Edhat
npr edvertisers
visitors movie times

Santa Barbara Weather: 78.4°F | Humidity: 63% | Pressure: 29.82in (Rising) | Conditions: Clear | Wind Direction: NE | Wind Speed: 4.5mph [see map]

Free Newsletter
Advertise
  login You create the news! Send your news item to ed@edhat.com
 
 
login
    15682 Subscribers
      688 Paid (4.4%)
     206 Comments
     110 Commenters
     61325 Page Views
 
 

 
The Winehound
The Winehound
 
Bike MS
Bike MS
 
Drama Dogs (Sept 26-Oct 5)
Drama Dogs (Sept 26-Oct 5)
 
Wine Tasting and Yacht Tours
Wine Tasting and Yacht Tours
 
Advertise on Edhat
Advertise on Edhat
 
News Events Referrals Deals Classifieds Comments About

more articles like this

Banning Electronic Cigarettes
updated: Mar 20, 2014, 2:20 PM

By Edhat Subscriber

San Francisco & Los Angeles have just added electronic cigarettes to their strict antismoking laws along with requiring sellers to secure a special permit, and prohibiting their sale in pharmacies and other businesses where tobacco sales are banned. Should Santa Barbara and the County areas do the same?

Comments in order of when they were received | (reverse order)

 COMMENT 504481 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 02:30 PM

Yes. I have been next to a person with one of these and it was obnoxious. Not as bad as a cigarette but still obnoxious.

 

 COMMENT 504483 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 02:32 PM

If it is used for smoking tobacco, and if fumes are released into the area (including from the smoker's exhalations), then yes, it should be treated the same.

 

 COMMENT 504484P agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 02:33 PM

Yes!

 

 COMMENT 504485 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 02:33 PM

What do people find obnoxious about them?

 

 COMMENT 504486P agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 02:35 PM

Really? I quit smoking more than 20 years ago and think people who want their E cigs should be left alone.

 

 COMMENT 504488 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 02:42 PM

Only if they ban perfume and BO!

Is there anyone who hasnt gagged on the noxious smell of some woman doused in perfume at a local store or restaurant? These folks sent is far more invasive than the e-cigs which dont really smell much at all. And I hate the smell of cigarettes.

And while we're at it can we please ban loud motorcycles? Their noise is truly deafening and really obnoxious and as someone who rides, truly superfluous to safety. They only serves to raise the shallow egos of the rider not their viability or safety...

 

 COMMENT 504489 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 02:43 PM

Smoking should be banned in any form. If you really want nicotine, there has to be a better drug delivery system that doesn't include dozens of toxic chemicals.

 

 COMMENT 504496 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 02:53 PM

There is no tobacco or smoke in E-Cigs.. The nicotine is vaporized, not smoked. There is no offensive smell like tobacco cigarettes.. This is the way to go if you want to quit smoking.. By far the easiest way to quit!

 

 COMMENT 504497P agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 02:53 PM

488 - I playfully echo you thoughts about heavy perfume. It can be very annoying and should be outlawed. :o)

Regarding e-cigarettes, we've spent 40 years as a nation trying to reduce the number of smokers and eliminate the negative health consequences caused by tobacco. If e-cigarettes in any way lead to even a partial reversal of all that hard work either directly or indirectly by making cigarettes cooler, then they too should be banned and regulated.

In and of themselves I have no clear opinion on how dangerous they are from a health perspective.

 

 COMMENT 504503 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 03:11 PM

As a nonsmoker for nearly 20 years. I'd far rather be around someone smoking an e-cig than be within 20 yards of the noxious fumes emanating from Abercrombie & Stench. I don't know what that fragrance is, but it's reminiscent of a 1980s gay bar.

 

 COMMENT 504511 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 03:27 PM

I never thought perfume was a probably until a crowd of ladies all wearing different perfumes attended an event together. Independently each was probably fine, but all mixed together was ... I can't even think of the words to describe it... nauseating is the best I can come up with.

 

 ROB EGENOLF agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 03:28 PM

I think we are missing the point here.

One of our biggest problems is that our population is aging and surviving far too long.

Instead of promoting healthy behavior our future economy requires that we start encouraging unhealthy behavior to do our best to reduce the population of elderly.

We need to start promoting risky behaviors among our elderly population such as smoking, bungee jumping, hang gliding, parkour, cliff jumping, rock climbing, base jumping, big wave surfing, motorcycle riding, and maybe even flat-lining.

Our elderly population will promptly decline and our economy will become far more robust.

Smoking can become our friend once again.

 

 COMMENT 504513P agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 03:29 PM

If there is no tobacco and no smoke, then what's the problem? I agree with those who say if anything should be banned it is heavy perfume. I had to sit next someone had a lecture the other day --- and felt like gagging from the perfume and had a headache from it.

 

 COMMENT 504514P agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 03:30 PM

As a nicotine delivery system, cigarette smoking is the worst. E-cigs are better, but still spread fumes of an addictive substance to bystanders, and hook kids. While I also agree with Rex about Abercrombie's teenie-bopper perfume - and the stinking cigar lounge with its open door - I'd favor a total ban on smoking (of anything) downtown, on the beaches and in the parks. Fat chance the barkeepers and cigarette profiteers would let health and fresh air prevail over making money off cancer precursors, though. Santa Barbara is way behind the curve on this issue.

 

 COMMENT 504517 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 03:38 PM

+1 Rob Egenolf, +1..

 

 COMMENT 504518 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 03:38 PM

The beauty part is they have other uses.

 

 COMMENT 504519P agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 03:38 PM

Absolutely - The same laws should apply to these as regular cigarettes. There are no long terms studies on their affects on the smoker or the second hand bystander, so why take the chance.

The most comical thing I saw recently was Jenny McCarthy smoking one of these on a TV commercial. Here's someone who claims that childhood vaccinations cause autism, yet she's peddling this untested crap to the world. Hypocrite?

 

 COMMENT 504522P agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 03:44 PM

I just don't understand why anyone would promote a ban on something that compared to real cigarettes is pretty unobtrusive.

I've been a non smoke for more than twenty years, but I remember what it was like to be a nic fiend - if people get some actual pleasure from an e-cig, in the grand scheme of our modern, crappy existence, why not let them have it?

 

 COMMENT 504527P agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 03:59 PM

522P, how many more generations of "nic fiends" do you want to see? Is the purpose of kids to support the admittedly harmful tobacco industry with fresh nicotine addictions? You really think e-cigs aren't just a less obtrusive gateway to "the real thing" once they're hooked?

 

 RUDOLF THE RED agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 04:04 PM

Leave e CIG puffers alone. I puff an e CIG. Its not smoke, its vapour. There are no carcinogens associated with them. Unfounded fear. Helps people stop smoking cigarettes too. If e cigs are banned I will just be smoking a normal cigarette.

You have nothing to fear but fear itself. Its a bunch of hype with no science saying it is bad for others.

 

 COMMENT 504539P agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 04:08 PM

It's really not my place to protect anyone from their self.

What these bans on smoking and other "offensive" behavior will lead to is an absolute nightmare police state where anything not explicitly banned is mandatory - food, drink, sleep, exercise, healthcare... all will be decided by the government for our "own good". What a wonderful life that will be!

Like I said, if people want to suck nicotine, leave 'em alone. .

 

 COMMENT 504541 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 04:11 PM

A study published in Indoor Air from the Fraunhofer Wilhelm-Klauditz-Institut in Germany examined secondhand emissions from several e-cigarettes in a human exposure chamber. Each e-cigarette was puffed 6 times and data were collected for a conventional cigarette, also puffed 6 times.

While the e-cigarette produced lower levels of toxins in the air for nonsmokers to breathe than the conventional cigarette, there were still elevated levels of acetic acid, acetone, isoprene, formaldehyde and acetaldehyde, averaging around 20% of what the conventional cigarette put into the air.

Thus, while not as polluting as a conventional cigarette, the e-cigarettes are putting detectable levels of several significant carcinogens and toxins in the air.

No one should have to breathe these chemicals, whether they come out of a conventional or e-cigarette. No one should smoke e-cigarettes indoors that are free of other forms of tobacco smoke pollution.

 

 COMMENT 504546 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 04:18 PM

I don't know enough about e cigs to have an educated opinion on their safety or second hand emissions. I'm not sure if anybody really does at this point.

But, I do know it is glamorizing smoking again (thanks again to the ever ignorant Jenny McCarthy). Is this really something we want? Is it a constructive behavior? Does it really contribute to a better society? Plus, it still leads to nicotine addiction.

Now if it moves people away from cigarettes, then it's a good thing. However, I'm inclined to think it is going to do the opposite. More people will be lured into smoking e cigs by promoting them as healthy and providing various non tobacco (i.e. child friendly) flavors. Next thing you know we have a new generation of tobacco addicts.

I say, ban it.

 

 COMMENT 504547P agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 04:19 PM

Yes, and we all breathe car exhaust, heavy metal from China and radiation from Fukushima every day - second hand emissions from e-cigs are way at the bottom of the list of air pollutants we should be concerned about.

 

 COMMENT 504548 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 04:19 PM

Way too many people jumping to conclusions here, you would think that if these people hated smoking so much an e-cig would be a welcome alternative. People are going to smoke regardless of what you think, might as well be something less abrasive. I know more people than I can count who have successfully quit smoking or have largely cut down their smoking because of e-cigs. Just another step to the nanny state, where we ban things without any information supporting regulation and demand that one's health is more important than their freedom of choice.

 

 COMMENT 504567 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 04:39 PM

547 you actually make a very important point. The chemicals used in your home, your work, your shopping or on your body all contain various levels of harmful substances. The exhaust from your car, your computer and maybe even your home (drywall, carpet, furniture) all contain various levels of carcinogens.

Dont just jump on the e-cig because its an easy target. Live and let live until you have a real reason to be concerned. I'd imagine the amount of these chemicals are almost undetectable in a real world environment. Walking past someone, a breeze blowing, that kind of thing. In a closed environment, yes. they're as annoying as perfume and BO.

 

 COMMENT 504571P agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 04:47 PM

I agree with Rob E. He's being sarcastic. I'm not. Nor are my elderly, miserable parents.

 

 COMMENT 504576 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 04:51 PM

Yes, the county should regulate e-cigs the same as regular cigarettes. Adults can still buy them and smoke them at home or in some open public spaces. I say keep them away from minors, and away from people who don't want to inhale the vapor. They do have an odd stink, so something is getting in the air, and I'd rather not breathe it. (I'd also like to reduce the use of perfumes in restaurants and theaters, but maybe we can gently educate folks to achieve that end.)

 

 COMMENT 504612 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 06:47 PM

E-cigs should be treated similarly to cigarettes in that:
- a tobacco permit must be obtained
- no sales to under 18.

As to restricting them as cigarettes _in use_? Not EVEN the same. Not close. Business owners should be allowed to permit or deny their use, perhaps ensuring that the air is circulated/filtered more stringently.

 

 COMMENT 504614 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 06:52 PM

Yes! People claim these are safe and no harm no foul, but I seem to recall they said the same about tobacco way back when. I don't want to breathe the junk someone else is smoking and find out down the road it caused some disease.

 

 COMMENT 504619 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 07:38 PM

They just look stupid. Isn't that enough?

 

 COMMENT 504623P agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 08:09 PM

Non-smoker here, never smoked or used tobacco. Being around smokers isn't really that big of a deal for me. As others have commented heavy perfume is obnoxious as well.

I'd far prefer that restaurants and similar places banned screaming brats and allowed smoking.

E-cigarettes are really not that big of a deal. Why does everything that people want to do need to be regulated or banned?

 

 COMMENT 504627P agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 08:29 PM

Can we stop with the word "ban"? Cigarettes aren't banned and no one's suggesting banning e-cigs either, just subjecting them to current no-smoking laws. These are not candy cigarettes. If they only harmed users, it wouldn't matter, but e-cig fumes are carcinogenic, not merely annoying. Treating them like they're some harmless pastime is just dumb.

 

 COMMENT 504628P agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 08:35 PM

Ok, so you want to suck yer chocolate and cherry-vanilla flavored nicotine vape, go ahead, but do it outside! NOT where my family and I are trying to breathe fresh air!

 

 COMMENT 504634P agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 08:50 PM

There's no evidence that second hand e-cig vapor is harmful. None. People who want to tell people where they can or cannot use e-cigs are just control freaks and petty tyrants.

 

 COMMENT 504636P agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 08:59 PM

They STINK! That alone is enough. If you want to suck on them, then do it. But keep your stinky nicotine vape AWAY from me and my family!

 

 GIGGLES agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 09:18 PM

I guess I will read the comments l8R....but personally speaking...as a 20+ smoker...the e-cigs are the ONLY thing that has helped me quit since Aug. 16th of last year. (and) that's all I have to say about THAT.

 

 COMMENT 504656P agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 11:05 PM

All CA antismoking ordinances need to be amended immediately to include all e-cigarettes & other vaping-type devices.

No need to introduce kids to the evils of smoking & inhaling other that air before their 18. There'll be many years for them to discover all the evils of this habit.

Marlboro has been systematically calling all local CA municipalities asking city clerks, etc. if there have been any talk or "rumblings" about getting the vaporizing materials on the same ordinances.

They know the "handwriting is on the wall."

 

 COMMENT 504658P agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-20 11:09 PM

Yes, 518, they do have other uses like drugs & other non-intended chemicals.

Why all the kiddie friend flavors? Adult smokers don't request gummy bear Camels, cotton candy flavored Marlboros or red licorice flavored Kools.

Relegate these ASAP with the other tobacco products.

 

 COMMENT 504670 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-21 06:44 AM

Absolutely, positively not. The e-cig opponents here are clearly clueless about what an e-cig is. I'd be fine with allowing them in restaurants and buses, for that matter.

I'm a former smoker who finds traditional cigarette smoking ugly, stupid, and obnoxious. The e-cig is an outstanding technological development that re-writes the book on smoking. All you nay-sayer nazis should do your homework, and then let others make their own choices about how to live their lives.

 

 COMMENT 504687 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-21 07:42 AM

Yes! It's taken years to make the image of a smoker as uncool, and it's the uncool factor that discourages smoking. With the e-cigarettes, we're accepting and glamorizing it again.

 

 COMMENT 504697 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-21 08:05 AM

Rob: Spoken like a true Malthusian. Perhaps the drought will continue and get much worse and the food supply will dwindle and there will be no need for the help of risky behaviors to reduce population. The population will just shrink by starvation related deaths.

 

 COMMENT 504706 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-21 08:19 AM

NO! But I DO think perfume needs to be banned. OMG it makes me SICK and I think that there might be some effects from second hand inhalation of it - have you read the ingredient lists/? And so many women (and men w/ cologne) wear way too much. Gross. And unhealthy. They should also ban red meat. Anything fried. Burgers. Fries. You know.

 

 COMMENT 504710P agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-21 08:22 AM

Nicotine - and that's what these cute little devices deliver - is an addictive stimulant. A-d-d-i-c-t-i-v-e. The fumes from e-cigs are nothing compared to the intention of the product: to get kids hooked in a habit that's very hard to break, and to make it more convenient for those already addicted to keep buying. Addiction guarantees business for the shameless profiteers who sell e- and paper cigarettes, just like the folks who bring us heroin and cocaine need junkies. Kid-targeted marketing - everyone knows that age restrictions are a joke - is truly horrific.

 

 COMMENT 504719 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-21 08:37 AM

No

 

 COMMENT 504751 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-21 09:16 AM

I hate them. I feel sorry for anyone that thinks they are healthy and more acceptable. I had the awful experience of one man using one on the patio at Dargans the other day. He was blowing so much smelly horrible smoke I had to shut the door as its was spoiling our lunch. Ban them everywhere!

 

 COMMENT 504752 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-21 09:17 AM

Truth is that t one time no regulation of tobacco was necessary at one time because its use among the lowest classes was limited by cost and its use among the better off was limited by etiquette. Poverty is no barrier today to those with low incomes who can choose to buy all kinds of drugs and then depend on the welfare system, parents, friends, and charities for food and other necessities and etiquette is so out of date . . .

Folks, regulate yourselves and it won't occur to anyone else to have the government regulate you.

 

 COMMENT 504770 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-21 09:49 AM

NO, they should not ban them. Too many laws and the e cigs are not offensive. Heavy perfume on the other hand... ugh! Can we start a whole 'nother thread on that? Geez, people! A little dab'll do ya!

 

 COMMENT 504775 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-21 09:51 AM

NO - and before someone busts my chops for being an "angry smoker" - I don't smoke. But this is blatant ridiculous hypocrisy - I don't see the AMA, Heart Association, or anyone else (especially the OMG let me get puking drunk and disgusting, at least I don't smoke holier-than-thous) saying ANYTHING about all the "medical" marijuana smoking - they can puff anywhere they want (except inside a store or restaurant) and I have yet to see anyone even mention it-and marijuana has huge amount of tar and carcinogens... And don't tell me about the medical benefits - for the 0.1% who carry cards and use it for that, I am all for it - but over 99% of your dope smokers in SB are just in it for the high.

 

 COMMENT 504782 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-21 09:58 AM

775 - I wouldnt call you an angry smoker, just an angry person...

I've never seen a single person smoking weed in pubic. At least not in the public you're referring to... most will be discrete and besides, weed smokers take a hit or three. They're not puffing endlessly like a tobacco smoker.

Also note that the science shows that marijuana doesnt actually have the same cancer causing effects as tobacco, that long term weed smokers do not suffer from lung cancer at any higher rate than non smokers... Put that in your pipe and smoke it :)

 

 COMMENT 504963 agree helpful negative off topic

2014-03-21 04:06 PM

Yes!! Recent studies from reputable sources say the fumes are toxic, containing most of the toxins regular cigarettes do. In addition they emit vaporized metal in the fumes from the heat source that creates the vapor. This is also very toxic. I don't like perfume either but it is not as poisonous. (except to me and my fellow asthma sufferers.)
I was at the beach a week ago and smelled faint tobacco and started wheezing. I looked to see who was smoking and it was a young man leaning over the sea wall with an Ecig. Santa Maria just voted to ban them under the same rules as regular cigarettes. GO SM!!!!

 

43% of comments on this page were made by Edhat Community Members.

 

 

Add Your Comments

Edhat Username

Password

Comment

Don't have an Account?

Don't know if you have an account?

Don't remember your account info?

CLICK HERE


ENJOY HAPPY HOUR! ... Between 4:00pm & 5:00pm only happy comment are allowed on the Edhat Comments Board.

If you can't say something nice, don't say nothing at all.

 
Hide Your Handle, but show paid status (paid subscribers only)
NEW - use verified name and picture (contact ed@edhat.com to be verified)
Find out About Becoming A Paid Subscriber
NOTE: We are testing a new Comment Preview Page. You must hit OK on the next page to have your comment go live. Send Feedback to ed@edhat.com.
 

get a handle   |  lost handle

 

EDHAT COMMENTS POLICY

 

  See more articles like this

# # # #

 

Send To a Friend
Your Email
Friend's Email

Top of Page | Old News Archives | Printer-Friendly Page

  Home Subscribe FAQ Jobs Contact copyright © 2003-2014  
Edhat, Inc.