Report suggests vaping on buses and trains "should be considered"

[overthewater]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-45212444

I'm not impressed with this idea, Its bonkers. And I see the BBC has now changed its headline to this piece.

I think its bad idea, to allow this on any public transport. I agree Vaping is better but its still has Nicotine in it.

Rules around e-cigarettes should be relaxed so they can be more widely used and accepted in society, says a report by MPs.

Vaping is much less harmful than normal cigarettes and e-cigarettes should be made available on prescription to help more people quit smoking, it said.

The report also asks the government to consider their use on buses and trains.

There is no evidence e-cigarettes are a gateway into smoking for young people, Public Health England said.

The report on e-cigarettes, by the science and technology MPs' committee, said they were too often overlooked by the NHS as a tool to help people stop smoking.

For example, it said it was "unacceptable" that a third of the 50 NHS mental health trusts in England had a ban on e-cigarettes on their premises, when there was a "negligible health risk" from second hand e-cigarette vapour.

What else do the MPs say?

• greater freedom for industry to advertise e-cigarettes
• relaxing of regulations and tax duties on e-cigarettes to reflect their relative health benefits
• an annual review of the health effects of e-cigarettes, as well as heat-not-burn products
• a debate on vaping in public spaces, such as on public transport and in offices
• e-cigarettes licensed as medical devices
• a rethink on limits on refill strengths and tank sizes
• an end to the ban on snus - an oral tobacco product which is illegal in the UK under EU rules

How popular has vaping become?

Media caption"Relief my son turned to vaping" - Norman Lamb
About 2.9 million people in the UK are currently using e-cigarettes.

It is estimated that 470,000 people are using them as an aid to stop smoking and tens of thousands are successfully quitting smoking each year as a result.

• Vaping - the rise in five charts
• E-cigarettes 'should be on prescription'
• How likely is your e-cigarette to explode?
• Vaping 'can damage vital immune system cells's

Although the report recognised the long-term health effects of vaping were not yet known, it said e-cigarettes were substantially less harmful than conventional cigarettes because they contained no tar or carbon monoxide.

Norman Lamb, chairman of the science and technology committee, said: "Current policy and regulations do not sufficiently reflect this and businesses, transport providers and public places should stop viewing conventional and e-cigarettes as one and the same.

"There is no public health rationale for doing so," he said.

"Concerns that e-cigarettes could be a gateway to conventional smoking, including for young non-smokers, have not materialised.

"If used correctly, e-cigarettes could be a key weapon in the NHS's stop-smoking arsenal."

Mr Lamb said medically licensed e-cigarettes "would make it easier for doctors to discuss and recommend them as a stop-smoking tool to aid those quitting smoking".

Image copyrightGETTY IMAGES
Image captionMPs want greater freedom for industry to advertise e-cigarettes
The debate on e-cigarettes
The report is the latest in a long-running debate about e-cigarettes and how they are used in society.

A survey in Scotland found that young people who use e-cigarettes could be more likely to later smoke tobacco.

And in Wales, concerns have been raised about young people using e-cigarettes on a regular basis.

But elsewhere, a six month trial at an Isle of Man jail found allowing inmates to smoke e-cigarettes made them calmer and helped them quit smoking.

More research is needed to better understand the long-term effects of e-cigarettes, after early research on lung cells in the lab suggested that the vapour may not be completely safe.

But there is general agreement among public health experts, doctors and scientists that e-cigarettes are significantly less harmful than normal cigarettes containing tobacco.

Where are you not allowed to vape?
E-cigarettes are not covered by the smoking legislation which bans the use of cigarettes in all enclosed public and work places.

In fact, to encourage smokers to switch to vaping, Public Health England recommends e-cigarettes should not be treated the same as regular cigarettes when it comes to workplaces devising smoking policies.

"Vaping," the authority said, "should be made a more convenient as well as safer option".

But some places have banned vaping. For example, Transport for London forbids the use of e-cigarettes on all buses and the Underground, including at stations.

Big cinema chains such as Cineworld, Odeon and Empire also ban smoking e-cigarettes anywhere on their premises while most theatres also forbid their use.

Most airlines and airports ban vaping, apart from in designated smoking areas.

What is the response to the MPs' report?
Public Health England estimates that e-cigarettes are 95% less harmful than normal cigarettes.

Duncan Selbie, chief executive of PHE, said: "E-cigarettes are not without harm but are way safer than the harms of tobacco.

"There is no evidence that they are acting as a gateway into smoking for young people.

"We want to see a tobacco-free generation within 10 years and this is within sight."

The charity Action on Smoking and Health welcomed the report but said it had some concerns over rule changes on advertising, which could mean tobacco companies being allowed to market their e-cigarettes in packs of cigarettes.

George Butterworth, from Cancer Research UK, said any changes to current e-cigarette regulations "should be aimed at helping smokers to quit whilst preventing young people from starting to use e-cigarettes".

Prof Linda Bauld, professor of health policy at the University of Stirling, said: "This report is a welcome and evidence-based respite from all the scare stories we see about vaping.

"Its recommendations are not likely to be popular with all, and some of them may be difficult or complex to implement. But government, regulators and service providers should take note."

 

[Darklord8899]

Can you imagine the top deck of a bus, all Windows shut, with 30 people vaping, 30 different flavours/smells? Stench would be horrible not to mention you couldn't even see if there was an empty seat

 

[GodAtum]

What a bunch of ****. Vaping is banned for the same reason drinking alcohol is, it's anti social.

 

[NSEFAN]

Are there any studies on the long-term health effects of vaping? If not, it should be treated the same as smoking until such time as the evidence shows that it's safe.

 

[Bletchleyite]

TBH I prefer the smell of cigarette smoke over clouds of sweet smelling vape.

No, it shouldn't be allowed. Indeed, that those who practice it are inconsiderate enough not to know they shouldn't do it around others without needing a ban is reason enough.

 

[najaB]

Are there any studies on the long-term health effects of vaping?

It's only been a 'thing' for under a decade so I'd be very surprised if there have been.

 

[Mag_seven]

I'm quite sure these MP's would be quite happy to have vaping in their houses....

 

[pdeaves]

Vape smoke makes me choke and induces headaches that can last for hours. Even if it didn't, I don't buy the claim that it's 'clean'. It's full of the toxins that give the user the 'kick' they crave. I mean, why use the stuff if there was no mild high? People on the whole prefer alcoholic drinks to non-alcoholic ones for the buzz they bring; pubs don't make their money on soft drinks and non-alcoholic beers, do they?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

What a bunch of ****. Vaping is banned for the same reason drinking alcohol is, it's anti social.

My thoughts exactly. If vaping became allowed (and commonplace) on public transport, I for one would probably stop using public transport unless I absolutely had to. And I imagine I would not be the only person by a long way.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I can hardly believe that I used to have to put up with people smoking in the past; can remember the signs on single deck buses saying "Smokers are requested to occupy rear seats" - this would be a massively retrograde step IMO.

 

[pdeaves]

Just a thought: Does the report really recommend changing the rules? Perhaps (only perhaps, nothing certain!) the report is to gauge public opinion and gain evidence without actively going out looking for it, after which it will be quietly shelved when 'they' realise it's a bigger issue than at first thought.

 

[edwin_m]

According to the OP's quote the report calls for "a debate on vaping in public spaces, such as on public transport and in offices". Going by the postings on here the verdict seems fairly clear!

 

[Bletchleyite]

According to the OP's quote the report calls for "a debate on vaping in public spaces, such as on public transport and in offices". Going by the postings on here the verdict seems fairly clear!

Politeness is that "for all values of X, if you wish to do X and it will affect others, be sure that others don't mind you doing X and accept them saying they do object to you doing X gracefully". Pretty much.

It applies to other antisocial activities such as playing movies out loud on trains.

 

[Darklord8899]

I've been told by a friend that vaping is illegal in Australia as is being found with any vaping paraphernalia on you!
Now that must tell a story surely?...

 

[johntea]

Some of the vapes these days produce more clouds per puff than a BBQ!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've been told by a friend that vaping is illegal in Australia as is being found with any vaping paraphernalia on you!
Now that must tell a story surely?...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2...alia-out-of-step-with-other-countries/9138430

Australia is, compared with the UK, very much a nanny state, which may be the reason why.

 

[Journeyman]

Yup, really don't agree with this. Vaping in an enclosed space, regardless of the risks, is exposing people to stuff they probably don't want to be exposed to, and the amount of vapour some of these things produce is ridiculous - I've seen cleaner steam engines.

 

[furnessvale]

Yup, really don't agree with this. Vaping in an enclosed space, regardless of the risks, is exposing people to stuff they probably don't want to be exposed to, and the amount of vapour some of these things produce is ridiculous - I've seen cleaner steam engines.

And I will NEVER be convinced that what they emit is 100% steam.

How can the human body extract ALL the noxious items from the inhaled vapour? In any case steam, is odourless, how come the exhaled rubbish smells so much?

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Yup, I don't wish to be the recipient of someone else's smoke and chemicals anywhere - let alone in an enclosed space - I bet no studies have been done to establish the safety of e-cigarettes. Another cancer risk methinks

And what of the poor children or seniors that travel on the bus/train who will have to breathe all this in through no choice of their own

Daft idea...

 

[najaB]

And I will NEVER be convinced that what they emit is 100% steam.

Good. Because that's never been the claim. Firstly because steam is invisible, and secondly because that would defeat the purpose of vaping!

 

[furnessvale]

Good. Because that's never been the claim. Firstly because steam is invisible, and secondly because that would defeat the purpose of vaping!

OK, water vapour. I remain to be corrected, but I am sure I have seen the claim that what is EMITTED by the smoker is 100% water vapour. Of course what he takes in has to have chemicals in it or he is, indeed, wasting his time.

 

[James H]

I was recently interviewed by the Office for National Statistics and part of the survey was a set of questions on my views/attitudes to vaping and how it should be regulated.

 

[Harpers Tate]

A couple of things spring to mind - and I say this as someone who doesn't vape and doesn't have a strong entrenched view either way:

- a couple of references to the "noxious" components of vape "smoke". Do those contributors actually know what the components of vape "smoke" are and whether they are even remotely noxious - especially in the concentrations that a "passive vaper" might encounter them? As an aside, a good few years ago, as has been noted, we used to "enjoy" others' real genuine smoke in enclosed spaces - pubs, buses and trains, aircraft, cinemas and so on. We know (don't we?) that tobacco smoke is genuinely dangerous, so why aren't we all dead then?

- how many anti-smoking anti-vaping crusaders drive a car*? Every one of them is guilty of polluting the very air we breathe with the noxious filth that these things produce. Sitting outside school waiting for little Jimmy - with the engine idling? Yep. We seem to have managed to make general public opinion sway to making smokers (and by association, vapers) into pariahs. The sooner we can whip up the same feelings towards those who drive (a) any journey less than a mile, except where carrying something huge like a TV or item of furniture or (b) any journey where there is a plausible alternative, the sooner we will see an improvement in our air quality - far greater than smoking reduction has ever created.


================
* EVs running on green electricity, hydrogen fuel-cell powered vehicles excused

 

[nlogax]

I don't want to be trapped on public transport with people puffing out clouds of - what smells like - burning Haribo.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Actually, I'm starting to wonder if what we're all arguing about is just a piece of inaccurate reporting, and whether the committee has actually recommended what the BBC is claiming. The BBC article in question provides a link to the full report which is here

I haven't read everything in the report, but I've scanned through the conclusions and recommendations, and the only reference to public transport I can find in the recommendations is in this paragraph, which does nothing more than call for a debate about e-cigarettes in public spaces:

10.Many businesses, public transport providers and owners of other public places do not allow e-cigarettes in the same way that they prohibit conventional smoking. There is some hostility towards the use of e-cigarettes in public areas, if only because some bystanders find its vapour unpleasant. As we have described in this Report, there is no public health rationale for treating use of the two products the same. Indeed, forcing vapers to use the same ‘smoking shelters’ as conventional smokers could undermine their efforts to quit. There is now a need for a wider debate on how e-cigarettes are to be dealt with in our public spaces, to help arrive at a solution which at least starts from the evidence rather than misconceptions about their health impacts. A liberalisation of restrictions on e-cigarettes, which provide a popular route for people to stop smoking, would result in non-vapers having to accommodate vapers (for a relatively short period of time). (Paragraph 60)

(Judging from the comments on this thread so far, I'd say it's pretty clear which way any debate will go )

Perhaps someone with more time than me can check if the rest of the report contains anything that justifies the BBC's claim that The report also asks the government to consider their use on buses and trains.

 

[Journeyman]

And I will NEVER be convinced that what they emit is 100% steam.

How can the human body extract ALL the noxious items from the inhaled vapour? In any case steam, is odourless, how come the exhaled rubbish smells so much?

Well, of course there's more to it than steam. There's quite a lot of nicotine in it for starters, and while I don't think you can passively absorb enough for it to be a problem, it's not exactly nice stuff. And the flavourings aren't going to be food-grade, are they?

 

[Journeyman]

Perhaps someone with more time than me can check if the rest of the report contains anything that justifies the BBC's claim that The report also asks the government to consider their use on buses and trains.

If it was ever going to happen, I think you'd need to have vaping/non-vaping areas, and can TOCs honestly be bothered setting them up and enforcing them?

 

[Harpers Tate]

There's quite a lot of nicotine in it for starters...

Are you quite sure about that?
e.g. https://www.totallywicked-eliquid.co.uk/e-liquid/e-liquid/zero-nicotine-e-liquid.html

 

[An_Engineer]

- a couple of references to the "noxious" components of vape "smoke". Do those contributors actually know what the components of vape "smoke" are and whether they are even remotely noxious - especially in the concentrations that a "passive vaper" might encounter them?

So I can answer this partially. The main components of vaping liquid are polypropylene glycol, glycerol, and nicotine. Both the glycerol and polyprop are harmless on their own at room temps and are common food additives (and can be found in smoke machines as well). It's an unregulated market, so you may find other things in it if bought from less than reputable sources.

This changes at high temperature in two ways:

• There is initial research to indicate that inhaling hot vapour can damage the throat and lungs (though this seems to be a general property of any hot gas, not just the ingredients). So it has potential to be damaging to the user, but by the time it reaches anyone else the vapour cloud will have already cooled so not too much an issue.
• Glycerol at high temperatures (above 230 degrees C I think) decomposes to form acetaldehyde (among other things). This is not a nice substance, so not the greatest idea to inhale, but I have no idea about the health effects. Most store bought e-cigs will not reach these temperatures, but most vapers can easily be modified to reach these temps

To add to this is the health effects of nicotine. The normal effects are strongly tied to cigarettes (with all the other crap being burnt), so it is unclear the exact effects of nicotine on it's own but there is likely some residual negative effects (exact amount still to be quantified).


So there are still health effects, with some unknowns. However, they are definitely healthier than cigarettes, so switching people from cigarettes to vaping should be encouraged.

As to the where: I agree they should not be lumped in with the smokers, as that just allows bad habits to pick up again. At the same time, I do find it rude for people to start vaping in an enclosed public agree (such as transport).

 

[Darandio]

Vape smoke makes me choke and induces headaches that can last for hours. Even if it didn't, I don't buy the claim that it's 'clean'. It's full of the toxins that give the user the 'kick' they crave. I mean, why use the stuff if there was no mild high? People on the whole prefer alcoholic drinks to non-alcoholic ones for the buzz they bring; pubs don't make their money on soft drinks and non-alcoholic beers, do they?

I'm a vaper, it helped me and my partner stop smoking after my mother died but you are talking utter nonsense here and show a complete lack of understanding. There is no 'mild high' and no toxins to try and give me a 'kick' other than nicotine as a form of replacement from cigarettes. I reckon you could be getting confused with weed vaping, something completely different. In fact what you are currently doing is effectively defining a vaper as some sort of junkie, which is idiotic.

Even as a nasty vaper myself I wouldn't support what is being discussed in this thread though, it is a backward step.