Second hand vaping

[babynelly2010]

Hi, we just found out we are pregnant, super excited! At work I sit next to a person that smokes e cigarets.
I am new to office so dont feel like I can say anything but everytime I hear that bubbling sound and him sucking the vapour about 4 feet away from me I want to get up and slap him on his face very litterally.
Any one knows if this vaping is harmfull to baby in that praximity? I was thinking getting usb air purifier and put it between us, any ideas if it will make any difference? Any advice on how to deal with this please?

Dunno about passive effects, but the smell of the flavoured stuff made me want to vom when I had morning sickness, so perhaps you might be able to be moved to a different desk if you experience the same.
I do think it's very antisocial of them, even if it's not dangerous.

There are no laws against vaping in indoor spaces. There may however be individual policies which don't allow it.

I would not be happy about this at all. There is advice that contradicts previous posters that have said vaping is safe for pregnant women (eg this article - www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/smoking-e-cigarettes-when-pregnant-puts-unborn-babies-at-risk-a6868276.html, which granted is about pregnant women vaping not effects of vaping in close proximity). Realise you are new at job and don't want to get someone in trouble that you are going to have to sit next to everyday but honestly why would you take the gamble?

You don't have to treat this as a complaint. Read the PHE guidance and if you still have concerns, just go in and have a chat with HR. Ask what their vaping policy is, express any concerns you still have and work out a solution. Asking to move desks would be a reasonable solution. Asking for your colleague to be sent out to stand with the smokers would be an unreasonable solution.

For all you know, your colleague could be recovering from a heart attack and HR have put a vaping policy in place to support his quit attempt in the hope he won't keel over in the next 6 months. Or, HR might have no clue he is vaping at his desk and would discipline him if they found out. You could ask him.

From a health perspective I think you should stop worrying, really. I'd place passive vaping in the same category of risk as using everyday cleaning and cosmetic products. None of those have been proven safe because that's not how science works. You can look for evidence of harm and either find it or not. If you don't find it you can say 'no evidence of harm' but you can never say 'proven to be safe'. In the case of vaping, a lot of scientists have been given a fuck-ton of money over the last 10 years to find evidence of harm and they haven't turned up anything credible.

You have been there for two weeks and you have just found out you are pregnant. If this is a permanent job which you like it's worth treading carefully. You shouldn't have to, but a lot of women find they are 'made redundant' during their pregnancies and ML. You don't have many employment rights until you've been somewhere 2 years and even fewer if you're still on probation.

Haven't read the whole thing but you are absolutely NOT being unreasonable to not want someone smoking e-cigarettes near you. Apart from the fact it sounds highly unusual in an office, I think it would be very unreasonable for a workplace to allow it. e-cigarettes have not been tested - they are not licensed as a drug therefore not subject to the same tasting as cigarettes, so anyone who says they are not proven to be harmful needs reminding that also they haven't been tested for how harmful they are. There are cases of them causing health problems and you are being totally reasonable to bring this up now. I know it is really awkward when you are new but you have to do it.

For all OP knows her colleague could be vaping liquid without any nicotine in it. So nothing whatsoever to worry about - OP needs to speak to him before she works herself into a lather about this.

Aus26 Yay! Tests On Mice! The article you linked to is based on a press release about a presentation that was given at a meeting of the American Academy for the Advancement of Science. Judith Zelikoff provided no studies or data to back up her assertions, which included that vaping is "just as dangerous to your health as cigarettes."

Her presentation appears to be based on 'anecdotal evidence'. I know there are a lot of knowlegeable sciency people on MN - can any of you read this and tell me it's not total bum gravy? Alarm bells started ringing at word 6, which is 'tobacco/nicotine', a category about as useful as 'arsenic/coffee'.

I said in my previous post that a lot of scientists have been given a fuck-ton of money over the last 10 years to find evidence of harm - Judith Zelikoff is one of them - and they haven't turned up anything credible - they have however turned up a load of incredible BS.

The party artist, there have been lots of tests to see whether or not ecigs are harmful. What cases have there been of them causing health problems?

OP have you had a workplace risk assessment done yet? I'm an office worker too and had mine done yesterday. That would probably be a good time to raise your concerns and most employers are likely to take a better safe than sorry approach.

Ginmakesitallok here is some info from the NHS about harmful effects of e-cigarettes:
www.nhs.uk/news/2015/12December/Pages/Flavouring-found-in-e-cigarettes-linked-to-popcorn-lung.aspx

MimiDiddy that's a good suggestion.

PartyArtist, From your link:

However, this study didn't look at this issue directly, so whether there is a link between e-cigarettes and "popcorn lung" is currently unknown

And

The paper said experts writing in the British Medical Journal said, "Many of the conclusions were premature and based on weak evidence"

That test took place in the US where only 8 people have ever been diagnosed with 'popcorn lung'. 8 out of how many millions?

ThePartyArtist I thought you said they hadn't been tested

There is around 750 times more diacetyl in cigarette smoke than there is in ecig vapour. Despite this, nobody has ever been diagnosed with 'popcorn lung' as a result of smoking. Diacetyl, and related compounds, do not need to be in eliquid and more and more manufacturers are certifying their juice as 'diacetyl-free'. All of them should be moving in that direction because, although this is a very small, entirely theoretical risk, it is avoidable.

It's also only a (very small, theoretical) risk for people who are themselves vapers and who use diacetyl-containing eliquid constantly, for years. What does this have to do with OP's situation?

Plentyofpubegardens I said they hadn't been tested to the extent that drugs such as tobacco have been - because they are not licenced as a drug and therefore not subject to the same testing before they are marketed.

OP You are reasonable to be concerned, and hopefully can sort something out with HR.

Tobacco is not licenced as a drug.

The EU tobacco products directive is currently being implemented (whether we'll have to keep it long term now we're brexiting is another question - my guess is yes, if we want access to EU markets). The regulations and testing regimes in the TPD are way more onerous for ecigs than they are for tobacco products. Completely disproportionately so. In fact they are not far off medicinal regulations.

This is all beside the point. What OP needs to worry about is whether she is at risk from her colleague's behaviour. Public Health England:

International peer-reviewed evidence indicates that the risk to the health of bystanders from exposure to e-cigarette vapour is extremely low. This is in contrast to the conclusive evidence of harm from exposure to secondhand smoke, which provides the basis for UK smokefree laws. The evidence of harm from secondhand exposure to vapour is not sufficient to justify the prohibition of e-cigarettes. Managers of public places and workplaces should ensure that this evidence informs their risk assessments.

When you're pregnant there are enough things to be concerned / worried / scared shitless about. What's the point of adding to those things with ill-informed scaremongering?

You'd be more at risk if he was made to go and stand among smokers to vape then came back in. Third hand smoke is dangerous, testing for second hand vaping is currently showing that there is no risk.

I made an account to specifically comment that it is obvious to everyone what is meant when a woman says ‘we are pregnant’. To comment that this is incorrect is COMPLETELY MISSING the point of her question which is genuinely seeking an answer. So you can politely take your non helpful comments elsewhere.
I am also pregnant and nervous about e cigs, particularly ignorant vapers. There is NOT enough research into this, when e cigs have been around as long as cigarettes have been, then people will wake up and smell the artificial cherry poison!

Since e-cigs are quite new there's not the body of evidence as with regular ones. I wouldn't want to be around that even if I wasn't pregnant, especially because they smell so weird often with flavours in them.

I'm surprised HR allows this. I've never been in an office where it's permitted.

Regardless of whether i was pregnant or not I wouldn’t want to be sat next to a person e-smoking. The smells are weird and disgusting - it seems like a really antisocial thing to do and very unprofessional. I agree approach HR 1st if they won’t intervene then maybe ask to be moved desks. Congratulations 🎉

This thread is 4 years old I would imagine the issue has been dealt with

And yet here we are captain obvious.