Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
Should the FAA Allow Electronic Cigarettes in the Sky?
Share:
by BMCWrites | June 20, 2008 at 01:58 pm
4544 views | 7 Recommendations | 23 comments
Recently, I came across a post in which a corporate blogger addressed the question of what might happen to a person who tried to “light up” an electronic cigarette, cigar or pipe while aboard a commercial airliner as a passenger. As the spouse of a flight attendant, I found the topic intriguing.
In case you’re not familiar with electronic cigarettes, here’s a primer: They provide smokers with a tobacco-free, smoke-free and flame-free way to satisfy their nicotine cravings and are billed as alternatives to traditional cigarettes.
While I won’t yet recommend anyone attempt to use an electronic cigarette product while aboard a passenger airliner, I think the question is relevant for several reasons:
- Electronic cigarettes do not contain tobacco, tars or other harmful ingredients;
- Electronic cigarettes do not generate any smoke (Instead, they emit only a harmless vapor that simulates smoke yet satisfies the nicotine urges and cravings);
- Electronic cigarettes hold the potential to transform traditionally smoke-filled environments (i.e., casinos, bowling alleys, pool halls, bars and restaurants) into smoke-free environments that can be enjoyed by smokers and non-smokers alike; and, perhaps best of all
- Electronic cigarettes leave none of the residue and odors that accompany traditional cigarettes on clothing and other surfaces.
On the flip side, one must consider the issue from the viewpoint of airline flight crew members. Not unlike most members of the general public, most crew members — in particular, the flight attendants — are unfamiliar with electronic cigarettes and the fact that they rely upon rechargeable batteries, instead of a flame, to function. Each is taught -- and required by the FAA -- to react in such a way as to ensure no one aboard their aircraft uses anything remotely resembling a smoking device.
The primary reason for banning smoking aboard aircraft, as spelled out in the most-pertinent FAA regulation on the topic, is “to reduce the possibility of fire.” Because electronic cigarettes do not require any sort of flame to operate, they seem to have put the cigarettes-constitute-a-fire-hazard argument to rest.
What do you think?
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Most Recommended Stories in Health
Recommendations (7)
Anonymous users (2)
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (23)
at 18:41 on June 20th, 2008
BMCWrites, I like this story. It's good stuff. Can't the addicts just chew gum? With all the new regulations regarding security on the planes, how do these fit in? Where does the harmless smoklike substance go? -- on my clothes, on the upholstery? Sounds like a wacko idea to me.
at 21:32 on March 31st, 2009
These fit in with other nicotine replacement therapies such as the Nicotrol & Nicorette nicotine inhalers.
None of these devices (including the new electronic cigarettes) produce a lingering odor, but allow smokers and non-smokers to peacefully co-exist.
These are actually approved by the TSA and I detail the method one can use to get permission to smoke them on a flight at my blog article: http://www.electroniccigarettereview.com/smoking-on-planes
at 12:40 on July 29th, 2009
Well, the "addicts" as you state, can chew gum. What makes this country great is that all people including "the addicts" have choices. Just how you have the choice to choose between a Big Mac or Whopper, others should have the choice to choose their nicotine delivery systems. The Electronic Cigarette is a fantastic substitute for traditional cigarettes which contain over 4000 different chemicals including arsenic and formaldehyde.
PS. The Smokel;ike substance dissipates into the air, just like car exhausts, perfumes, spray deoderants, hair spray, etc.
at 09:55 on June 21st, 2008
Barbara -- There is no smoke-like substance. The only thing it produces is a vapor just like that used to resemble smoke of fog in theatrical productions. I've tried 'em. There's no downside unless, that is, you want the gunk on your clothes, furniture, etc. It isn't wacko!
at 08:46 on July 10th, 2008
:>
at 07:06 on July 12th, 2008
If there is no tobacco being burned and no second hand smoke (and there is no smell), there shouldn't be a problem with using in public places. And a note about the difference between the electronic cigarette and the nicotine gum; many smokers are also addicted to the physical motion of smoking. They need to have that "time out" to smoke. The electronic cigarette allows this with no harm to others around them.
at 15:48 on August 13th, 2008
I actually own a Janty pen (ecig) and as well recently enjoyed it both in the airport gate area waiting to board my flight and in fact, on my flight. The lady sitting right next to me finally asked, is that for asthma? As the only thing she saw was an occassional puff of vapor.
No, there is no residual smell on clothes or upolstry as someone suggested or asked as there is no 'smoke', no tobacco, no anything but vapor/steam. If the user chooses to use nicotine cartridges then the nicotine is absorbed by the user and the only thing in the air is steam which quickly evaporates with nothing left behind. There are non nicotine and low nicotine cartridges as well.
at 12:56 on October 5th, 2008
There should be no reason why FAA should ban these products... Think about the reason why the banned regular ciggs. Fire and Cancer.... Ive been using my product aboard almost every aircraft I was in.. Only 1 out of 15 flights did one of the flight attendents give me trouble...
Regards,
Eric Mizrachi @ www.myspace.com/ewee420
at 08:16 on February 1st, 2009
After 40 years as a heavy smoker, I am now cig free for over a week now with this product. Our mission is to educate the public to reduce the back lash from the ones that would like to run other peoples lives.
at 04:52 on February 2nd, 2009
I just got mine a few days ago and after 25 years of smoking regular cigarettes, I have not smoked one in three days so far. Also the E Cigs come with different color LED lights. Mine is blue, which definitely does not look like cigarette fire. I tried taking a few drags off a regular cigarette and thought "nasty" and threw it away because my e cig tasted much better.
at 14:37 on March 12th, 2009
Of course people should be allowed to smoke e-cigarettes in planes, are you kidding me? Check this site out and then just try and tell me I'm wrong:
http://greensmokes.blogspot.com
at 12:08 on March 27th, 2009
The OK Electronic cigarette has freed me from nicotine. Check out www.theokcigarette.com Furthermore you can earn 20% on the Pay it forward affiliate program, www.theokcig.com/payitforward
Penny
at 17:03 on March 28th, 2009
Smokers need to just ease up. If you can't handle a couple of hours on an airplane without a cigarette, you have real problems. Don't junk up my air with your smoke. Go into the closet. These should be banned on airlines NOW!
at 15:29 on April 9th, 2009
The point of the e-cig, sir, is that we will not "junk up," as you so eloquently put it, ANY air with smoke. The point of the e-cig, is that, and try and follow me here, there is NO SMOKE. None, zero, nada. No smoke, no fire, no tar, no carcinogens, no bad smell to get on you or your loved ones. There is only vapor, and we don't ban boiling water or taking hot showers, or saunas, do we? Yes, there is one toxin, nicotine, if the user chooses, which is absorbed by the user leaving only vapor in the exhaled air. But to me, 1 toxin in an e-cig vs. 4000 toxins in a regular cigarette, should be a reasonably easy thing to accept publicly. It should be a no-brainer really. These don't need to be banned anywhere, they need to become more ubiquitous than cell phones and television.
at 22:24 on April 14th, 2009
Wow, you absolutely failed to understand what is going on with these devices. They do NOT produce smoke, there is NO ignition.
The only thing that gets exhaled into the general environment is a vapor that disappears virtually instantly.
If your problem is with the nicotine involved, well these things contain nicotine as well...Tomatoes, Potatoes, Green Peppers, and Eggplant.
at 01:42 on June 10th, 2009
Do you by chance drink alcohol on a plane or at a bar and then drive even after 1 drink? People who do put me and my loved one in much more danger than a ciggerette has ever put you life in danger much less an odorless smoke free cigg. More power to the smokers who choose this as an alternative and gives up the real thing!!!!! Smoke away smokers!
at 12:53 on June 26th, 2009
OK. Someone has obviously not been paying attention. Listen carefully, pumpkin. Move your lips to the words if you have to so you can follow along:
E-cigarettes produce no harmful emissions (that includes electromagnetic ones). There is no tar, no carbon monoxide, no hydrogen cyanide, cesium, or other compounds.
Most e-cigarettes contain water, a flavoring agent, atomized nicotine, and propylene glycol (an alcohol that the FDA classes as "generally regarded as safe"; it's in your mouthwash, toothpaste, food products, pet food, etc.). The vapor contains a miniscule amount of nicotine and water. You breathe in water vapor in your kitchen when you cook, in your bathroom when you bathe or shower, and at waterfalls.
Propylene glycol breaks down in the body into pyruvitic acid, a by-product of glucose metabolism (it's a alcohol and has a slight sweet taste). It is used in theatrical, film and television productions with water to produce fog. Thousands of technicians and hundreds upon hundreds of actors have breathed PG/water vapor with no deleterious effect.
E-cigarettes produce no discernible odor. The vapor lasts roughly the same as it does over a pot of boiling water (that's because the water vapor loses heat energy to the surrounding air and becomes invisible). The vapor is no different than what you exhale on a cold winter's day.
There is nothing burned. There are no toxic fumes. There is no odor. But it allows a smoker to enjoy themselves without adversely affecting their health or the health of others.
You receive more toxic constituents walking along a city street than from e-cigarette vapor. Partially consumed hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, ethylene, soot, etc. are in today's city air. Do you chase after city buses when they belch black smoke that is known to be carcinogenic and adversely affect lung health and tell the driver to turn off the ignition?
As to your claim they should be banned -- you show me where you are subjected to toxins and where your health is adversely affected breathing water vapor and I'll agree with you on the ban on airlines.
Now you've been educated. You may shut up now. Your Crusader mentality is what needs banning, not e-cigarettes.
at 14:44 on March 31st, 2009
Why is it that all you non smokers always have to tell us smokers what we should be doing, like David McMichaels, we dont tell you non smokers what to do so if there is a solution for us smokers, and it doesnt harm ANYONE! then whats the problem? let us be! and keep your opinion to yourself, bringing e-ciggs onboard the plane should be legal and not governed by the airline. If the the FAA says its no problem the airlines should not be able to say no.
Bottom line, regular cigarettes should be banned completely, as they contain 4000 chemicals, many lethal in bigger dosages, but e-ciggs have none of the drawbacks, so let it pass and stop merely vending your emotional opinion, put some rationale into it!
Lets on the other hand focus on another more serious matter, like obesity. If Im sitting on a flight and the person next to me or on both sides are excessively fat and doesnt fit into one seat (which by the way is designed with the average person in mind) and bulges over on my side uncomfortably, should I then ask the airline to ban fat people? (after all they are the most expensive customer the airline has with regards to fuel)
In all reality, obese people should be charged much higher or even denied to fly as they use more fuel and offer a hazard to the rest of us in case of an emergency landing: they cant move very well, odds are their seat isnt designed to take that kind of extra load and will kill whomever is in front of them, and finally, do you think the airplanes were designed with todays obese people in mind? answer is NO, the average weight of a person has gone up drastically in the past years due to fast food, meaning that airlines are having to compensate for the additional FAT. Say an airplane that holds 400 people, on average the obesity adds about 40 pounds per person (400 * 40 = 16000 pounds extra weight , previously not accounted for!
Furthermore, obesity tears on our hospitals , extending waiting lines for regular operations, and eats tax payers money. Not to mention that about 80% of the world live in poverty on less than 3$ a day, and have little or no access to food nor clean drinking water, and then the majority of Americans cant even cook a decent healthy meal and live at McDonald's for their breakfast, lunch and dinner. YOU OBESE PEOPLE SHOULD BE ASHAMED for not being able to take responsibility of your own health, BEING FAT IS NOT NORMAL, and so is making silly TV programs like the Biggest Looser.
http://creativeclass.typepad.com/thecreativityexchange/images/2008/07/07/obesitystates.jpg
at 10:57 on May 22nd, 2009
hi c10,
you are a jerk. you are inconsiderate, you evidently have never had any dependency issues or bad habbits, i guess you think you are a God.
Some Humans are overweight, alcoholics, gamblers, smokers and a lot of other things that are worse. every time someone comes up with something that helps, the so called perfect people are not happy. we are real people and should not be picking each other apart.
you dont want people telling you what to do. you want them to shut up. what about you? what you are doing is alot worse. you could use some mental help.
at 15:32 on April 22nd, 2009
Yes, I'm another enthusiastic user of e-cigarettes. After 25 years of smoking these things let me stop buying tobacco in an instant. They're awesome.
As far as the vapor goes, I think it's about at the same level as perfume or cologne. Just as harmless, doesn't smell bad if you can smell it at all, and a very localized effect.
Zealous anti-smoking advocates who continue to view use of this device with disdain just want to feel superior to some other group of people. There's no other explaination.
at 17:20 on May 14th, 2009
check out e-cigs.biz for a lot of information on using the electronic cigarette. cheapest prices on the net, as well!
at 10:47 on May 28th, 2009
I can see the argument for both sides regarding the Electronic Cigarette. First, I can see the smokers point of view. I couldn't imagine not having nicotine for a 5 hour flight without losing my mind. In this regard the smoker is right. However, from the airlines point of view...How do they know that this electronic cigarette doesn't have any explosive materials in it? Also, it puts more pressure on fight attendants to ensure that its an e-cigarette and not a real one. This one is definitely up in the air.
at 13:10 on June 26th, 2009
JDG wrote,
How do I know your iPod isn't rigged to explode at 36,000 feet? Or how about that fat-cat self-important business lump in business class with a laptop? Maybe that spare battery of his is really a small brick of plastique!
E-cigarettes contain only a few components. A cartridge, an atomizer, a battery, a smart chip (usually) and an LED that lights when you inhale (mine blinks to tell me I've taken too many puffs in a minute, or it needs a charge).
The TSA has said they're okay to carry on planes. They do not produce a flame. Heck, people are allowed to carry oxygen aboard and that's highly combustible and explosive!
As has been suggested here and elsewhere, a quick demo of how it works with the crew chief on a plane will usually result in an "okay". When they hear it's just a vapor that contains nicotine and works like nicotine gum or a patch, they're sympathetic usually.
If push really comes to shove -- one can always nick into the lav and vape. People have reported the e-cig doesn't set off the smoke detectors (likely because they're ionizing radiation based rather than using visual detection; in other words, they react to combustible material, heat and smoke).
And I always use the term "vape" rather than smoke. I'm not smoking. And far as I know, there are lots of "No Smoking" signs but I have yet to see a "No Vaporizing" one!