E-smoking question

[Unixman]

Was on a XCountry train yesterday between Brum and Wakefield. Sitting opposite was a chap who was holding an e-cigarette from which he took an occasional puff. Now, obviously I am well aware that all smoking is banned on trains but here is the catch: it was patently obvious that the gentleman had various disabilities ( precisely what they were I wasn't going to find out) so I let it ride. Should I have done so?

 

[ainsworth74]

As far as I'm aware the majority of TOCs do not allow them to be used on board or at stations.

 

[Hellfire]

The World Health Organisation seems to think the use of electronic cigarettes can endanger those close by. So maybe you could have had a quiet word, or spoken to the Train Manager. I know Virgin ban their use on trains.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-health/11058158/E-cigarette-WHO-ban-I-thought-vaping-was-safe.html

E-cigarettes should be banned indoors over fears that they can be as toxic to bystanders as normal cigarettes, the World Health Organisation has said.
Despite releasing vapour instead of smoke, the devices still pollute the air with harmful chemicals, health experts warned.

 

[thenorthern]

Most operators have banned them now as you say, I know East Midlands Trains recently banned them and I think Cross Country has banned them.

 

[matt_world2004]

I was on a train from north Greenwich and a load of Lady Gaga spectators got on with about 10% of them smoking e cigarettes the carriage was horrible. And smokey

 

[GatwickDepress]

Southeastern have this in their FAQ section:

You are currently allowed to use e-cigarettes at our stations and on our trains. However, please be considerate to other passengers who may feel uncomfortable with this.

This policy is being kept under review and we will consider all medical evidence on the health impact of passive exposure to e-cigarettes. We will also monitor customer complaints should e-cigarettes become a source of regular complaint or problems.

 

[Unixman]

I was well aware of all of that. It was just that I didn't want to be the ******* who stopped a thoroughly disabled (at a guess both physical and mental) person from having, what I suspect, is one of his few pleasures.

 

[Dolge]

I use e-cigs and as far as I know the only TOC to ban them is Merseyrail Electrics. It would need a specific ban and specific notices, as on Merseyrail, to have any effect - e-cigs are not covered by general smoking bans, not least because using them isn't smoking. Even then a ban would be unenforceable since discreet e-cig use is undetectable, unlike smoking which is immediately noticeable by everyone. Doesn't trigger smoke alarms either, there being no smoke. And if you actually read the WHO guidance it's completely evidence free - all maybes and mights. Much more medical opinion the other way.

 

[Agent_c]

IIRC the announcements at Glasgow Central include ECigs.

 

[Llanigraham]

I use e-cigs and as far as I know the only TOC to ban them is Merseyrail Electrics. It would need a specific ban and specific notices, as on Merseyrail, to have any effect - e-cigs are not covered by general smoking bans, not least because using them isn't smoking. Even then a ban would be unenforceable since discreet e-cig use is undetectable, unlike smoking which is immediately noticeable by everyone. Doesn't trigger smoke alarms either, there being no smoke. And if you actually read the WHO guidance it's completely evidence free - all maybes and mights. Much more medical opinion the other way.

Can I suggest you look at some of the posts above yours.
MerseyRail are NOT the only ones to ban there use!
They should be banned everywhere.

 

[Unixman]

I use e-cigs and as far as I know the only TOC to ban them is Merseyrail Electrics. It would need a specific ban and specific notices, as on Merseyrail, to have any effect - e-cigs are not covered by general smoking bans, not least because using them isn't smoking. Even then a ban would be unenforceable since discreet e-cig use is undetectable, unlike smoking which is immediately noticeable by everyone. Doesn't trigger smoke alarms either, there being no smoke. And if you actually read the WHO guidance it's completely evidence free - all maybes and mights. Much more medical opinion the other way.

As an ex-smoker ( albeit from a long time ago now) I do not under any circumstances or form be subjected to nicotine if it is at all possible. It IS an addictive compound and although I recognise that e-cigs are probably safer that traditional tobacco products, I normally don't want them to be near me. I am, however, also a human being who is also disabled and hence I was happy(ish) to make an exception in this case.

 

[najaB]

They should be banned everywhere.

I fully support the smoking ban, but I'm not convinced that e-cigs should be banned everywhere. Allowing the use of e-cigs in some locations where tobacco products are banned may encourage more people to make the switch.

 

[Mag_seven]

I don't see the difference between e-cigs and normal cigs - they are polluting shared airspace and should be banned from enclosed public spaces in the same way that normal cigs are.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't see the difference between e-cigs and normal cigs - they are polluting shared airspace and should be banned from enclosed public spaces in the same way that normal cigs are.

There is a very clear difference - e-cigs do not emit traditional smoke and as such do not "pollute" in quite the same way, though they do to an extent.

Personally, I think they should only be banned if research finds health issues evident from passive e-smoking.

(I'm not a smoker, neither electronically nor traditionally)

Neil

 

[najaB]

I don't see the difference between e-cigs and normal cigs - they are polluting shared airspace and should be banned from enclosed public spaces in the same way that normal cigs are.

There's two big differences though - firstly they don't produce most of the harmful chemicals that burning tobacco does since there's no fire, secondly vapour doesn't travel nearly as far as do the fine particles in smoke. To date, afaik, it hasn't yet been shown that second-hand vape is harmful in same way as second-hand smoke.

 

[JaJaWa]

Looked through the TOC Passenger Charters / FAQs and found this:

Allowed:
Southeastern

Banned:
Abellio Greater Anglia
Arriva Trains Wales
Caledonian Sleeper
c2c
Chiltern Railways
CrossCountry
East Coast
East Midlands Trains
First Great Western
First Hull Trains
First TransPennine Express
Gatwick Express
Grand Central
Great Northern
Island Line
London Midland
Merseyrail
Northern
ScotRail
South West Trains
Southern
Thameslink
Transport for London (DLR, London Overground, Underground etc)
Virgin Trains West Coast

Unknown:
Heathrow Connect
Heathrow Express

 

[RPI]

FGW have posters up at most stations now saying they are banned, there is no specific legislation banning them but their use would be covered by the byelaw of "interfering with the comfort of other passengers" I would have thought.

 

[thenorthern]

The Manchester Metrolink bans E-Cigs on stations and platforms although its widely ignored.

 

[The Ham]

There's two big differences though - firstly they don't produce most of the harmful chemicals that burning tobacco does since there's no fire, secondly vapour doesn't travel nearly as far as do the fine particles in smoke. To date, afaik, it hasn't yet been shown that second-hand vape is harmful in same way as second-hand smoke.

All that maybe true, however I still will be ensuing that my toddler is kept away from people using them. Why? Mainly because there have been no medical testing nor has there been any studies into their long term effects.

Yes they maybe safer, but it has to be viewed in the context of how very unsafe traditional smoking is.

 

[rdeez]

I use an e-cig, and yes, sometimes do so occasionally on board or at stations, though not if there's anyone in the seats immediately in front of or behind me, or if the carriage is reasonably busy regardless.

Whether anyone has noticed or not I don't know, but I've not (yet) been asked to stop. I actually wasn't aware that it was specifically banned on the majority of TOCs, so I may have to reconsider.

While I don't condone anyone being exposed to anything that may harm them unwillingly, I doubt my device falls into this category - it doesn't produce much vapour at all, I exhale in a downward direction to minimise the dispersion.

I'd be very interested to see the results of a proper study on the toxicity of this vapour, on the face of it, it should be virtually zero - the ingredients of the liquid are a common food additive, flavourings, and nicotine. Nothing that should immediately cause alarm...assuming the listed ingredients are all that is contained, anyway.

 

[WatcherZero]

John Hopkins did a animal study, while they only emit 1% of the carcinogens of Cigarettes they do still lower immune response and increase vulnerability to both bacterial and viral respiratory infections, in particular the moisture in the lungs prevents the infections being cleared by immune response. Was also an Italian study where they measured the air quality in an office when people smoked each. There were 10% of the heavy metals in the air when using E-cigs than normal cigs but they were still being expelled into the air and breathed in by other office workers.

 

[Hellfire]

I use e-cigs and as far as I know the only TOC to ban them is Merseyrail Electrics. It would need a specific ban and specific notices, as on Merseyrail, to have any effect - e-cigs are not covered by general smoking bans, not least because using them isn't smoking. Even then a ban would be unenforceable since discreet e-cig use is undetectable, unlike smoking which is immediately noticeable by everyone. Doesn't trigger smoke alarms either, there being no smoke. And if you actually read the WHO guidance it's completely evidence free - all maybes and mights. Much more medical opinion the other way.

I doubt a ban would be unenforceable. Someone sat opposite me on a train last month with one of these things. Vapour was clearly visible when he exhaled and there was an odour in the air. You are still pushing chemicals towards other people. They may or may not be as dangerous as real cigarettes but they are a nuisance and TOCs have every right to ban anything that interferes with the comfort of other passengers.

 

[yorkie]

I use e-cigs

and as far as I know the only TOC to ban them is Merseyrail Electrics.

Well your level of knowledge is quite small as the reality is that nearly all ban them.

It would need a specific ban and specific notices, as on Merseyrail, to have any effect

Not true - this is easily covered by the Railway Byelaws in my opinion.

e-cigs are not covered by general smoking bans, not least because using them isn't smoking. Even then a ban would be unenforceable since discreet e-cig use is undetectable, unlike smoking which is immediately noticeable by everyone. Doesn't trigger smoke alarms either, there being no smoke. And if you actually read the WHO guidance it's completely evidence free - all maybes and mights. Much more medical opinion the other way.

It may not be smoke, but it's still unpleasant.

 

[suzanneparis]

I had to suffer from an e cigarette smoker recently. I must say I didn't like the 'vapour'.

I don't think they should be allowed on any trains or stations.

Just my view.

 

[northwichcat]

I saw someone smoking one on a Northern service recently. The same person was intoxicated with alcohol and with other drunk people who were swearing their heads off. For some reason he tried to pour wine in to a can of Fosters but poured more over himself than in the can. The conductor stayed in the back cab for the duration of the journey other than coming out to open the doors.

 

[First class]

Byelaw 6(8) can be used to enforce it, assuming the smoking specific ones can't be used.

In any event, it's a private company and they can enforce it by refusing you access to their trains and stations.

 

[bnm]

As an ex-smoker ( albeit from a long time ago now) I do not under any circumstances or form be subjected to nicotine if it is at all possible. It IS an addictive compound and although I recognise that e-cigs are probably safer that traditional tobacco products, I normally don't want them to be near me. I am, however, also a human being who is also disabled and hence I was happy(ish) to make an exception in this case.

And those of use who use nicotine free e-cigs that contain nothing but propylene glycol (food safe) vegetable glycerin (food safe) and flavouring (food safe)?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It may not be smoke, but it's still unpleasant.

My nicotine free Blue Raspberry is very pleasant.

 

[tony_mac]

And those of use who use nicotine free e-cigs that contain nothing but propylene glycol (food safe) vegetable glycerin (food safe) and flavouring (food safe)?

Food safe doesn't necessarily mean safe to inhale.
(e.g., pea seeds http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10945050 )

My nicotine free Blue Raspberry is very pleasant.

I'm sure it isn't pleasant to everyone. I cross the road when walking past a Lush shop, for example.
I imagine that fumes from diesel or steam trains are probably more toxic, and some people go out of their way to inhale those!

 

[bnm]

Food safe doesn't necessarily mean safe to inhale.

PG/VG/flavourings/aromas safe for skin absorption, eye drops, ear drops, nasal sprays, throat sprays, dental products... but the moment they're inhaled it's bad? :roll:

All the ingredients I use (I make my own e-liquid) have Ph. EU. licenses or are food grade. If such things can be absorbed into the bloodstream from consumption (i.e eating) with no ill effects then I've no concern about absorption through inhalation.

 

[misterredmist]

I think the TOBACCO NAZI's will jump on anything.

I don't smoke anymore myself , but i have tried an e-cig and they bare NO resemblance in terms of toxicity and pollution to real cigarettes. I think they're a great device for for discouraging youngsters from smoking real cigarettes and some of the flavours and aromas they have on offer are excellent.

To ban them from Stations does not make sense, I can understand non-smokers may not want them on trains, but I'd see no harm in having a dedicated carriage on long distance routes which could be used for "e-ciggers".....

I'll await the inevitable criticism and take cover !!!!!!!