Smoking e-cigarettes at work sparks row

Watford Observer: Smoking e-cigarettes at work sparks row Smoking e-cigarettes at work sparks row

In the first case of its type the rights of employees to use e-cigarettes is to be examined in an Employment Tribunal after a worker was sacked for using one at work.

The waste disposal company Viridor, which had no policy on e-cigarettes, sacked 55-year-old Paul Scott who was using one while he was operating a truck in the compost area of a landfill.

Mr Scott, who had been working for Viridor since 2007, has filed a claim for unfair dismissal. He had been a 20-a-day tobacco smoker for the past 40 years before he turned to e-cigarettes.

The cigarette look-a-like products produce a nicotine vapour without the tar, carcinogens or fire risk caused by burning tobacco.

Mr Scott said: "By the time I was sacked I had completely switched to e-cigarettes. I had stopped wheezing and coughing and my breathing was a damned sight better”. However the stress of being sacked has now led him to start using tobacco again.

What do you think?

Comments (53)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:46am Wed 4 Dec 13

TRT says...

"Smoke" is not defined in the act which created smoke-free zones.
"Smoke" is not defined in the act which created smoke-free zones. TRT

10:05am Wed 4 Dec 13

dented says...

You cannot 'smoke' an e-cig as it doesn't produce any smoke. If the company in question didn't have a policy on e-cigs then I cannot see it winning the case.
You cannot 'smoke' an e-cig as it doesn't produce any smoke. If the company in question didn't have a policy on e-cigs then I cannot see it winning the case. dented

10:09am Wed 4 Dec 13

TRT says...

Well, even the OED is a little vague about the definition of smoke... it can refer to the emission of visible vapours produced by heating, or the act of inhaling and exhaling such.
Well, even the OED is a little vague about the definition of smoke... it can refer to the emission of visible vapours produced by heating, or the act of inhaling and exhaling such. TRT

10:11am Wed 4 Dec 13

TRT says...

However the act does specifically refer to the substance rather than the act, namely, it's only an offence if it was a substance that contained tobacco. So I reckon he's not broken the law, and as such they should have given him a warning and written a policy.
However the act does specifically refer to the substance rather than the act, namely, it's only an offence if it was a substance that contained tobacco. So I reckon he's not broken the law, and as such they should have given him a warning and written a policy. TRT

10:12am Wed 4 Dec 13

TRT says...

TRT wrote:
However the act does specifically refer to the substance rather than the act, namely, it's only an offence if it was a substance that contained tobacco. So I reckon he's not broken the law, and as such they should have given him a warning and written a policy.
My bad. It also says "smoking any other substance". Which would mean you have to close all curry houses as you can no longer smoke the oil to fry the spices.
[quote][p][bold]TRT[/bold] wrote: However the act does specifically refer to the substance rather than the act, namely, it's only an offence if it was a substance that contained tobacco. So I reckon he's not broken the law, and as such they should have given him a warning and written a policy.[/p][/quote]My bad. It also says "smoking any other substance". Which would mean you have to close all curry houses as you can no longer smoke the oil to fry the spices. TRT

10:29am Wed 4 Dec 13

Mike Ribble says...

The primary purpose of the ban on smoking in the work (and other public) places was to protect people from the dangers of passive smoking. On the face of it using an e-cig doesn't appear to be in breach of the purpose. However, as is usual with the WO's brief reports, we don't have the full story.
This man's claim may have more to do with the process (or lack of one) used to achieve his dismissal.
Of course winning such a claim doesn't mean you get your back and the compensation isn't generous where there is no discrimination involved so Mr Scott would be best advised to go back to his e-cig asap - it's so much cheaper as well as less injurious to his health.
The primary purpose of the ban on smoking in the work (and other public) places was to protect people from the dangers of passive smoking. On the face of it using an e-cig doesn't appear to be in breach of the purpose. However, as is usual with the WO's brief reports, we don't have the full story. This man's claim may have more to do with the process (or lack of one) used to achieve his dismissal. Of course winning such a claim doesn't mean you get your back and the compensation isn't generous where there is no discrimination involved so Mr Scott would be best advised to go back to his e-cig asap - it's so much cheaper as well as less injurious to his health. Mike Ribble

10:43am Wed 4 Dec 13

EU_OUT_NOW says...

A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"
A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas," EU_OUT_NOW

11:15am Wed 4 Dec 13

garston tony says...

Does smoking an e-cigarette stop the person from being able to perform his job properly? Ie if he is driving could it be argued that he is not in full control of the vehicle or if doing other work is smoking an e-cigarette a form of unofficial break?

Other than that if the above dont apply is in any different to someone munching into a chocolate bar, or sipping a can of fizzy or even chewing on nicotine gum whilst doing their job?

On the face of it does seem harsh, I dont see any problem with it unless the act/time itself was impacting on his work. Maybe its the smell, but then is it worse than an over strong perfume or mens deoderant? Where do you draw the line if that is the case!
Does smoking an e-cigarette stop the person from being able to perform his job properly? Ie if he is driving could it be argued that he is not in full control of the vehicle or if doing other work is smoking an e-cigarette a form of unofficial break? Other than that if the above dont apply is in any different to someone munching into a chocolate bar, or sipping a can of fizzy or even chewing on nicotine gum whilst doing their job? On the face of it does seem harsh, I dont see any problem with it unless the act/time itself was impacting on his work. Maybe its the smell, but then is it worse than an over strong perfume or mens deoderant? Where do you draw the line if that is the case! garston tony

1:02pm Wed 4 Dec 13

harleyrider1777 says...

This pretty well destroys the Myth of second hand smoke:

http://vitals.nbcnew
s.com/_news/2013/01/
28/16741714-lungs-fr
om-pack-a-day-smoker
s-safe-for-transplan
t-study-finds?lite

Lungs from pack-a-day smokers safe for transplant, study finds.

By JoNel Aleccia, Staff Writer, NBC News.

Using lung transplants from heavy smokers may sound like a cruel joke, but a new study finds that organs taken from people who puffed a pack a day for more than 20 years are likely safe.

What’s more, the analysis of lung transplant data from the U.S. between 2005 and 2011 confirms what transplant experts say they already know: For some patients on a crowded organ waiting list, lungs from smokers are better than none.

“I think people are grateful just to have a shot at getting lungs,” said Dr. Sharven Taghavi, a cardiovascular surgical resident at Temple University Hospital in Philadelphia, who led the new study...............
............

Ive done the math here and this is how it works out with second ahnd smoke and people inhaling it!

The 16 cities study conducted by the U.S. DEPT OF ENERGY and later by Oakridge National laboratories discovered:

Cigarette smoke, bartenders annual exposure to smoke rises, at most, to the equivalent of 6 cigarettes/year.

146,000 CIGARETTES SMOKED IN 20 YEARS AT 1 PACK A DAY.

A bartender would have to work in second hand smoke for 2433 years to get an equivalent dose.

Then the average non-smoker in a ventilated restaurant for an hour would have to go back and forth each day for 119,000 years to get an equivalent 20 years of smoking a pack a day! Pretty well impossible ehh!
This pretty well destroys the Myth of second hand smoke: http://vitals.nbcnew s.com/_news/2013/01/ 28/16741714-lungs-fr om-pack-a-day-smoker s-safe-for-transplan t-study-finds?lite Lungs from pack-a-day smokers safe for transplant, study finds. By JoNel Aleccia, Staff Writer, NBC News. Using lung transplants from heavy smokers may sound like a cruel joke, but a new study finds that organs taken from people who puffed a pack a day for more than 20 years are likely safe. What’s more, the analysis of lung transplant data from the U.S. between 2005 and 2011 confirms what transplant experts say they already know: For some patients on a crowded organ waiting list, lungs from smokers are better than none. “I think people are grateful just to have a shot at getting lungs,” said Dr. Sharven Taghavi, a cardiovascular surgical resident at Temple University Hospital in Philadelphia, who led the new study............... ............ Ive done the math here and this is how it works out with second ahnd smoke and people inhaling it! The 16 cities study conducted by the U.S. DEPT OF ENERGY and later by Oakridge National laboratories discovered: Cigarette smoke, bartenders annual exposure to smoke rises, at most, to the equivalent of 6 cigarettes/year. 146,000 CIGARETTES SMOKED IN 20 YEARS AT 1 PACK A DAY. A bartender would have to work in second hand smoke for 2433 years to get an equivalent dose. Then the average non-smoker in a ventilated restaurant for an hour would have to go back and forth each day for 119,000 years to get an equivalent 20 years of smoking a pack a day! Pretty well impossible ehh! harleyrider1777

1:02pm Wed 4 Dec 13

harleyrider1777 says...

This pretty well destroys the Myth of second hand smoke:

http://vitals.nbcnew
s.com/_news/2013/01/
28/16741714-lungs-fr
om-pack-a-day-smoker
s-safe-for-transplan
t-study-finds?lite

Lungs from pack-a-day smokers safe for transplant, study finds.

By JoNel Aleccia, Staff Writer, NBC News.

Using lung transplants from heavy smokers may sound like a cruel joke, but a new study finds that organs taken from people who puffed a pack a day for more than 20 years are likely safe.

What’s more, the analysis of lung transplant data from the U.S. between 2005 and 2011 confirms what transplant experts say they already know: For some patients on a crowded organ waiting list, lungs from smokers are better than none.

“I think people are grateful just to have a shot at getting lungs,” said Dr. Sharven Taghavi, a cardiovascular surgical resident at Temple University Hospital in Philadelphia, who led the new study...............
............

Ive done the math here and this is how it works out with second ahnd smoke and people inhaling it!

The 16 cities study conducted by the U.S. DEPT OF ENERGY and later by Oakridge National laboratories discovered:

Cigarette smoke, bartenders annual exposure to smoke rises, at most, to the equivalent of 6 cigarettes/year.

146,000 CIGARETTES SMOKED IN 20 YEARS AT 1 PACK A DAY.

A bartender would have to work in second hand smoke for 2433 years to get an equivalent dose.

Then the average non-smoker in a ventilated restaurant for an hour would have to go back and forth each day for 119,000 years to get an equivalent 20 years of smoking a pack a day! Pretty well impossible ehh!
This pretty well destroys the Myth of second hand smoke: http://vitals.nbcnew s.com/_news/2013/01/ 28/16741714-lungs-fr om-pack-a-day-smoker s-safe-for-transplan t-study-finds?lite Lungs from pack-a-day smokers safe for transplant, study finds. By JoNel Aleccia, Staff Writer, NBC News. Using lung transplants from heavy smokers may sound like a cruel joke, but a new study finds that organs taken from people who puffed a pack a day for more than 20 years are likely safe. What’s more, the analysis of lung transplant data from the U.S. between 2005 and 2011 confirms what transplant experts say they already know: For some patients on a crowded organ waiting list, lungs from smokers are better than none. “I think people are grateful just to have a shot at getting lungs,” said Dr. Sharven Taghavi, a cardiovascular surgical resident at Temple University Hospital in Philadelphia, who led the new study............... ............ Ive done the math here and this is how it works out with second ahnd smoke and people inhaling it! The 16 cities study conducted by the U.S. DEPT OF ENERGY and later by Oakridge National laboratories discovered: Cigarette smoke, bartenders annual exposure to smoke rises, at most, to the equivalent of 6 cigarettes/year. 146,000 CIGARETTES SMOKED IN 20 YEARS AT 1 PACK A DAY. A bartender would have to work in second hand smoke for 2433 years to get an equivalent dose. Then the average non-smoker in a ventilated restaurant for an hour would have to go back and forth each day for 119,000 years to get an equivalent 20 years of smoking a pack a day! Pretty well impossible ehh! harleyrider1777

1:07pm Wed 4 Dec 13

EU_OUT_NOW says...

garston tony wrote:
Does smoking an e-cigarette stop the person from being able to perform his job properly? Ie if he is driving could it be argued that he is not in full control of the vehicle or if doing other work is smoking an e-cigarette a form of unofficial break?

Other than that if the above dont apply is in any different to someone munching into a chocolate bar, or sipping a can of fizzy or even chewing on nicotine gum whilst doing their job?

On the face of it does seem harsh, I dont see any problem with it unless the act/time itself was impacting on his work. Maybe its the smell, but then is it worse than an over strong perfume or mens deoderant? Where do you draw the line if that is the case!
Did you totally miss my point below Tony?.......... A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas," This is research being carried out in the US, not my view.
[quote][p][bold]garston tony[/bold] wrote: Does smoking an e-cigarette stop the person from being able to perform his job properly? Ie if he is driving could it be argued that he is not in full control of the vehicle or if doing other work is smoking an e-cigarette a form of unofficial break? Other than that if the above dont apply is in any different to someone munching into a chocolate bar, or sipping a can of fizzy or even chewing on nicotine gum whilst doing their job? On the face of it does seem harsh, I dont see any problem with it unless the act/time itself was impacting on his work. Maybe its the smell, but then is it worse than an over strong perfume or mens deoderant? Where do you draw the line if that is the case![/p][/quote]Did you totally miss my point below Tony?.......... A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas," This is research being carried out in the US, not my view. EU_OUT_NOW

1:24pm Wed 4 Dec 13

dented says...

EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"
I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh!

When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.
[quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"[/p][/quote]I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh! When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club. dented

1:30pm Wed 4 Dec 13

EU_OUT_NOW says...

dented wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"
I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh!

When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.
I didn't say it was true ****! I was simply putting a alternate view forward. Same as fog out of a fog machine? So now you are a research scientist? I think not.
[quote][p][bold]dented[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"[/p][/quote]I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh! When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.[/p][/quote]I didn't say it was true ****! I was simply putting a alternate view forward. Same as fog out of a fog machine? So now you are a research scientist? I think not. EU_OUT_NOW

1:32pm Wed 4 Dec 13

DailyTerrors says...

EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"
It's already been found out that there are NO second hand effects from the exhilation of liquid nicotine.

The effects of second hand smoking are primarily from the tar and other carcinogens. Whereas there are carcinogens associated with e-cigs they are 5% of that compared to a tobacco cigarette and when exhaled are considered trace, with no "passive vaping" effects.

Your google-fu is weak
[quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"[/p][/quote]It's already been found out that there are NO second hand effects from the exhilation of liquid nicotine. The effects of second hand smoking are primarily from the tar and other carcinogens. Whereas there are carcinogens associated with e-cigs they are 5% of that compared to a tobacco cigarette and when exhaled are considered trace, with no "passive vaping" effects. Your google-fu is weak DailyTerrors

1:46pm Wed 4 Dec 13

EU_OUT_NOW says...

DailyTerrors wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"
It's already been found out that there are NO second hand effects from the exhilation of liquid nicotine.

The effects of second hand smoking are primarily from the tar and other carcinogens. Whereas there are carcinogens associated with e-cigs they are 5% of that compared to a tobacco cigarette and when exhaled are considered trace, with no "passive vaping" effects.

Your google-fu is weak
I think the whole pack of you nicotine addicts should admit you are nicotine addicts, kick the habit and find something else to do with your hands and mouths! If I can quit smoking after 20yrs @20 a day and maintain abstinence for 26yrs, then so can you lot!..... e-ciggs won't cut it, it's a temporary crutch, you go back to real ciggy's in the end. QUIT is the only way!
[quote][p][bold]DailyTerrors[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"[/p][/quote]It's already been found out that there are NO second hand effects from the exhilation of liquid nicotine. The effects of second hand smoking are primarily from the tar and other carcinogens. Whereas there are carcinogens associated with e-cigs they are 5% of that compared to a tobacco cigarette and when exhaled are considered trace, with no "passive vaping" effects. Your google-fu is weak[/p][/quote]I think the whole pack of you nicotine addicts should admit you are nicotine addicts, kick the habit and find something else to do with your hands and mouths! If I can quit smoking after 20yrs @20 a day and maintain abstinence for 26yrs, then so can you lot!..... e-ciggs won't cut it, it's a temporary crutch, you go back to real ciggy's in the end. QUIT is the only way! EU_OUT_NOW

1:50pm Wed 4 Dec 13

dented says...

EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
dented wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"
I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh!

When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.
I didn't say it was true ****! I was simply putting a alternate view forward. Same as fog out of a fog machine? So now you are a research scientist? I think not.
I said similar to a fog machine, not the same. You weren't putting an alternate view forward, you were putting someone else's view forward! I'm not a research scientist but I am aware of the risks of vaping vs smoking.

EU_OUT_NOW I think not.


I believe you need a comma after think.
[quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dented[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"[/p][/quote]I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh! When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.[/p][/quote]I didn't say it was true ****! I was simply putting a alternate view forward. Same as fog out of a fog machine? So now you are a research scientist? I think not.[/p][/quote]I said similar to a fog machine, not the same. You weren't putting an alternate view forward, you were putting someone else's view forward! I'm not a research scientist but I am aware of the risks of vaping vs smoking. [quote][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] I think not.[/quote] I believe you need a comma after think. dented

2:01pm Wed 4 Dec 13

EU_OUT_NOW says...

dented wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
dented wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"
I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh!

When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.
I didn't say it was true ****! I was simply putting a alternate view forward. Same as fog out of a fog machine? So now you are a research scientist? I think not.
I said similar to a fog machine, not the same. You weren't putting an alternate view forward, you were putting someone else's view forward! I'm not a research scientist but I am aware of the risks of vaping vs smoking.

EU_OUT_NOW I think not.


I believe you need a comma after think.
Have your views by all means, that's what the comments page is all about. But being rude achieves nothing......... (believe you need a comma after think)
[quote][p][bold]dented[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dented[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"[/p][/quote]I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh! When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.[/p][/quote]I didn't say it was true ****! I was simply putting a alternate view forward. Same as fog out of a fog machine? So now you are a research scientist? I think not.[/p][/quote]I said similar to a fog machine, not the same. You weren't putting an alternate view forward, you were putting someone else's view forward! I'm not a research scientist but I am aware of the risks of vaping vs smoking. [quote][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] I think not.[/quote] I believe you need a comma after think.[/p][/quote]Have your views by all means, that's what the comments page is all about. But being rude achieves nothing......... (believe you need a comma after think) EU_OUT_NOW

2:04pm Wed 4 Dec 13

EU_OUT_NOW says...

I think the whole pack of you nicotine addicts should admit you are nicotine addicts, kick the habit and find something else to do with your hands and mouths! If I can quit smoking after 20yrs @20 a day and maintain abstinence for 26yrs, then so can you lot!..... e-ciggs won't cut it, it's a temporary crutch, you go back to real ciggy's in the end. QUIT is the only way!
I think the whole pack of you nicotine addicts should admit you are nicotine addicts, kick the habit and find something else to do with your hands and mouths! If I can quit smoking after 20yrs @20 a day and maintain abstinence for 26yrs, then so can you lot!..... e-ciggs won't cut it, it's a temporary crutch, you go back to real ciggy's in the end. QUIT is the only way! EU_OUT_NOW

2:41pm Wed 4 Dec 13

chas says...

Ecigs are far more effective than NRTs in helping smokers to cut down or quit smoking, but I bet the company doesn'y object to people using NRTs.
Ecigs are far more effective than NRTs in helping smokers to cut down or quit smoking, but I bet the company doesn'y object to people using NRTs. chas

4:19pm Wed 4 Dec 13

Vape Viner says...

You vape in a public enclosed area and our cause will be challenged. We are the minority and must walk solftly. For now. Be discrete, that's my stand. Vape Storms, vapers.
You vape in a public enclosed area and our cause will be challenged. We are the minority and must walk solftly. For now. Be discrete, that's my stand. Vape Storms, vapers. Vape Viner

4:41pm Wed 4 Dec 13

Vape Viner says...

EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
I think the whole pack of you nicotine addicts should admit you are nicotine addicts, kick the habit and find something else to do with your hands and mouths! If I can quit smoking after 20yrs @20 a day and maintain abstinence for 26yrs, then so can you lot!..... e-ciggs won't cut it, it's a temporary crutch, you go back to real ciggy's in the end. QUIT is the only way!
This is a little troll who knows very little about ecigs.. Little **** disturbed. The Taliban think vacination is a trick by the west. This troll should go join closed minded fools anonymous. Good for entertainment, though, little troll. Try quiting being an ****, bet you can't there OutNow.
[quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: I think the whole pack of you nicotine addicts should admit you are nicotine addicts, kick the habit and find something else to do with your hands and mouths! If I can quit smoking after 20yrs @20 a day and maintain abstinence for 26yrs, then so can you lot!..... e-ciggs won't cut it, it's a temporary crutch, you go back to real ciggy's in the end. QUIT is the only way![/p][/quote]This is a little troll who knows very little about ecigs.. Little **** disturbed. The Taliban think vacination is a trick by the west. This troll should go join closed minded fools anonymous. Good for entertainment, though, little troll. Try quiting being an ****, bet you can't there OutNow. Vape Viner

4:45pm Wed 4 Dec 13

Vape Viner says...

EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
dented wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"
I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh!

When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.
I didn't say it was true ****! I was simply putting a alternate view forward. Same as fog out of a fog machine? So now you are a research scientist? I think not.
Your still trolling fot a fight. No takers here, just us vapors. Sorry your jealous. Get well, soon.
[quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dented[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"[/p][/quote]I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh! When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.[/p][/quote]I didn't say it was true ****! I was simply putting a alternate view forward. Same as fog out of a fog machine? So now you are a research scientist? I think not.[/p][/quote]Your still trolling fot a fight. No takers here, just us vapors. Sorry your jealous. Get well, soon. Vape Viner

4:48pm Wed 4 Dec 13

Vape Viner says...

EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
dented wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
dented wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"
I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh!

When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.
I didn't say it was true ****! I was simply putting a alternate view forward. Same as fog out of a fog machine? So now you are a research scientist? I think not.
I said similar to a fog machine, not the same. You weren't putting an alternate view forward, you were putting someone else's view forward! I'm not a research scientist but I am aware of the risks of vaping vs smoking.

EU_OUT_NOW I think not.


I believe you need a comma after think.
Have your views by all means, that's what the comments page is all about. But being rude achieves nothing......... (believe you need a comma after think)
Left that for you, take a pause.
[quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dented[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dented[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"[/p][/quote]I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh! When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.[/p][/quote]I didn't say it was true ****! I was simply putting a alternate view forward. Same as fog out of a fog machine? So now you are a research scientist? I think not.[/p][/quote]I said similar to a fog machine, not the same. You weren't putting an alternate view forward, you were putting someone else's view forward! I'm not a research scientist but I am aware of the risks of vaping vs smoking. [quote][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] I think not.[/quote] I believe you need a comma after think.[/p][/quote]Have your views by all means, that's what the comments page is all about. But being rude achieves nothing......... (believe you need a comma after think)[/p][/quote]Left that for you, take a pause. Vape Viner

5:10pm Wed 4 Dec 13

EU_OUT_NOW says...

Vape Viner wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
dented wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
dented wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"
I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh!

When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.
I didn't say it was true ****! I was simply putting a alternate view forward. Same as fog out of a fog machine? So now you are a research scientist? I think not.
I said similar to a fog machine, not the same. You weren't putting an alternate view forward, you were putting someone else's view forward! I'm not a research scientist but I am aware of the risks of vaping vs smoking.

EU_OUT_NOW I think not.


I believe you need a comma after think.
Have your views by all means, that's what the comments page is all about. But being rude achieves nothing......... (believe you need a comma after think)
Left that for you, take a pause.
I think you are being very, very silly!
[quote][p][bold]Vape Viner[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dented[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dented[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"[/p][/quote]I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh! When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.[/p][/quote]I didn't say it was true ****! I was simply putting a alternate view forward. Same as fog out of a fog machine? So now you are a research scientist? I think not.[/p][/quote]I said similar to a fog machine, not the same. You weren't putting an alternate view forward, you were putting someone else's view forward! I'm not a research scientist but I am aware of the risks of vaping vs smoking. [quote][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] I think not.[/quote] I believe you need a comma after think.[/p][/quote]Have your views by all means, that's what the comments page is all about. But being rude achieves nothing......... (believe you need a comma after think)[/p][/quote]Left that for you, take a pause.[/p][/quote]I think you are being very, very silly! EU_OUT_NOW

5:10pm Wed 4 Dec 13

steffijade says...

EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
I think the whole pack of you nicotine addicts should admit you are nicotine addicts, kick the habit and find something else to do with your hands and mouths! If I can quit smoking after 20yrs @20 a day and maintain abstinence for 26yrs, then so can you lot!..... e-ciggs won't cut it, it's a temporary crutch, you go back to real ciggy's in the end. QUIT is the only way!
Oh look... an arrogant, ignorant, holier than thou ex smoker.. quelle suprise.

Just because you chose to quit smoking and give up nicotine entirely, that's no reason to expect other people to do the same. Your presumption that everyone wants to quit nicotine merely demonstrates you arrogance and ignorance.

I switched from smoking to vaping and have no plans to quit nicotine thank you. I'm happy enough to continue using nicotine without all the tar and added chemicals in tobacco cigarettes.. after all, why would I even want to quit nicotine?

It's no more 'harmful' than caffeine and I don't see any stuck up do-gooders picketing costa or starbucks to troll caffeine 'addicts'.

Just accept the fact that vaping is different from smoking, that there is NO risk to other people from passive vapour and that nicotine isn't the absolute evil that brainwashed simpletons believe it to be.

Why do you even care anyway? It's not like anyone's asking you to vape. Or are you just trolling to take your mind off the fact that after being 26 years off the fags, there are still times you could murder for one? ;)
[quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: I think the whole pack of you nicotine addicts should admit you are nicotine addicts, kick the habit and find something else to do with your hands and mouths! If I can quit smoking after 20yrs @20 a day and maintain abstinence for 26yrs, then so can you lot!..... e-ciggs won't cut it, it's a temporary crutch, you go back to real ciggy's in the end. QUIT is the only way![/p][/quote]Oh look... an arrogant, ignorant, holier than thou ex smoker.. quelle suprise. Just because you chose to quit smoking and give up nicotine entirely, that's no reason to expect other people to do the same. Your presumption that everyone wants to quit nicotine merely demonstrates you arrogance and ignorance. I switched from smoking to vaping and have no plans to quit nicotine thank you. I'm happy enough to continue using nicotine without all the tar and added chemicals in tobacco cigarettes.. after all, why would I even want to quit nicotine? It's no more 'harmful' than caffeine and I don't see any stuck up do-gooders picketing costa or starbucks to troll caffeine 'addicts'. Just accept the fact that vaping is different from smoking, that there is NO risk to other people from passive vapour and that nicotine isn't the absolute evil that brainwashed simpletons believe it to be. Why do you even care anyway? It's not like anyone's asking you to vape. Or are you just trolling to take your mind off the fact that after being 26 years off the fags, there are still times you could murder for one? ;) steffijade

5:14pm Wed 4 Dec 13

EU_OUT_NOW says...

Vape Viner wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
dented wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"
I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh!

When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.
I didn't say it was true ****! I was simply putting a alternate view forward. Same as fog out of a fog machine? So now you are a research scientist? I think not.
Your still trolling fot a fight. No takers here, just us vapors. Sorry your jealous. Get well, soon.
Oh dear, all these email notifications in my email box are from you. Didn't realise I was trying to communicate with rebellious child. I'll pass on you in future.
[quote][p][bold]Vape Viner[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dented[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"[/p][/quote]I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh! When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.[/p][/quote]I didn't say it was true ****! I was simply putting a alternate view forward. Same as fog out of a fog machine? So now you are a research scientist? I think not.[/p][/quote]Your still trolling fot a fight. No takers here, just us vapors. Sorry your jealous. Get well, soon.[/p][/quote]Oh dear, all these email notifications in my email box are from you. Didn't realise I was trying to communicate with rebellious child. I'll pass on you in future. EU_OUT_NOW

8:15pm Wed 4 Dec 13

EU_OUT_NOW says...

steffijade wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
I think the whole pack of you nicotine addicts should admit you are nicotine addicts, kick the habit and find something else to do with your hands and mouths! If I can quit smoking after 20yrs @20 a day and maintain abstinence for 26yrs, then so can you lot!..... e-ciggs won't cut it, it's a temporary crutch, you go back to real ciggy's in the end. QUIT is the only way!
Oh look... an arrogant, ignorant, holier than thou ex smoker.. quelle suprise.

Just because you chose to quit smoking and give up nicotine entirely, that's no reason to expect other people to do the same. Your presumption that everyone wants to quit nicotine merely demonstrates you arrogance and ignorance.

I switched from smoking to vaping and have no plans to quit nicotine thank you. I'm happy enough to continue using nicotine without all the tar and added chemicals in tobacco cigarettes.. after all, why would I even want to quit nicotine?

It's no more 'harmful' than caffeine and I don't see any stuck up do-gooders picketing costa or starbucks to troll caffeine 'addicts'.

Just accept the fact that vaping is different from smoking, that there is NO risk to other people from passive vapour and that nicotine isn't the absolute evil that brainwashed simpletons believe it to be.

Why do you even care anyway? It's not like anyone's asking you to vape. Or are you just trolling to take your mind off the fact that after being 26 years off the fags, there are still times you could murder for one? ;)
I missed you, Just noticed you. Every nicotine addict wants to quit. No one enjoys smoking, you simply convince yourself you do (I used to) The body is forced to accept all the negative aspects of smoking just to get the DRUG Nicotine. As with all addicts the defence they put up to support their addiction is fierce and protective, but the bottom line is their breath stinks, there cloths stink and it costs a fortune to smoke!...... Your comment that you "have no plans to quit nicotine thank you" simply means you can't!.... If cigarettes/nicotine were introduced today they would probably be a class A drug. They are highly addictive and need to be topped up approximately every hour. But you carry on with your e-ciggs, you will be back to real cigarettes in the end unless you quit now! If not, you can win the T Shirt I have. It says smoking related lung damage. But Hey, you carry on!
[quote][p][bold]steffijade[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: I think the whole pack of you nicotine addicts should admit you are nicotine addicts, kick the habit and find something else to do with your hands and mouths! If I can quit smoking after 20yrs @20 a day and maintain abstinence for 26yrs, then so can you lot!..... e-ciggs won't cut it, it's a temporary crutch, you go back to real ciggy's in the end. QUIT is the only way![/p][/quote]Oh look... an arrogant, ignorant, holier than thou ex smoker.. quelle suprise. Just because you chose to quit smoking and give up nicotine entirely, that's no reason to expect other people to do the same. Your presumption that everyone wants to quit nicotine merely demonstrates you arrogance and ignorance. I switched from smoking to vaping and have no plans to quit nicotine thank you. I'm happy enough to continue using nicotine without all the tar and added chemicals in tobacco cigarettes.. after all, why would I even want to quit nicotine? It's no more 'harmful' than caffeine and I don't see any stuck up do-gooders picketing costa or starbucks to troll caffeine 'addicts'. Just accept the fact that vaping is different from smoking, that there is NO risk to other people from passive vapour and that nicotine isn't the absolute evil that brainwashed simpletons believe it to be. Why do you even care anyway? It's not like anyone's asking you to vape. Or are you just trolling to take your mind off the fact that after being 26 years off the fags, there are still times you could murder for one? ;)[/p][/quote]I missed you, Just noticed you. Every nicotine addict wants to quit. No one enjoys smoking, you simply convince yourself you do (I used to) The body is forced to accept all the negative aspects of smoking just to get the DRUG Nicotine. As with all addicts the defence they put up to support their addiction is fierce and protective, but the bottom line is their breath stinks, there cloths stink and it costs a fortune to smoke!...... Your comment that you "have no plans to quit nicotine thank you" simply means you can't!.... If cigarettes/nicotine were introduced today they would probably be a class A drug. They are highly addictive and need to be topped up approximately every hour. But you carry on with your e-ciggs, you will be back to real cigarettes in the end unless you quit now! If not, you can win the T Shirt I have. It says smoking related lung damage. But Hey, you carry on! EU_OUT_NOW

9:05pm Wed 4 Dec 13

Trojan pest control says...

E cigs are harmless. It's all about money!

Approx 10mil people smoke in the uk and revenue raised made up of tax and vat =12.1 bil

A pack of 20marlboro gold costing £8.20 will be made up of about £4.50 in tax.

The cost to treating smoking related diseases to the NHS (stat vary) 2.7bil -5.2bil . There was 110000-115000 Deaths due to smoking related illness last yr.

With people like myself choosing the option of using e cigs set to rise from 1.5mil to possible 3-4 mil over the next few yr this will result in huge losses.

The tabacco companies are also aware of the impact on revenue due to a safer alternative they are buying up all competition and buy the time e cigs are regulated the tax and inflated prices will exceed the cost of tabacco.

I've gone nearly a yr without a cigarette and fell a lot more healthier. I wouldn't say their 100% safe until further studies are done but I'm pretty sure a few ml of nicotine and some glycerol and propylene glycol is also less damaging than the thousands of cancer causing chemical in the profitable tabacco.

It's all about money. Safe or not they will take the measure that make the most money!
E cigs are harmless. It's all about money! Approx 10mil people smoke in the uk and revenue raised made up of tax and vat =12.1 bil A pack of 20marlboro gold costing £8.20 will be made up of about £4.50 in tax. The cost to treating smoking related diseases to the NHS (stat vary) 2.7bil -5.2bil . There was 110000-115000 Deaths due to smoking related illness last yr. With people like myself choosing the option of using e cigs set to rise from 1.5mil to possible 3-4 mil over the next few yr this will result in huge losses. The tabacco companies are also aware of the impact on revenue due to a safer alternative they are buying up all competition and buy the time e cigs are regulated the tax and inflated prices will exceed the cost of tabacco. I've gone nearly a yr without a cigarette and fell a lot more healthier. I wouldn't say their 100% safe until further studies are done but I'm pretty sure a few ml of nicotine and some glycerol and propylene glycol is also less damaging than the thousands of cancer causing chemical in the profitable tabacco. It's all about money. Safe or not they will take the measure that make the most money! Trojan pest control

9:19pm Wed 4 Dec 13

Nascot says...

Trojan pest control wrote:
E cigs are harmless. It's all about money! Approx 10mil people smoke in the uk and revenue raised made up of tax and vat =12.1 bil A pack of 20marlboro gold costing £8.20 will be made up of about £4.50 in tax. The cost to treating smoking related diseases to the NHS (stat vary) 2.7bil -5.2bil . There was 110000-115000 Deaths due to smoking related illness last yr. With people like myself choosing the option of using e cigs set to rise from 1.5mil to possible 3-4 mil over the next few yr this will result in huge losses. The tabacco companies are also aware of the impact on revenue due to a safer alternative they are buying up all competition and buy the time e cigs are regulated the tax and inflated prices will exceed the cost of tabacco. I've gone nearly a yr without a cigarette and fell a lot more healthier. I wouldn't say their 100% safe until further studies are done but I'm pretty sure a few ml of nicotine and some glycerol and propylene glycol is also less damaging than the thousands of cancer causing chemical in the profitable tabacco. It's all about money. Safe or not they will take the measure that make the most money!
How many spelling grammar mistakes are there in that post?
[quote][p][bold]Trojan pest control[/bold] wrote: E cigs are harmless. It's all about money! Approx 10mil people smoke in the uk and revenue raised made up of tax and vat =12.1 bil A pack of 20marlboro gold costing £8.20 will be made up of about £4.50 in tax. The cost to treating smoking related diseases to the NHS (stat vary) 2.7bil -5.2bil . There was 110000-115000 Deaths due to smoking related illness last yr. With people like myself choosing the option of using e cigs set to rise from 1.5mil to possible 3-4 mil over the next few yr this will result in huge losses. The tabacco companies are also aware of the impact on revenue due to a safer alternative they are buying up all competition and buy the time e cigs are regulated the tax and inflated prices will exceed the cost of tabacco. I've gone nearly a yr without a cigarette and fell a lot more healthier. I wouldn't say their 100% safe until further studies are done but I'm pretty sure a few ml of nicotine and some glycerol and propylene glycol is also less damaging than the thousands of cancer causing chemical in the profitable tabacco. It's all about money. Safe or not they will take the measure that make the most money![/p][/quote]How many spelling grammar mistakes are there in that post? Nascot

10:28pm Wed 4 Dec 13

LSC says...

"Every nicotine addict wants to quit. No one enjoys smoking..."

Absolute poppycock. I smoke. I enjoy it. I wish it was cheaper, but that is the only thing I don't like about it. I like the taste and I like the smell.
Yes, stale smoke isn't good, but stale anything isn't good. Ever been in a pub first thing in the morning? The reek of stale beer is stomach churning. But I still like a pint come the evening.

I'm fully aware of the health dangers, but then I'm aware of lots of health dangers, like the beer for instance. Steak without the fat cut off. Bacon. Deep fried Scampi. Los Angeles smog. Standing anywhere near a Bus Stop. Cake. Red wine. White wine. Swimming in the sea. Flying. Crossing the road. Driving a car.

All the above are proven to be bad for you, even dangerous. But they are my choice thanks.
"Every nicotine addict wants to quit. No one enjoys smoking..." Absolute poppycock. I smoke. I enjoy it. I wish it was cheaper, but that is the only thing I don't like about it. I like the taste and I like the smell. Yes, stale smoke isn't good, but stale anything isn't good. Ever been in a pub first thing in the morning? The reek of stale beer is stomach churning. But I still like a pint come the evening. I'm fully aware of the health dangers, but then I'm aware of lots of health dangers, like the beer for instance. Steak without the fat cut off. Bacon. Deep fried Scampi. Los Angeles smog. Standing anywhere near a Bus Stop. Cake. Red wine. White wine. Swimming in the sea. Flying. Crossing the road. Driving a car. All the above are proven to be bad for you, even dangerous. But they are my choice thanks. LSC

10:45pm Wed 4 Dec 13

EU_OUT_NOW says...

Nascot wrote:
Trojan pest control wrote:
E cigs are harmless. It's all about money! Approx 10mil people smoke in the uk and revenue raised made up of tax and vat =12.1 bil A pack of 20marlboro gold costing £8.20 will be made up of about £4.50 in tax. The cost to treating smoking related diseases to the NHS (stat vary) 2.7bil -5.2bil . There was 110000-115000 Deaths due to smoking related illness last yr. With people like myself choosing the option of using e cigs set to rise from 1.5mil to possible 3-4 mil over the next few yr this will result in huge losses. The tabacco companies are also aware of the impact on revenue due to a safer alternative they are buying up all competition and buy the time e cigs are regulated the tax and inflated prices will exceed the cost of tabacco. I've gone nearly a yr without a cigarette and fell a lot more healthier. I wouldn't say their 100% safe until further studies are done but I'm pretty sure a few ml of nicotine and some glycerol and propylene glycol is also less damaging than the thousands of cancer causing chemical in the profitable tabacco. It's all about money. Safe or not they will take the measure that make the most money!
How many spelling grammar mistakes are there in that post?
Oh does it really matter? They have made their point, at least they are trying to quit and hopefully they will realise the benefits of good health and stop completely before it's too late! Nit picking tart.
[quote][p][bold]Nascot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Trojan pest control[/bold] wrote: E cigs are harmless. It's all about money! Approx 10mil people smoke in the uk and revenue raised made up of tax and vat =12.1 bil A pack of 20marlboro gold costing £8.20 will be made up of about £4.50 in tax. The cost to treating smoking related diseases to the NHS (stat vary) 2.7bil -5.2bil . There was 110000-115000 Deaths due to smoking related illness last yr. With people like myself choosing the option of using e cigs set to rise from 1.5mil to possible 3-4 mil over the next few yr this will result in huge losses. The tabacco companies are also aware of the impact on revenue due to a safer alternative they are buying up all competition and buy the time e cigs are regulated the tax and inflated prices will exceed the cost of tabacco. I've gone nearly a yr without a cigarette and fell a lot more healthier. I wouldn't say their 100% safe until further studies are done but I'm pretty sure a few ml of nicotine and some glycerol and propylene glycol is also less damaging than the thousands of cancer causing chemical in the profitable tabacco. It's all about money. Safe or not they will take the measure that make the most money![/p][/quote]How many spelling grammar mistakes are there in that post?[/p][/quote]Oh does it really matter? They have made their point, at least they are trying to quit and hopefully they will realise the benefits of good health and stop completely before it's too late! Nit picking tart. EU_OUT_NOW

10:58pm Wed 4 Dec 13

EU_OUT_NOW says...

LSC wrote:
"Every nicotine addict wants to quit. No one enjoys smoking..."

Absolute poppycock. I smoke. I enjoy it. I wish it was cheaper, but that is the only thing I don't like about it. I like the taste and I like the smell.
Yes, stale smoke isn't good, but stale anything isn't good. Ever been in a pub first thing in the morning? The reek of stale beer is stomach churning. But I still like a pint come the evening.

I'm fully aware of the health dangers, but then I'm aware of lots of health dangers, like the beer for instance. Steak without the fat cut off. Bacon. Deep fried Scampi. Los Angeles smog. Standing anywhere near a Bus Stop. Cake. Red wine. White wine. Swimming in the sea. Flying. Crossing the road. Driving a car.

All the above are proven to be bad for you, even dangerous. But they are my choice thanks.
Absolute BULL. I smoke and I enjoy it? No, you need the drug in the cigarette and your mind tells you, you enjoy it, simply because you have a "temporary feel good factor" Craving has for a while been satisfied. So you say I enjoyed that cigarette. I enjoy smoking. The arguments you put forward for justifying what you cannot give up are quite common. But if you are happy doing a sales job on yourself. Fine. Didn't know they had smog in LA?
[quote][p][bold]LSC[/bold] wrote: "Every nicotine addict wants to quit. No one enjoys smoking..." Absolute poppycock. I smoke. I enjoy it. I wish it was cheaper, but that is the only thing I don't like about it. I like the taste and I like the smell. Yes, stale smoke isn't good, but stale anything isn't good. Ever been in a pub first thing in the morning? The reek of stale beer is stomach churning. But I still like a pint come the evening. I'm fully aware of the health dangers, but then I'm aware of lots of health dangers, like the beer for instance. Steak without the fat cut off. Bacon. Deep fried Scampi. Los Angeles smog. Standing anywhere near a Bus Stop. Cake. Red wine. White wine. Swimming in the sea. Flying. Crossing the road. Driving a car. All the above are proven to be bad for you, even dangerous. But they are my choice thanks.[/p][/quote]Absolute BULL. I smoke and I enjoy it? No, you need the drug in the cigarette and your mind tells you, you enjoy it, simply because you have a "temporary feel good factor" Craving has for a while been satisfied. So you say I enjoyed that cigarette. I enjoy smoking. The arguments you put forward for justifying what you cannot give up are quite common. But if you are happy doing a sales job on yourself. Fine. Didn't know they had smog in LA? EU_OUT_NOW

11:14pm Wed 4 Dec 13

EU_OUT_NOW says...

Trojan pest control wrote:
E cigs are harmless. It's all about money!

Approx 10mil people smoke in the uk and revenue raised made up of tax and vat =12.1 bil

A pack of 20marlboro gold costing £8.20 will be made up of about £4.50 in tax.

The cost to treating smoking related diseases to the NHS (stat vary) 2.7bil -5.2bil . There was 110000-115000 Deaths due to smoking related illness last yr.

With people like myself choosing the option of using e cigs set to rise from 1.5mil to possible 3-4 mil over the next few yr this will result in huge losses.

The tabacco companies are also aware of the impact on revenue due to a safer alternative they are buying up all competition and buy the time e cigs are regulated the tax and inflated prices will exceed the cost of tabacco.

I've gone nearly a yr without a cigarette and fell a lot more healthier. I wouldn't say their 100% safe until further studies are done but I'm pretty sure a few ml of nicotine and some glycerol and propylene glycol is also less damaging than the thousands of cancer causing chemical in the profitable tabacco.

It's all about money. Safe or not they will take the measure that make the most money!
Good Lord. £8.20 for 20 smokes, had no idea they now cost that much!. If I was still smoking that would be £57 a week. I used to smoke B&H. I hear these electronic cigarettes are very pricy too? Now I smoke a Ventolin inhaler and exhale through a peak flow meter. Well it's something a bit different.
[quote][p][bold]Trojan pest control[/bold] wrote: E cigs are harmless. It's all about money! Approx 10mil people smoke in the uk and revenue raised made up of tax and vat =12.1 bil A pack of 20marlboro gold costing £8.20 will be made up of about £4.50 in tax. The cost to treating smoking related diseases to the NHS (stat vary) 2.7bil -5.2bil . There was 110000-115000 Deaths due to smoking related illness last yr. With people like myself choosing the option of using e cigs set to rise from 1.5mil to possible 3-4 mil over the next few yr this will result in huge losses. The tabacco companies are also aware of the impact on revenue due to a safer alternative they are buying up all competition and buy the time e cigs are regulated the tax and inflated prices will exceed the cost of tabacco. I've gone nearly a yr without a cigarette and fell a lot more healthier. I wouldn't say their 100% safe until further studies are done but I'm pretty sure a few ml of nicotine and some glycerol and propylene glycol is also less damaging than the thousands of cancer causing chemical in the profitable tabacco. It's all about money. Safe or not they will take the measure that make the most money![/p][/quote]Good Lord. £8.20 for 20 smokes, had no idea they now cost that much!. If I was still smoking that would be £57 a week. I used to smoke B&H. I hear these electronic cigarettes are very pricy too? Now I smoke a Ventolin inhaler and exhale through a peak flow meter. Well it's something a bit different. EU_OUT_NOW

12:44am Thu 5 Dec 13

Trojan pest control says...

Nascot: sorry if my grammar and spelling has offended you, I'm doing my company paperwork and commenting via my phone so didn't have time to spell check.
Situations like this make me wish I had tried harder at school and maybe progressed my education by going to university then I might have got 9A* and a few A levels like my unemployed friends!

EU_OUT_NOW

With regards to the cost of E cigs yes they are expensive and do cost more than smoking if you buy disposables at £5-£8 each. They do say that 1 is the same as 20-40 cigs but most brands are nowhere near that figure..... More like 10cigs.

If you purchase the rechargeable E cigs your able to open the cartridges are place nicotine liquid in them. A bottle of E liquid 10ml lasts me approx 2 weeks at a cost of £5 so that's a lot cheaper than buying disposables from the shops.
Nascot: sorry if my grammar and spelling has offended you, I'm doing my company paperwork and commenting via my phone so didn't have time to spell check. Situations like this make me wish I had tried harder at school and maybe progressed my education by going to university then I might have got 9A* and a few A levels like my unemployed friends! EU_OUT_NOW With regards to the cost of E cigs yes they are expensive and do cost more than smoking if you buy disposables at £5-£8 each. They do say that 1 is the same as 20-40 cigs but most brands are nowhere near that figure..... More like 10cigs. If you purchase the rechargeable E cigs your able to open the cartridges are place nicotine liquid in them. A bottle of E liquid 10ml lasts me approx 2 weeks at a cost of £5 so that's a lot cheaper than buying disposables from the shops. Trojan pest control

7:12am Thu 5 Dec 13

Parmenion says...

EU_OUT_NOW...Have you always been such a self-righteous bigot? Seems to me that you're just another one of the gullible sheeple...completely brainwashed by the tobacco control industry propaganda.

Antismokers tell us that people only smoke because they are ‘addicted to nicotine’, and that most smokers actually want to quit. But most smokers enjoy smoking, and few people want to quit something they enjoy. Nag and frighten them enough, though, and you can certainly get them to believe that they should.
‘Addiction’ is not a clearly-defined scientific term, and it’s very hard to separate ‘addictions’ from habits.
Antismokers have to keep pushing ‘addiction’ since they either cannot believe, or cannot admit, that people not only freely choose to smoke but enjoy it. ‘Addiction’ also works to further stigmatise smokers by portraying us as contemptible junkies. Of course, if you’re smoking out of pure compulsion and aren’t even enjoying it, I would say you might as well quit. After all, if you’re going to do something which not only has potential health risks but increasingly gets you treated like dirt, then you may as well at least get some pleasure from it. But many thousands have quit of their own accord, and many others are smoking moderately, or only at certain times, or switching to cigars or e-cigs. I meet these people all the time, but according to antismokers they don’t exist. I personally only smoke when I’m having a drink. Perhaps I don’t exist either.

http://www.formindep
.org/The-myth-of-nic
otine-addiction.html

http://www.formindep
.org/The-myth-of-nic
otine-addiction.html
EU_OUT_NOW...Have you always been such a self-righteous bigot? Seems to me that you're just another one of the gullible sheeple...completely brainwashed by the tobacco control industry propaganda. Antismokers tell us that people only smoke because they are ‘addicted to nicotine’, and that most smokers actually want to quit. But most smokers enjoy smoking, and few people want to quit something they enjoy. Nag and frighten them enough, though, and you can certainly get them to believe that they should. ‘Addiction’ is not a clearly-defined scientific term, and it’s very hard to separate ‘addictions’ from habits. Antismokers have to keep pushing ‘addiction’ since they either cannot believe, or cannot admit, that people not only freely choose to smoke but enjoy it. ‘Addiction’ also works to further stigmatise smokers by portraying us as contemptible junkies. Of course, if you’re smoking out of pure compulsion and aren’t even enjoying it, I would say you might as well quit. After all, if you’re going to do something which not only has potential health risks but increasingly gets you treated like dirt, then you may as well at least get some pleasure from it. But many thousands have quit of their own accord, and many others are smoking moderately, or only at certain times, or switching to cigars or e-cigs. I meet these people all the time, but according to antismokers they don’t exist. I personally only smoke when I’m having a drink. Perhaps I don’t exist either. http://www.formindep .org/The-myth-of-nic otine-addiction.html http://www.formindep .org/The-myth-of-nic otine-addiction.html Parmenion

9:42am Thu 5 Dec 13

Alban Hornet says...

Smoking E-cigs still has some side effects, such as looking like an utter ****
Smoking E-cigs still has some side effects, such as looking like an utter **** Alban Hornet

10:05am Thu 5 Dec 13

TRT says...

Parmenion wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW...Have you always been such a self-righteous bigot? Seems to me that you're just another one of the gullible sheeple...completely brainwashed by the tobacco control industry propaganda.

Antismokers tell us that people only smoke because they are ‘addicted to nicotine’, and that most smokers actually want to quit. But most smokers enjoy smoking, and few people want to quit something they enjoy. Nag and frighten them enough, though, and you can certainly get them to believe that they should.
‘Addiction’ is not a clearly-defined scientific term, and it’s very hard to separate ‘addictions’ from habits.
Antismokers have to keep pushing ‘addiction’ since they either cannot believe, or cannot admit, that people not only freely choose to smoke but enjoy it. ‘Addiction’ also works to further stigmatise smokers by portraying us as contemptible junkies. Of course, if you’re smoking out of pure compulsion and aren’t even enjoying it, I would say you might as well quit. After all, if you’re going to do something which not only has potential health risks but increasingly gets you treated like dirt, then you may as well at least get some pleasure from it. But many thousands have quit of their own accord, and many others are smoking moderately, or only at certain times, or switching to cigars or e-cigs. I meet these people all the time, but according to antismokers they don’t exist. I personally only smoke when I’m having a drink. Perhaps I don’t exist either.

http://www.formindep

.org/The-myth-of-nic

otine-addiction.html


http://www.formindep

.org/The-myth-of-nic

otine-addiction.html
I'm sorry. This is the biggest load of balls I've read. You say it's wrong to tar all smokers with the same brush, that of being addicted, then you go on to make generalisations about anti-smokers.
[quote][p][bold]Parmenion[/bold] wrote: EU_OUT_NOW...Have you always been such a self-righteous bigot? Seems to me that you're just another one of the gullible sheeple...completely brainwashed by the tobacco control industry propaganda. Antismokers tell us that people only smoke because they are ‘addicted to nicotine’, and that most smokers actually want to quit. But most smokers enjoy smoking, and few people want to quit something they enjoy. Nag and frighten them enough, though, and you can certainly get them to believe that they should. ‘Addiction’ is not a clearly-defined scientific term, and it’s very hard to separate ‘addictions’ from habits. Antismokers have to keep pushing ‘addiction’ since they either cannot believe, or cannot admit, that people not only freely choose to smoke but enjoy it. ‘Addiction’ also works to further stigmatise smokers by portraying us as contemptible junkies. Of course, if you’re smoking out of pure compulsion and aren’t even enjoying it, I would say you might as well quit. After all, if you’re going to do something which not only has potential health risks but increasingly gets you treated like dirt, then you may as well at least get some pleasure from it. But many thousands have quit of their own accord, and many others are smoking moderately, or only at certain times, or switching to cigars or e-cigs. I meet these people all the time, but according to antismokers they don’t exist. I personally only smoke when I’m having a drink. Perhaps I don’t exist either. http://www.formindep .org/The-myth-of-nic otine-addiction.html http://www.formindep .org/The-myth-of-nic otine-addiction.html[/p][/quote]I'm sorry. This is the biggest load of balls I've read. You say it's wrong to tar all smokers with the same brush, that of being addicted, then you go on to make generalisations about anti-smokers. TRT

10:12am Thu 5 Dec 13

garston tony says...

EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
garston tony wrote: Does smoking an e-cigarette stop the person from being able to perform his job properly? Ie if he is driving could it be argued that he is not in full control of the vehicle or if doing other work is smoking an e-cigarette a form of unofficial break? Other than that if the above dont apply is in any different to someone munching into a chocolate bar, or sipping a can of fizzy or even chewing on nicotine gum whilst doing their job? On the face of it does seem harsh, I dont see any problem with it unless the act/time itself was impacting on his work. Maybe its the smell, but then is it worse than an over strong perfume or mens deoderant? Where do you draw the line if that is the case!
Did you totally miss my point below Tony?.......... A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas," This is research being carried out in the US, not my view.
Chill out, seems like you need a cigarette to calm your nerves!
[quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]garston tony[/bold] wrote: Does smoking an e-cigarette stop the person from being able to perform his job properly? Ie if he is driving could it be argued that he is not in full control of the vehicle or if doing other work is smoking an e-cigarette a form of unofficial break? Other than that if the above dont apply is in any different to someone munching into a chocolate bar, or sipping a can of fizzy or even chewing on nicotine gum whilst doing their job? On the face of it does seem harsh, I dont see any problem with it unless the act/time itself was impacting on his work. Maybe its the smell, but then is it worse than an over strong perfume or mens deoderant? Where do you draw the line if that is the case![/p][/quote]Did you totally miss my point below Tony?.......... A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas," This is research being carried out in the US, not my view.[/p][/quote]Chill out, seems like you need a cigarette to calm your nerves! garston tony

10:14am Thu 5 Dec 13

garston tony says...

harleyrider1777 wrote:
This pretty well destroys the Myth of second hand smoke: http://vitals.nbcnew s.com/_news/2013/01/ 28/16741714-lungs-fr om-pack-a-day-smoker s-safe-for-transplan t-study-finds?lite Lungs from pack-a-day smokers safe for transplant, study finds. By JoNel Aleccia, Staff Writer, NBC News. Using lung transplants from heavy smokers may sound like a cruel joke, but a new study finds that organs taken from people who puffed a pack a day for more than 20 years are likely safe. What’s more, the analysis of lung transplant data from the U.S. between 2005 and 2011 confirms what transplant experts say they already know: For some patients on a crowded organ waiting list, lungs from smokers are better than none. “I think people are grateful just to have a shot at getting lungs,” said Dr. Sharven Taghavi, a cardiovascular surgical resident at Temple University Hospital in Philadelphia, who led the new study............... ............ Ive done the math here and this is how it works out with second ahnd smoke and people inhaling it! The 16 cities study conducted by the U.S. DEPT OF ENERGY and later by Oakridge National laboratories discovered: Cigarette smoke, bartenders annual exposure to smoke rises, at most, to the equivalent of 6 cigarettes/year. 146,000 CIGARETTES SMOKED IN 20 YEARS AT 1 PACK A DAY. A bartender would have to work in second hand smoke for 2433 years to get an equivalent dose. Then the average non-smoker in a ventilated restaurant for an hour would have to go back and forth each day for 119,000 years to get an equivalent 20 years of smoking a pack a day! Pretty well impossible ehh!
The fact that any lung is better than no lung isnt the destroying any 'myth' about second hand smoke.

Like a lot of things the impact varies from person to person, for every person you can find who isnt that affected by second hand smoke I can find someone whose never smoked in their lives yet who have got smokers lungs from hanging around smokers too much.
[quote][p][bold]harleyrider1777[/bold] wrote: This pretty well destroys the Myth of second hand smoke: http://vitals.nbcnew s.com/_news/2013/01/ 28/16741714-lungs-fr om-pack-a-day-smoker s-safe-for-transplan t-study-finds?lite Lungs from pack-a-day smokers safe for transplant, study finds. By JoNel Aleccia, Staff Writer, NBC News. Using lung transplants from heavy smokers may sound like a cruel joke, but a new study finds that organs taken from people who puffed a pack a day for more than 20 years are likely safe. What’s more, the analysis of lung transplant data from the U.S. between 2005 and 2011 confirms what transplant experts say they already know: For some patients on a crowded organ waiting list, lungs from smokers are better than none. “I think people are grateful just to have a shot at getting lungs,” said Dr. Sharven Taghavi, a cardiovascular surgical resident at Temple University Hospital in Philadelphia, who led the new study............... ............ Ive done the math here and this is how it works out with second ahnd smoke and people inhaling it! The 16 cities study conducted by the U.S. DEPT OF ENERGY and later by Oakridge National laboratories discovered: Cigarette smoke, bartenders annual exposure to smoke rises, at most, to the equivalent of 6 cigarettes/year. 146,000 CIGARETTES SMOKED IN 20 YEARS AT 1 PACK A DAY. A bartender would have to work in second hand smoke for 2433 years to get an equivalent dose. Then the average non-smoker in a ventilated restaurant for an hour would have to go back and forth each day for 119,000 years to get an equivalent 20 years of smoking a pack a day! Pretty well impossible ehh![/p][/quote]The fact that any lung is better than no lung isnt the destroying any 'myth' about second hand smoke. Like a lot of things the impact varies from person to person, for every person you can find who isnt that affected by second hand smoke I can find someone whose never smoked in their lives yet who have got smokers lungs from hanging around smokers too much. garston tony

10:17am Thu 5 Dec 13

garston tony says...

EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
dented wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
dented wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote: A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"
I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh! When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.
I didn't say it was true ****! I was simply putting a alternate view forward. Same as fog out of a fog machine? So now you are a research scientist? I think not.
I said similar to a fog machine, not the same. You weren't putting an alternate view forward, you were putting someone else's view forward! I'm not a research scientist but I am aware of the risks of vaping vs smoking.
EU_OUT_NOW I think not.
I believe you need a comma after think.
Have your views by all means, that's what the comments page is all about. But being rude achieves nothing......... (believe you need a comma after think)
Erm, werent you the one that started the rudeness!
[quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dented[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dented[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"[/p][/quote]I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh! When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.[/p][/quote]I didn't say it was true ****! I was simply putting a alternate view forward. Same as fog out of a fog machine? So now you are a research scientist? I think not.[/p][/quote]I said similar to a fog machine, not the same. You weren't putting an alternate view forward, you were putting someone else's view forward! I'm not a research scientist but I am aware of the risks of vaping vs smoking. [quote][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] I think not.[/quote] I believe you need a comma after think.[/p][/quote]Have your views by all means, that's what the comments page is all about. But being rude achieves nothing......... (believe you need a comma after think)[/p][/quote]Erm, werent you the one that started the rudeness! garston tony

10:23am Thu 5 Dec 13

garston tony says...

Nascot wrote:
Trojan pest control wrote: E cigs are harmless. It's all about money! Approx 10mil people smoke in the uk and revenue raised made up of tax and vat =12.1 bil A pack of 20marlboro gold costing £8.20 will be made up of about £4.50 in tax. The cost to treating smoking related diseases to the NHS (stat vary) 2.7bil -5.2bil . There was 110000-115000 Deaths due to smoking related illness last yr. With people like myself choosing the option of using e cigs set to rise from 1.5mil to possible 3-4 mil over the next few yr this will result in huge losses. The tabacco companies are also aware of the impact on revenue due to a safer alternative they are buying up all competition and buy the time e cigs are regulated the tax and inflated prices will exceed the cost of tabacco. I've gone nearly a yr without a cigarette and fell a lot more healthier. I wouldn't say their 100% safe until further studies are done but I'm pretty sure a few ml of nicotine and some glycerol and propylene glycol is also less damaging than the thousands of cancer causing chemical in the profitable tabacco. It's all about money. Safe or not they will take the measure that make the most money!
How many spelling grammar mistakes are there in that post?
This is an internet forum, not an English exam or job application. Cant stand grammar police on forums like this, all that matters here is being able to get your point accross doesnt matter if spelling isnt a ok etc.

I'n not saying good grammar and spelling isnt important but picking people up on it on places like here just makes you look stupid, stick to the subject
[quote][p][bold]Nascot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Trojan pest control[/bold] wrote: E cigs are harmless. It's all about money! Approx 10mil people smoke in the uk and revenue raised made up of tax and vat =12.1 bil A pack of 20marlboro gold costing £8.20 will be made up of about £4.50 in tax. The cost to treating smoking related diseases to the NHS (stat vary) 2.7bil -5.2bil . There was 110000-115000 Deaths due to smoking related illness last yr. With people like myself choosing the option of using e cigs set to rise from 1.5mil to possible 3-4 mil over the next few yr this will result in huge losses. The tabacco companies are also aware of the impact on revenue due to a safer alternative they are buying up all competition and buy the time e cigs are regulated the tax and inflated prices will exceed the cost of tabacco. I've gone nearly a yr without a cigarette and fell a lot more healthier. I wouldn't say their 100% safe until further studies are done but I'm pretty sure a few ml of nicotine and some glycerol and propylene glycol is also less damaging than the thousands of cancer causing chemical in the profitable tabacco. It's all about money. Safe or not they will take the measure that make the most money![/p][/quote]How many spelling grammar mistakes are there in that post?[/p][/quote]This is an internet forum, not an English exam or job application. Cant stand grammar police on forums like this, all that matters here is being able to get your point accross doesnt matter if spelling isnt a ok etc. I'n not saying good grammar and spelling isnt important but picking people up on it on places like here just makes you look stupid, stick to the subject garston tony

10:26am Thu 5 Dec 13

TRT says...

dented wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"
I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh!

When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.
I *am* a research scientist and though I can't say anything about the whys and wherefores of nicotine absorption in the lung (lungs are not my area of research) I do have concerns about possible contamination of the vapour produced by most designs of e-cigaratte. The bulk of designs produce the vapour by passing moisture-laden air mixed with the additive over a heating element to vaporise it. This heating element heats up and cools down rapidly and repeatedly with every breath, stressing the heating element and causing flexure. This in turn releases nano-particles of the heating element into the vapour stream. The heating element is usually a nickel-chromium wire or coil, especially in cheaper and disposable units, and it is becoming established through experimental and epidemiological studies that magnetic nano-particles, particularly aluminium and nickel, are a definite cause of neuronal cell death, which in turn causes a cascading chain-reaction of neighbouring neurone death leading principally to the condition known as Alzheimer's disease.

The e-cigarette method of vapour production cannot be compared to, e.g. natural fog or dry-ice fog machines, or even oil based ones where the coil runs continuously. And I'm fully aware that internal combustion engines, electrical transformers etc etc etc can also slew off nano-particles into the air that we breathe - the results are nowhere near in on that one yet. But given that many millions of people are suddenly breathing these particles deep into their lungs habitually on a daily basis, I've grave concerns for a future epidemic of a disease that can take decades to manifest. By the time we start to notice a causative effect, it'll be far too late. Much as the lip, tongue, throat and lung cancers associated with smoking have taken decades and decades to become apparent. And though Alzheimer's is not as lethal as cancer, that may in fact be worse for society as a whole and the individuals who may contract it.

I'm not urging a permanent ban, but I do urge caution, more research and better control of the supply chain for what is, to all intents and purposes, a pharmaceutical device.
[quote][p][bold]dented[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"[/p][/quote]I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh! When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.[/p][/quote]I *am* a research scientist and though I can't say anything about the whys and wherefores of nicotine absorption in the lung (lungs are not my area of research) I do have concerns about possible contamination of the vapour produced by most designs of e-cigaratte. The bulk of designs produce the vapour by passing moisture-laden air mixed with the additive over a heating element to vaporise it. This heating element heats up and cools down rapidly and repeatedly with every breath, stressing the heating element and causing flexure. This in turn releases nano-particles of the heating element into the vapour stream. The heating element is usually a nickel-chromium wire or coil, especially in cheaper and disposable units, and it is becoming established through experimental and epidemiological studies that magnetic nano-particles, particularly aluminium and nickel, are a definite cause of neuronal cell death, which in turn causes a cascading chain-reaction of neighbouring neurone death leading principally to the condition known as Alzheimer's disease. The e-cigarette method of vapour production cannot be compared to, e.g. natural fog or dry-ice fog machines, or even oil based ones where the coil runs continuously. And I'm fully aware that internal combustion engines, electrical transformers etc etc etc can also slew off nano-particles into the air that we breathe - the results are nowhere near in on that one yet. But given that many millions of people are suddenly breathing these particles deep into their lungs habitually on a daily basis, I've grave concerns for a future epidemic of a disease that can take decades to manifest. By the time we start to notice a causative effect, it'll be far too late. Much as the lip, tongue, throat and lung cancers associated with smoking have taken decades and decades to become apparent. And though Alzheimer's is not as lethal as cancer, that may in fact be worse for society as a whole and the individuals who may contract it. I'm not urging a permanent ban, but I do urge caution, more research and better control of the supply chain for what is, to all intents and purposes, a pharmaceutical device. TRT

10:59am Thu 5 Dec 13

dented says...

EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
I think the whole pack of you nicotine addicts should admit you are nicotine addicts, kick the habit and find something else to do with your hands and mouths! If I can quit smoking after 20yrs @20 a day and maintain abstinence for 26yrs, then so can you lot!..... e-ciggs won't cut it, it's a temporary crutch, you go back to real ciggy's in the end. QUIT is the only way!
There is nothing worse than a militant ex-smoker who thinks he knows it all. Well done for quitting but don't believe what worked for you is a universal solution.
[quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: I think the whole pack of you nicotine addicts should admit you are nicotine addicts, kick the habit and find something else to do with your hands and mouths! If I can quit smoking after 20yrs @20 a day and maintain abstinence for 26yrs, then so can you lot!..... e-ciggs won't cut it, it's a temporary crutch, you go back to real ciggy's in the end. QUIT is the only way![/p][/quote]There is nothing worse than a militant ex-smoker who thinks he knows it all. Well done for quitting but don't believe what worked for you is a universal solution. dented

12:07pm Thu 5 Dec 13

EU_OUT_NOW says...

Parmenion wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW...Have you always been such a self-righteous bigot? Seems to me that you're just another one of the gullible sheeple...completely brainwashed by the tobacco control industry propaganda.

Antismokers tell us that people only smoke because they are ‘addicted to nicotine’, and that most smokers actually want to quit. But most smokers enjoy smoking, and few people want to quit something they enjoy. Nag and frighten them enough, though, and you can certainly get them to believe that they should.
‘Addiction’ is not a clearly-defined scientific term, and it’s very hard to separate ‘addictions’ from habits.
Antismokers have to keep pushing ‘addiction’ since they either cannot believe, or cannot admit, that people not only freely choose to smoke but enjoy it. ‘Addiction’ also works to further stigmatise smokers by portraying us as contemptible junkies. Of course, if you’re smoking out of pure compulsion and aren’t even enjoying it, I would say you might as well quit. After all, if you’re going to do something which not only has potential health risks but increasingly gets you treated like dirt, then you may as well at least get some pleasure from it. But many thousands have quit of their own accord, and many others are smoking moderately, or only at certain times, or switching to cigars or e-cigs. I meet these people all the time, but according to antismokers they don’t exist. I personally only smoke when I’m having a drink. Perhaps I don’t exist either.

http://www.formindep

.org/The-myth-of-nic

otine-addiction.html


http://www.formindep

.org/The-myth-of-nic

otine-addiction.html
Utter defensive rubbish!!! "But most smokers enjoy smoking" Try to convince yourself if you must, but don't try to convince me or others. You are addicted to them, we know it and so do the unscrupulous manufactures.
[quote][p][bold]Parmenion[/bold] wrote: EU_OUT_NOW...Have you always been such a self-righteous bigot? Seems to me that you're just another one of the gullible sheeple...completely brainwashed by the tobacco control industry propaganda. Antismokers tell us that people only smoke because they are ‘addicted to nicotine’, and that most smokers actually want to quit. But most smokers enjoy smoking, and few people want to quit something they enjoy. Nag and frighten them enough, though, and you can certainly get them to believe that they should. ‘Addiction’ is not a clearly-defined scientific term, and it’s very hard to separate ‘addictions’ from habits. Antismokers have to keep pushing ‘addiction’ since they either cannot believe, or cannot admit, that people not only freely choose to smoke but enjoy it. ‘Addiction’ also works to further stigmatise smokers by portraying us as contemptible junkies. Of course, if you’re smoking out of pure compulsion and aren’t even enjoying it, I would say you might as well quit. After all, if you’re going to do something which not only has potential health risks but increasingly gets you treated like dirt, then you may as well at least get some pleasure from it. But many thousands have quit of their own accord, and many others are smoking moderately, or only at certain times, or switching to cigars or e-cigs. I meet these people all the time, but according to antismokers they don’t exist. I personally only smoke when I’m having a drink. Perhaps I don’t exist either. http://www.formindep .org/The-myth-of-nic otine-addiction.html http://www.formindep .org/The-myth-of-nic otine-addiction.html[/p][/quote]Utter defensive rubbish!!! "But most smokers enjoy smoking" Try to convince yourself if you must, but don't try to convince me or others. You are addicted to them, we know it and so do the unscrupulous manufactures. EU_OUT_NOW

12:19pm Thu 5 Dec 13

EU_OUT_NOW says...

garston tony wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
garston tony wrote: Does smoking an e-cigarette stop the person from being able to perform his job properly? Ie if he is driving could it be argued that he is not in full control of the vehicle or if doing other work is smoking an e-cigarette a form of unofficial break? Other than that if the above dont apply is in any different to someone munching into a chocolate bar, or sipping a can of fizzy or even chewing on nicotine gum whilst doing their job? On the face of it does seem harsh, I dont see any problem with it unless the act/time itself was impacting on his work. Maybe its the smell, but then is it worse than an over strong perfume or mens deoderant? Where do you draw the line if that is the case!
Did you totally miss my point below Tony?.......... A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas," This is research being carried out in the US, not my view.
Chill out, seems like you need a cigarette to calm your nerves!
Very good Tony.. I would much prefer a new pair of lungs from 20yrs of smoking though, but you guys carry on smoking and then somewhere down the line you may be able to enjoy the same lung disease and inhalers that I do... You will feel so proud you stood up for your rights!!! Go Tony, enjoy the addiction!!
[quote][p][bold]garston tony[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]garston tony[/bold] wrote: Does smoking an e-cigarette stop the person from being able to perform his job properly? Ie if he is driving could it be argued that he is not in full control of the vehicle or if doing other work is smoking an e-cigarette a form of unofficial break? Other than that if the above dont apply is in any different to someone munching into a chocolate bar, or sipping a can of fizzy or even chewing on nicotine gum whilst doing their job? On the face of it does seem harsh, I dont see any problem with it unless the act/time itself was impacting on his work. Maybe its the smell, but then is it worse than an over strong perfume or mens deoderant? Where do you draw the line if that is the case![/p][/quote]Did you totally miss my point below Tony?.......... A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas," This is research being carried out in the US, not my view.[/p][/quote]Chill out, seems like you need a cigarette to calm your nerves![/p][/quote]Very good Tony.. I would much prefer a new pair of lungs from 20yrs of smoking though, but you guys carry on smoking and then somewhere down the line you may be able to enjoy the same lung disease and inhalers that I do... You will feel so proud you stood up for your rights!!! Go Tony, enjoy the addiction!! EU_OUT_NOW

12:29pm Thu 5 Dec 13

EU_OUT_NOW says...

Alban Hornet wrote:
Smoking E-cigs still has some side effects, such as looking like an utter ****
Hahahahaahh... Oh I do like this one, it's like smoking an electric torch. It says look at me I want to give up smoking but I can't, so I am prepared to pay ridiculous sums of money to smoke a battery with nicotine liquid in it!
[quote][p][bold]Alban Hornet[/bold] wrote: Smoking E-cigs still has some side effects, such as looking like an utter ****[/p][/quote]Hahahahaahh... Oh I do like this one, it's like smoking an electric torch. It says look at me I want to give up smoking but I can't, so I am prepared to pay ridiculous sums of money to smoke a battery with nicotine liquid in it! EU_OUT_NOW

1:03pm Thu 5 Dec 13

garston tony says...

EU i'm a non smoker, never ever tried it and have no desire too. From the start i've never liked the smell and to this day I feel the need to wash and change clothing if i've been near someone smoking for even a short period of time. The smell just permeates everything and lingers for ever (on that note i've not actually been near anyone smoking an e-cig, does it give out the same stench?)

Nor EU was I standing up for any rights in my comments, I was actually asking if the reason the chap was dissmissed was because the company viewed it as breaching no smoking laws or because if he was doing it whilst driving a truck it breached some rule about being in control of a moving vehicle or maybe he was abusing the break system.

If the former then the result of the case would be significant for employers and employees and people wanting to use e-cigs in public spaces, if the latter I was asking was it any different to someone having a can of pop or eating a snack whilst doing their work and where do you draw the line.

Next time I look you've gone all aggressive and abusive about peoples comments! Hence my comment about chilling out.
EU i'm a non smoker, never ever tried it and have no desire too. From the start i've never liked the smell and to this day I feel the need to wash and change clothing if i've been near someone smoking for even a short period of time. The smell just permeates everything and lingers for ever (on that note i've not actually been near anyone smoking an e-cig, does it give out the same stench?) Nor EU was I standing up for any rights in my comments, I was actually asking if the reason the chap was dissmissed was because the company viewed it as breaching no smoking laws or because if he was doing it whilst driving a truck it breached some rule about being in control of a moving vehicle or maybe he was abusing the break system. If the former then the result of the case would be significant for employers and employees and people wanting to use e-cigs in public spaces, if the latter I was asking was it any different to someone having a can of pop or eating a snack whilst doing their work and where do you draw the line. Next time I look you've gone all aggressive and abusive about peoples comments! Hence my comment about chilling out. garston tony

1:03pm Thu 5 Dec 13

garston tony says...

At a slight tangent, I am anti smoking and was glad when the laws were introduced restricting where people could smoke in public spaces. Whilst I welcome being able to go into a pub or restaurant etc and not being engulfed by smoke it does annoy me that often to get inside those places and many other buildings you have to run a gauntlet of people having a fag outside. Just this last weekend I sat on a bench outside in town whilst waiting for the other half when someone came and stood right behind me having a smoke. I moved but asked myself why I had to move when it was the other person causing the problem? I'd love the ban to be extended to include pretty much all outdoor public spaces too.
At a slight tangent, I am anti smoking and was glad when the laws were introduced restricting where people could smoke in public spaces. Whilst I welcome being able to go into a pub or restaurant etc and not being engulfed by smoke it does annoy me that often to get inside those places and many other buildings you have to run a gauntlet of people having a fag outside. Just this last weekend I sat on a bench outside in town whilst waiting for the other half when someone came and stood right behind me having a smoke. I moved but asked myself why I had to move when it was the other person causing the problem? I'd love the ban to be extended to include pretty much all outdoor public spaces too. garston tony

1:06pm Thu 5 Dec 13

garston tony says...

EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
Alban Hornet wrote: Smoking E-cigs still has some side effects, such as looking like an utter ****
Hahahahaahh... Oh I do like this one, it's like smoking an electric torch. It says look at me I want to give up smoking but I can't, so I am prepared to pay ridiculous sums of money to smoke a battery with nicotine liquid in it!
Yes, and isnt that a good thing? Someone who doesnt have the discipline to give up the addiction is willing to spend more money to use a supposedly healthier alternative. Good on them.

As someone who says they are an ex smoker you have rather strange opinions
[quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alban Hornet[/bold] wrote: Smoking E-cigs still has some side effects, such as looking like an utter ****[/p][/quote]Hahahahaahh... Oh I do like this one, it's like smoking an electric torch. It says look at me I want to give up smoking but I can't, so I am prepared to pay ridiculous sums of money to smoke a battery with nicotine liquid in it![/p][/quote]Yes, and isnt that a good thing? Someone who doesnt have the discipline to give up the addiction is willing to spend more money to use a supposedly healthier alternative. Good on them. As someone who says they are an ex smoker you have rather strange opinions garston tony

1:24pm Thu 5 Dec 13

EU_OUT_NOW says...

TRT wrote:
dented wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"
I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh!

When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.
I *am* a research scientist and though I can't say anything about the whys and wherefores of nicotine absorption in the lung (lungs are not my area of research) I do have concerns about possible contamination of the vapour produced by most designs of e-cigaratte. The bulk of designs produce the vapour by passing moisture-laden air mixed with the additive over a heating element to vaporise it. This heating element heats up and cools down rapidly and repeatedly with every breath, stressing the heating element and causing flexure. This in turn releases nano-particles of the heating element into the vapour stream. The heating element is usually a nickel-chromium wire or coil, especially in cheaper and disposable units, and it is becoming established through experimental and epidemiological studies that magnetic nano-particles, particularly aluminium and nickel, are a definite cause of neuronal cell death, which in turn causes a cascading chain-reaction of neighbouring neurone death leading principally to the condition known as Alzheimer's disease.

The e-cigarette method of vapour production cannot be compared to, e.g. natural fog or dry-ice fog machines, or even oil based ones where the coil runs continuously. And I'm fully aware that internal combustion engines, electrical transformers etc etc etc can also slew off nano-particles into the air that we breathe - the results are nowhere near in on that one yet. But given that many millions of people are suddenly breathing these particles deep into their lungs habitually on a daily basis, I've grave concerns for a future epidemic of a disease that can take decades to manifest. By the time we start to notice a causative effect, it'll be far too late. Much as the lip, tongue, throat and lung cancers associated with smoking have taken decades and decades to become apparent. And though Alzheimer's is not as lethal as cancer, that may in fact be worse for society as a whole and the individuals who may contract it.

I'm not urging a permanent ban, but I do urge caution, more research and better control of the supply chain for what is, to all intents and purposes, a pharmaceutical device.
This has to be the most informative and detailed analysis of the potential dangers of passive smoking from e-cigarettes. Some objective common sense at last instead of opinions being driven by emotive, defensive overloads. Do I feel that e-cigarettes should be smoked in the work place or any other public area? NO..... I have enjoyed the debate with you all, it's been lively and fun! But nothing has changed in many years, smokers whether it be the real thing or battery driven substitutes are as vigorously defensive about their habit as ever.
I am just so relieved that both my grown up children have kicked the habit and no longer smoke. believe me the language they used at the time makes your criticism on here look mild. But I think seeing Dad in the morning with inhalers coping with lung damage caused by long term smoking managed to put them off cigarettes for life! To all of you out there trying to quit smoking, I wish you the very best of luck and I mean that sincerely. Giving up the nicotine habit is hard work, but it can be done! 20/30yrs down the line you will be glad you did. So good bye for now and don't give up trying to QUIT!.... Finally, the man who got me to quit all those years ago was the same guy who got Richard Branson to quit smoking. Pity the VHS tape can't be re-released on DVD (I will uncheck the box at the bottom, so wont be able to reply)
[quote][p][bold]TRT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dented[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: A comment I found on the Internet from research being carried out on e cigarettes.... "I wouldn't be surprised if we find out that there's going to be second hand effects from even just the exhilaration of the nicotine gas,"[/p][/quote]I read it on the internet so it must be true! Sheesh! When you vape (inhale from an ecig) the nicotine is absorbed into the bloodstream via the lungs. When you exhale it is nothing but vapour, similar to the output of a 'fog' machine at the local club.[/p][/quote]I *am* a research scientist and though I can't say anything about the whys and wherefores of nicotine absorption in the lung (lungs are not my area of research) I do have concerns about possible contamination of the vapour produced by most designs of e-cigaratte. The bulk of designs produce the vapour by passing moisture-laden air mixed with the additive over a heating element to vaporise it. This heating element heats up and cools down rapidly and repeatedly with every breath, stressing the heating element and causing flexure. This in turn releases nano-particles of the heating element into the vapour stream. The heating element is usually a nickel-chromium wire or coil, especially in cheaper and disposable units, and it is becoming established through experimental and epidemiological studies that magnetic nano-particles, particularly aluminium and nickel, are a definite cause of neuronal cell death, which in turn causes a cascading chain-reaction of neighbouring neurone death leading principally to the condition known as Alzheimer's disease. The e-cigarette method of vapour production cannot be compared to, e.g. natural fog or dry-ice fog machines, or even oil based ones where the coil runs continuously. And I'm fully aware that internal combustion engines, electrical transformers etc etc etc can also slew off nano-particles into the air that we breathe - the results are nowhere near in on that one yet. But given that many millions of people are suddenly breathing these particles deep into their lungs habitually on a daily basis, I've grave concerns for a future epidemic of a disease that can take decades to manifest. By the time we start to notice a causative effect, it'll be far too late. Much as the lip, tongue, throat and lung cancers associated with smoking have taken decades and decades to become apparent. And though Alzheimer's is not as lethal as cancer, that may in fact be worse for society as a whole and the individuals who may contract it. I'm not urging a permanent ban, but I do urge caution, more research and better control of the supply chain for what is, to all intents and purposes, a pharmaceutical device.[/p][/quote]This has to be the most informative and detailed analysis of the potential dangers of passive smoking from e-cigarettes. Some objective common sense at last instead of opinions being driven by emotive, defensive overloads. Do I feel that e-cigarettes should be smoked in the work place or any other public area? NO..... I have enjoyed the debate with you all, it's been lively and fun! But nothing has changed in many years, smokers whether it be the real thing or battery driven substitutes are as vigorously defensive about their habit as ever. I am just so relieved that both my grown up children have kicked the habit and no longer smoke. believe me the language they used at the time makes your criticism on here look mild. But I think seeing Dad in the morning with inhalers coping with lung damage caused by long term smoking managed to put them off cigarettes for life! To all of you out there trying to quit smoking, I wish you the very best of luck and I mean that sincerely. Giving up the nicotine habit is hard work, but it can be done! 20/30yrs down the line you will be glad you did. So good bye for now and don't give up trying to QUIT!.... Finally, the man who got me to quit all those years ago was the same guy who got Richard Branson to quit smoking. Pity the VHS tape can't be re-released on DVD (I will uncheck the box at the bottom, so wont be able to reply) EU_OUT_NOW

1:33pm Thu 5 Dec 13

EU_OUT_NOW says...

garston tony wrote:
EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
Alban Hornet wrote: Smoking E-cigs still has some side effects, such as looking like an utter ****
Hahahahaahh... Oh I do like this one, it's like smoking an electric torch. It says look at me I want to give up smoking but I can't, so I am prepared to pay ridiculous sums of money to smoke a battery with nicotine liquid in it!
Yes, and isnt that a good thing? Someone who doesnt have the discipline to give up the addiction is willing to spend more money to use a supposedly healthier alternative. Good on them.

As someone who says they are an ex smoker you have rather strange opinions
Last comment before I go. Not really so strange. STOP, QUIT is the only way! Substitutes are just putting off the inevitable, at great cost to the addict and huge profit to the manufacturer STOP. QUIT
[quote][p][bold]garston tony[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EU_OUT_NOW[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alban Hornet[/bold] wrote: Smoking E-cigs still has some side effects, such as looking like an utter ****[/p][/quote]Hahahahaahh... Oh I do like this one, it's like smoking an electric torch. It says look at me I want to give up smoking but I can't, so I am prepared to pay ridiculous sums of money to smoke a battery with nicotine liquid in it![/p][/quote]Yes, and isnt that a good thing? Someone who doesnt have the discipline to give up the addiction is willing to spend more money to use a supposedly healthier alternative. Good on them. As someone who says they are an ex smoker you have rather strange opinions[/p][/quote]Last comment before I go. Not really so strange. STOP, QUIT is the only way! Substitutes are just putting off the inevitable, at great cost to the addict and huge profit to the manufacturer STOP. QUIT EU_OUT_NOW

1:38pm Thu 5 Dec 13

EU_OUT_NOW says...

garston tony wrote:
At a slight tangent, I am anti smoking and was glad when the laws were introduced restricting where people could smoke in public spaces. Whilst I welcome being able to go into a pub or restaurant etc and not being engulfed by smoke it does annoy me that often to get inside those places and many other buildings you have to run a gauntlet of people having a fag outside. Just this last weekend I sat on a bench outside in town whilst waiting for the other half when someone came and stood right behind me having a smoke. I moved but asked myself why I had to move when it was the other person causing the problem? I'd love the ban to be extended to include pretty much all outdoor public spaces too.
Well done Tony, you have just lit the blue touch paper..... Kerboom!!!
[quote][p][bold]garston tony[/bold] wrote: At a slight tangent, I am anti smoking and was glad when the laws were introduced restricting where people could smoke in public spaces. Whilst I welcome being able to go into a pub or restaurant etc and not being engulfed by smoke it does annoy me that often to get inside those places and many other buildings you have to run a gauntlet of people having a fag outside. Just this last weekend I sat on a bench outside in town whilst waiting for the other half when someone came and stood right behind me having a smoke. I moved but asked myself why I had to move when it was the other person causing the problem? I'd love the ban to be extended to include pretty much all outdoor public spaces too.[/p][/quote]Well done Tony, you have just lit the blue touch paper..... Kerboom!!! EU_OUT_NOW

5:29pm Fri 6 Dec 13

EU_OUT_NOW says...

Allen Carr's Easy Way To Stop Smoking ... It's on eBay... It helped Richard Branson, so it could help you. It's not a magic fix, it may take time, but it does work.. Richard Branson is on YouTube introducing the video too.......
Allen Carr's Easy Way To Stop Smoking [2005] [DVD]... It's on eBay... It helped Richard Branson, so it could help you. It's not a magic fix, it may take time, but it does work.. Richard Branson is on YouTube introducing the video too....... EU_OUT_NOW

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree