I am an e-cigarette "vaper". I smoked for about thirty years give or take. I remember when all public transportation had smoking areas in the back of the bus or plane. I remember when my high school had a designated smoking area. I also remember falling out and the Platoon Sergeant saying "Smoke em if you got em" or "The smoking lamp is lighted". It's a bygone era.
With the eCig I can vape away without hurting anyone else. And as an American I should be able to. Remember, our liberties should only stop when they infringe on someone else. It's that simple, and thanks to the rule makers and a myriad of agencies both public and governmental; that complex.
I blog all the time about doing due diligence on political candidates and causes. So, here is a chance to do due diligence on someones civil liberties. Should vaping (e-cigarette use) be allowed in public places or should it be banned along with tobacco cigarettes? Do you know what an electric cigarette is? Do you know how to form an educated opinion? Or, are you merely part of the 80 percent that will go along with the first media outlet or website report? I'm going to ask you to do something no blogger should ever ask; Namely, after reading this entry, leave my blog and read the two links I provide that issue a pro and con. Then come back and comment or not. In any event, thanks for stopping by.
Here is the first side of the story. It is filled with authoritative statements that sound damning. I almost quit my electronic cigarette in fear and went back to smoking; NOT. If you don't know how to do your due diligence, this would be the group forming opinions that your congressman or local mayor might make their decisions on. Think of all the other regulations both public and private levied on your liberties. This is how it goes down. You don't have to agree with either piece. But any restriction on your right to choose how to live your life needs a really hard look.
Action on Smoking and Health (ASH), America’s first antismoking organization, strongly supports the need for legislation to prohibit the use of e-cigarettes, e-cigars, and e- pipes [e-cigs] in workplaces, public places, and other areas where smoking is not permitted in order to protect the overwhelming majority of the public who do not use such devices from exposure to chemicals in the e-cig vapors, and the potential attendant health risks to nonusers.On the other hand, there is a rebuttal. And, it actually comes from Australia. It addresses each of the allegations and arguments made in the anti e-cig piece. Most people who vape (as opposed to smoke, since we exhale vapor without particulate matter) already know a lot more about their product than I knew about cigarettes as a smoker. So, I am need you, the average joe, to read and form an opinion one way or the other. But, even more important I am need you to have an informed opinion you can discuss with others. I don't mind if someone disagrees with me. I do mind if I did my homework and they didn't. Onward.
The first organisation to respond to SMOKESCREEN’s initial concerns was ASH Australia. Some of the information they provided causes us to rethink some of our positions and change our focus according. Unfortunately much of their correspondence led us to believe that ASH was more focused on the anti-tobacco ideology rather than the solid science of Tobacco Harm Reduction.There it is. The pro and con just waiting for you to decide and maybe research a bit more. Go for it, I promise that the internet will still be there when you're done :)
After reading the latest news from ASH America there is no longer any doubt at all. Check out our deconstruction on their article “Why Ban Use of E-Cigarettes in No-Smoking Area”. Let’s try and ignore the bad english and regular spelling mistakes and just focus on what we do best – the raw science.
The first quoted website, ASH, came from here.
The second site, Smokescreen , came from here.