegetarian, meat.

Sure, you could sniff your coworkers to discover who ate corned beef, and who vaped at lunch, but neither is at the level that we'd call it offensive in an office setting.

The only reason people are complaining is because cigarettes are bad and by extension everything related to everything related is bad, and people love jumping on the bandwagon.

Excuse me? I know it's not reinforcing what you want to believe, but this isn't an echo chamber.

Coworkers are starting to smoke in small meeting rooms where you don't normally get the smell of lunches etc. It DOES smell unpleasant, though it's not nearly as bad as cigarette smoke. Fortunately my coworkers are gracious enough to shower every so often so I can't say that BO is a regular problem.

> Got some proof that secondhand vapor causes harm?

Why is "harm" needed? If I am next to you I'm not interested in you forcing me to take drugs. I don't need to demonstrate harm, I just don't want you to send me drugs.

At least put a filter on the thing so no nicotine comes out of it (i.e. you breath both in and out of it, through the filter).

"I'm not interested in you forcing me to take drugs."

You have got to be kidding me. Whatever amount of nicotine you are getting from secondhand vapor is TINY. You are not getting drugged. It has no psychoactive effects or addictive potential at that level.

Since that whole line of thinking is ridiculous, we consider harm. Being near cooking food, say your neighbors having a BBQ, exposes you to volatile N'-nitrosamines, similar to one of the groups of compounds shown to have some carcinogenic potential in smoking.

These types of things are not found in ecigs (or only in incredibly tiny amounts). There is no burning, carbon monoxide, etc. You are getting more harm from stuff like cleaning product fumes or other air pollution from cars/industry.

With almost no independent studies being done on e-cigs and their impact on the environment around you almost none of the claims you just made can be substantiated as either true or shown to be false.

We need more reliable data.

In general e-cigs should be restricted until they're proven safe. Basically treated like any other kind of cigarette. It is clear from this thread and elsewhere that smokers have zero consideration for others.

There's tons of credible evidence out there that ecigs do not contain most of the carcinogens in burning cigarettes. Even studies done by scientists with big pharma funding will at least mostly acknowledge this.

Ecigs are clearly not "100% safe" but the same goes for the food you eat and all other types of things you put in your body. it isn't about proving 100% safety. It's about showing a vast reduction in harm for people who are addicted to and dying from smoking.

Speaking of "zero consideration for others", anti-nicotine zealots take a quit or die stance. You would rather ban ecigs and force people back to smoking?

That's just ridiculous. I think exhaust pipes from traffic are of much more concern than e-cigs around us. Personally, I find offensive when get hit by a whiff of someone's BO more than e-cigs (which if aren't flavored I can't even tell if they are 'smoking' them).

I'm just curious, do you eat potatoes, tomatoes, eggplant, or cauliflower? If so, you are already ingesting that evil, evil nicotine[1]. In all honesty, I doubt we would be put more at risk by inhaling any trace amounts of nicotine in secondhand vap than we would from interacting with everything else in our everyday lives. Hell, sitting in front of this computer and typing this response is probably shortening my lifespan more than a minuscule amount of nicotine.

[1]: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/15/nicotine-in-vegetab...

>Why is "harm" needed?

Because hristov said "they almost certainly harm people around you", which is false. There is no "almost certainly" about that claim.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com