What do non-smokers think of e-cigarettes?

[epiphany]

Ah yes. Drag out the tame stooges. I wonder which ones the UK law makers will listen to.

 

Dream on suckers. Believe anything you want to believe. It won't make a blind bit of difference.

 

Right, so your "argument" is basically the law is what the law is, rather than anything based on logic or reason. I suppose we can't expect anything deeper from such an unashamed apologist for the nanny state.

[WeX]

I distrust them especially when people "smoke" them in offices. Weren't we told years ago that smoking was a good thing by the manufacturers? Why would these e-cigarettes people do anything different?

[I1L2T3]

Some people clearly want to use e-cigs to come off nicotine altogether. Others see it as a safer way to maintain addiction. As I stated it is two arguments. For those who want to stop creating many more situations where they can use is clearly a bad thing. For those who want to continue what is the problem with maintaining the public aspect of their addiction on the way they do now?

 

Nobody should lose sight of the addictive nature of nicotine. Addiction to it in any form should be discouraged IMO

[PeteMorris]

I don't think it's about cessation at all, it's nicotine habit maintenance. And why do you use the word "freely flaunt"? I appreciate that ecigs are a bit new, and people are unsure about them, but do caffeine addicts "freely flaunt" their addiction waving cappuccinos about, do alcohol addicts "freely flaunt" their addiction in pubs?

 

If they do, then I'd argue that ecigs should have parity in the "freely flaunted" stakes.

 

Replace "freely flaunt" with a less emotively loaded term, like "satisfy" and we have a less emotive question: So should the rights of people who do not want to stop their addiction and want to satisfy it in public be restricted for those addicted to nicotine?

 

I think much of the vitriol and apparent anger stems from the fact that for a while, smokers were regarded as unclean sinners by some members of society, giving them a feeling of superiority that they rather enjoyed. But they feel that smokers are somehow cheating them out of that moral high ground with ecigs.

 

I agree with the paragraph above. It does seem that the anti-smoking lobby has had the wind taken out of it's sails somewhat. Now it seems it's a case of "I don't want to witness someone feeding their addiction to nicotine". Personally, I feel the same about coffee! I can't stand the smell or taste of it!

[stereolab]

 

[/color]

 

But the point is...it's NOT the bad old days!...It's not harmful to anyone, including the 'smoker'

 

---------- Post added 24-03-2013 at 10:19 ----------

 

 

The way I see it, is even if it doesn't make me quit...so what?....It's not causing me any harm (as far as I know)...it's not causing anyone else any harm, and it's by far and away MUCH cheaper than 'proper' cigarettes.

 

However, if the government decide to start taxing it, as they do 'real' cigarettes, then in my mind that pure hipocracy.

 

The problem is that at the moment, no one knows if they are doing harm or not. This is because they are totally unregulated - they can be sold to kids, advertised freely and there are no controls over the purity of what you are getting. People are buying these things off street traders and car boot sales and have no idea what they are really getting.

 

They also seem to be popular with people who have no intention of quitting smoking, and may even be driving some people to smoke even more - people can now 'smoke' in between cigarettes in places they might not have been able to before.

 

Personally I would like to see them properly tested and regulated - they seem like a good idea - if they can be proved to be safe and effective then I would be happy to see them provided for free by the NHS rather than sold out of car boots and pound shops.

[PeteMorris]

The problem is that at the moment, no one knows if they are doing harm or not. This is because they are totally unregulated - they can be sold to kids, advertised freely and there are no controls over the purity of what you are getting. People are buying these things off street traders and car boot sales and have no idea what they are really getting.

 

They also seem to be popular with people who have no intention of quitting smoking, and may even be driving some people to smoke even more - people can now 'smoke' in between cigarettes in places they might not have been able to before.

 

Personally I would like to see them properly tested and regulated - they seem like a good idea - if they can be proved to be safe and effective then I would be happy to see them provided for free by the NHS rather than sold out of car boots and pound shops.

 

Well...I agree that their manufacture and liquid 'does' need to be adequately tested and controlled. I wouldn't argue that point for a second. However, providing them free on the NHS would no doubt cause uproar from certain quarters..."Why should I have to pay for other people's addiction...etc".

 

All I know, is, that the place I buy mine from, all of their products are CE marked, and the e-liquid is tested in UK labs. There 'are' some cheap and cheerful knock-off's floating around in some not so reputable establishments though. Also, they will not sell to anyone under 18 years of age.

[Phanerothyme]

I think the fledgling industry is very keen to protect what is a lucrative market, and as such has already established an active trade association and code of practice.

 

The ecig industry (wholesalers and retailers) would, I'm sure, be happy with things like a ban on sale to minors, continuous testing and monitoring of devices and fluids and other regulatory legislation, because that is more or less what they are doing anyway.

[epiphany]

As a consumer, it's your duty to research the product you wish to purchase, especially if it involves putting substances in your body. Otherwise, be prepared to bear the risks. I am sick of ignorance being the excuse for empowering the nanny state.

 

I for one am not the slightest bit concerned about the e-liquid I buy, since the exact same compounds (VG and PG) have been tested in labs for harmful effects and the results have been clear - negligible quantities of harmful substances.

 

Is it still a risk? Of course, but then there are many products on the market that carry risks. You cannot eliminate risk.

 

E-cigs are not unregulated! They are subject to all the standard requirements of any product being sold and distributed in the UK market. Courts would still have the power to prosecute any company who does not adhere to these requirements. But again, we need a responsible consumer mindset in order to call out the companies who violate these basic regulations.

 

---------- Post added 27-03-2013 at 10:13 ----------

 

The ecig industry (wholesalers and retailers) would, I'm sure, be happy with things like a ban on sale to minors, continuous testing and monitoring of devices and fluids and other regulatory legislation, because that is more or less what they are doing anyway.

 

I agree, I think they would welcome the reassurance such legislation would bring because the increased custom, from those who were perhaps wary about the safety of e-cigs, would far outweigh the costs of any tighter regulations.