Sat I hairdressers on two seater couch and other woman waiting is chugging on e-cig

[whoahokeycokey]

Just this really. I've got colour on waiting for it to take and as it's a small hairdressers (3 chairs) they rotate us whilst colour set etc. The woman next to me is chugging away on her e-cig. It stinks of some rancid sweet smell.
Why is it acceptable to whip these things out? I've noticed a lot that they are used in places where smoking is not allowed. I know my 2nd hand inhalation isn't going to cause me a great harm but it's making my teeth itch!

Nevertheless, you do appear to agree broadly with the conclusions, just not the way they are expressed, theymademejoin. That's plenty reassuring enough for me for the time being. It doesn't lead me to the conclusion the researchers involved are corrupt or grossly misleading. I would rather conclusions to scientific research did not contain figures inserted more to have an impact on the general public than to reflect accurate, scientific calculations, but nevertheless, the risk is currently accepted by respected researchers to be low, particularly to passive vapers, who are my main interest (albeit obviously not the researchers'!).

roundaboutthetown I do appreciate that you have listened and have revised your position. Thank you. I know it's not an easy thing to do.

Thank you, Pencils. I don't actually find it difficult to change my position if treated to an informed and intelligent discussion.

Pencil - I've chosen to pick holes in this report as you have been quoting it as fact.

They may have used the best data available but should report it accurately rather than misrepresentating it to suit their purpose.

Roundabouttown - my concerns are that they are misrepresentating data. If they are doing that in the cases I identified, without actually going and examining all the sources they use, I have no idea how accurate their conclusions are. So no, I am not saying that I agree with their conclusions. The misrepresentating of data means that I don't trust what they are saying to be accurate. That doesn't mean their conclusions are wrong, equally it doesn't mean they are right.

Pencil - how do you know the standard of this research is so high? You said previously that you didn't understand the issue with sample size and statistics. I presume that also means that you would not be able to determine whether statistics have been used or interpreted accurately in a report?

As most people are in the same boat, it is important that public bodies and policy makers accurately report the facts. There is misinformation in the report. I have already pointed that out to you. Whether it will have negative consequences or not, I don't know. However, as I said previously, this misinformation creates a faulty foundation for future research. It may not matter in the long term but I would prefer those making public policy decisions to build strong, reliable foundations for that policy.

My main problem with vaping, now, is the extreme addictiveness of nicotine. It is not a good thing for people to be victim to powerful addictions - they are at the mercy of price hikes, they become so focused on getting their fix they can become extremely self-centred/selfish about it (eg my ex-boss), many would even kill themselves off for it if it proved to be harmful after all, as smoking shows. As such, I would hate vaping to become popular with people who do not already smoke. That justifies e-cigarettes receiving intense continued scrutiny. Under current norms, it doesn't mean people should be banned from being seen to do it, though, as that is an extremely draconian response. That is not why smoking was banned from public spaces.

Round - I actually think your point is a good reason to restrict where vaping is done. At the moment, it is predominantly done as a substitute for tobacco, I think as it becomes more prevalent we would be naive to think people (and that's usually children) will not start to experiment. After all, part of the reason for its success is the fact it's fun!

And with nicotine, experimentation is likely to lead to addiction.

Pencil - how do you know the standard of this research is so high? You said previously that you didn't understand the issue with sample size and statistics. I presume that also means that you would not be able to determine whether statistics have been used or interpreted accurately in a report?

Because as well as the report I looked at the reception and criticism it received, as I do whenever a new report or piece of research hits the headlines. I may not have much of an understanding of statistics but there is a small army of well funded scientists who do and who would love nothing more than for this report to be wrong. If there were any major flaws with this report, those scientists would be all over them like a rash. Instead, after two years all we have is the same minor criticisms that you have raised, plus some really dreadful and baseless ad hominem attacks. They have nothing.

Compare the criticisms of PHE's report with, for example, expert reaction to the latest WHO report or the Surgeon General's report on youth and ecigs (see also Clive Bates on this.) The bar is not that high.

It's smoking that is highly addictive, not nicotine on it's own.

From fact sheet on nicotine and addiction:

It is important to note that it is the delivery of nicotine through tobacco smoke which makes it potentially addictive as this is the fastest way of delivering nicotine to the bloodstream. Tobacco smoke may also include chemicals that make nicotine more potent because nicotine separated from tobacco is not particularly addictive. Studies have shown that animals do not self-administer nicotine readily even if provided rapidly, and nicotine replacement treatments have virtually no addictive potential for non-smokers and only limited appeal to smokers.

Absorption of nicotine from ecigs is much slower. It takes about 1/2 hour to get the same amount of nicotine from a decent ecig as you can get from a fag in 5 minutes. This is why nicotine dependence levels are much lower in vapers than in smokers, something any vaper can confirm. Once you get over the initial switching hurdle, you just don't get the dreadful cravings you used to get as a smoker.

This is also why regular ecig use is almost entirely confined to smokers and ex smokers, among both adults and youth. People might be experimenting but they are not getting hooked unless they were already smokers.

So, smokers who switch to vaping become less addicted to nicotine and no new nicotine addicts are being created despite experimentation already happening.

I'm back at work today so won't have time to keep up with this thread any more.

Erm, I'm certainly not less addicted to nicotine now that I vape.

Sorry, messed up the link. The quote is from ASH's fact sheet on nicotine and addiction

Well then you're unusual, Saucy

Unfortunately, if you don't have the skill set to discern good and bad research, you are reliant on others to interpret it for you. You need to be going to the sources and reading high quality peer reviewed journals to actually see what is being said, rather than media interpretations.

Generally the way a body of research is built up is by taking existing research, examining it and then building on it. Unfortunately, a lot of research misinterprets or misrepresents existing research and once the misrepresentation gets repeated a few times, it becomes "fact". This seems to be happening with the 95% number the PHE are claiming.

You don't seem to be able to accept that the misrepresentation of existing research by the PHE is a problem. Fair enough. That is obviously your own unconscious bias showing through and which also presumably feeds into your interpretation of your reading.

Anyway, I've wasted more than enough time on this so I'm going to bow out. I hope it is apparent to anyone reading my posts that it is not as black and white as you claim and that critical analysis of the reports of PHE and other organisations is needed as they are perfectly capable of misrepresenting research to suit their aims.

I'm certainly committed Pencils.

I panic when I can't find it. It stopped charging once. I nearly bit someone.

Forgetting what the research papers all say - I don't smoke and someone vaping next to me causes my head to spin and me feel sick due to the nicotine I am inhaling. It's bloody rank...

UKCTAS are not the media, they are 'a network of 13 universities (12 in the UK, one in New Zealand) who conduct research, teaching and policy work into tobacco and alcohol, both important public health concerns.'

HerOtherHalf thank you for articulating your thoughts on this so well, totally agree with you! I know I couldn't have given up the fags without vaping and I will be eternally grateful for it, after having smoked for 30 years.

I thought they just gave off water vapour...

I thought they just gave off water vapour...

Water vapor containing nicotine

Good God, the route to nicotine addiction sounds highly complex. I don't remember reading anywhere before that nicotine is only addictive in cigarettes.

How can we possibly be confident at this stage that vaping is not addictive to non-smokers, given that only about a quarter of people who take up smoking become seriously addicted and the claim is that hardly any non-smokers have actually tried vaping, yet? What in-depth, large scale studies have been done, that I could be pointed towards, on the never-smoking vapers and why those that tried it and stopped chose to stop and how quickly they gave up? Are we sure people stopped because it is not addictive, and not because it is not socially accepted enough yet to encourage people to try it enough times to become addicted? Do we know what chemicals in tobacco combine with the nicotine to increase the likelihood of it becoming addictive? It's not as if nicotine is the only chemical in an e-cigarette. What other chemicals could increase the potency or addictiveness of nicotine in an e-cigarette, and can we trust profit making companies not to try to find out how to make it more addictive?! It's not as if Big Tobacco is not now involved in e-cigarettes, and we know how unscrupulous they are. Do we really understand why vaping seems to be so much more successful at helping people to quit smoking than other nicotine replacement products? This is weird - and fascinating.

Ps I'm assuming it is not water vapour that comes out of an e-cigarette, given that it's glycerine and chemical flavourings, not water, the nicotine is mixed with.

Vaping is saving many lives and preventing lung diseases like COPD. Will save the NHS a fortune treating smoking related diseases in time.

That's good enough for me anyway and I will tolerate it, although it doesn't bother me in the slightest. I always think, well good on you for not smoking tobacco or cigarettes.

(Hoping that Pencils is still feeling benign enough and is not too busy to do the work of pointing me in the right direction! Also, where can I read up about nicotine addiction in general - Google searches just bring up tonnes of contradictory information about nicotine addiction?)

Puffing out horrible smelling vapour in a confined space is anti-social. I'm glad more and more places are banning it - and they're the same places that cigarette-smoking is banned, so it's not driving anyone back to fags.

Vaping smells so rank. Personally, I'd rather smell cigarette smoke that that horrible sickly smell.

sodablackcurrant - that is now how I feel about former smokers who now vape. From the perspective of what to say to my children if it ever becomes a "thing" to vape regularly just for fun, I would like to clear up whether nicotine is addictive and just how addictive it is!