[Los Angeles] City Council Panel Eyes Tougher Limits On E-Cigarette Use In Public

CBSLA.com) ^ | February 24, 2014 9:35 AM | Brian Ping

[BenLurkin]

LOS ANGELES (CBSLA.com) — A City Council committee was expected to vote Monday on a proposal to sharply restrict the use of electronic cigarettes — known as “e-cigarettes” — in public areas in the city of Los Angeles.

City Attorney Mike Feuer and councilmembers Mitch O’Farrell, Paul Koretz, and Bernard Parks proposed the ordinance in December in response to the surging popularity of the devices, which use battery-powered metal cartridges to simulate the effect of smoking by heating nicotine-containing liquid into vapor.

KNX 1070′s Brian Ping reports the motion would prohibit the use of e-cigarettes wherever smoking tobacco is currently prohibited by law, including restaurants, public parks, playgrounds, beaches, schools, daycare centers and libraries.

While some researchers have found e-cigarettes to be less harmful to smokers’ heart function than regular tobacco cigarettes, studies have found the devices to contain benzene, toulene, heavy metals such as nickel and arsenic, and other chemicals in addition to nicotine.

Feuer told KNX1070 NEWSRADIO that researchers still have yet to determine the extent to which e-cigarettes may pose a public health threat.

“We don’t know whether the toxics that are contained in the vapor of e-cigarettes is as harmful as tobacco, but we know that that vapor contains known carcinogens,” Feuer said.

Officials with the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health have called for amending local smoke-free policies to “prohibit e-cigarette use in existing smoke free areas, thereby preventing inhalation of secondhand e-cigarette vapors or passive vaping.”

Some e-cigarette makers have raised questions over whether outright prohibition could lead ex-cigarette smokers to relapse, especially before any health risks have been fully determined.

[RginTN]

Its gotten crazy when inhaling toxic pot is good while inhaling vapor which doesn’t get one high is bad.

Oh I get it, its the taxes they want.

[Political Junkie Too]

So the fumes given off by charbroiling hamburgers and bacon are worse than an e-cigarette, but the cigarette will be banned for health reasons?

-PJ

[Mount Athos]

Moves to ban e-cigs are really disturbing.

Taxes on tobacco are sky high.
A lot of poor people are addicted, really hurting them financially.

Finally a safe way to escape comes along and the government wants to ban it for no good reason?

I guess this is motivated by tax revenue addiction.
It’s really immoral to ban e cigs isn’t it, or am I missing something?

If anything the government should be subsidizing tobacco, because the people who use it die earlier so they take much less entitlement money.

[Ignatz]

Liberals are kept awake at night by the terrifying thought that someone, somewhere, is enjoying life.

[BenLurkin]

You better believe that the petty little “liberal” tyrants will be after hamburgers and bacon someday. Probably soon.

[markman46]

the Cancer Society and Lung association are behind this

[publius911]

Officials with the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health have called for amending local smoke-free policies to “prohibit e-cigarette use in existing smoke free areas, thereby preventing inhalation of secondhand e-cigarette vapors or passive vaping.”

Some folks just don’t know their science.

Just additional confirmation that this was never about health issues, but about control.
That's why the WHO report on second hand smoke (1993) was ignored and buried.

Now what?
The anti-smoking Nazis are revealed for the moron controlling twits that they are.
E-cigarettes are no more a health hazard than perfume addicts are.
More unequivocally so for the "nicotine-free" variety.