Boca to be E-Cigarette Free
An ordinance introduced during a City Hall meeting has the potential of prohibiting e-cigarettes around the city
Mohammed F Emran | Web Editor
February 18, 2015
FAU students have already been prohibited from smoking on campus. Now, smoking (of any sort) off campus in certain locations may no longer be an option.
Ordinance 5296 was introduced during a City Hall meeting on Feb. 10. The purpose of the ordinance is to ban e-cigarettes in locations around Boca Raton where regular cigarettes are already prohibited.
These locations are limited to public areas and the ordinance specifies that private locations such as homes, stand-alone bars and smoke shops are not included.
This ordinance was proposed by Council Member Constance Scott who experienced second-hand smoke from an e-cigarette.
“Until the research has been done to determine they are not harmful, I don’t want the residents exposed to potentially unhealthy carcinogens,” Scott stated in the Sun Sentinel.
The official document for the ordinance contains a statement from the American Heart Association stating e-cigarette vapor exposes residents to nicotine and other toxic chemicals.
The ordinance itself does not give a procedure in determining whether the e-cigarette contains nicotine. Punishments for not following an ordinance according to Section 1-16. General Penalty in the Code of Ordinances is a fine of up to $500 and/or imprisonment for up to 60 days.
Freshman chemistry major Jonathan De La Cruz expressed his opinions via text regarding Boca Raton’s ordinance.
“E-liquid vapor is just glycerin, the same stuff inhalers use,” De La Cruz said. “Fuck it, we should ban emergency inhalers.”
At the next City Council regular meeting (date to be announced), the ordinance will be under a regular public hearing where anyone can comment and express their thoughts and concerns for the ordinance before council members make a motion.
Rules for public hearings according to the Boca Raton City Council Agenda are to state your name and address and limit your response to five minutes.
City Council Regular Meetings are held in the City Council Chamber of City Hall (201 W. Palmetto Park Road, Boca Raton, Fla. 33432) starting at 6 p.m. on the second and fourth Tuesday of every month.
For more information on the agenda and the next regular meeting time, click here and look under the section “Upcoming Events.”
crunchy2k • Feb 19, 2015 at 5:15 am
Funny how Constance Scott who experienced second-hand smoke from an e-cigarette, didn’t notice it was only water vapor. Remember not to hold a cup of coffee around this weirdo or he may say he doesn’t like you ‘smoking’ around him. BTW, caffeine is much more dangerous. The LD50 level of caffeine is 250mg/kg body weight and nicotine is much safer at 500-1500mg/kg body weight.
Vaping is not only a life safer to smokers and those around them, but it is the Oxford Dictionary’s 2014 word of the year.
rfoshee • Feb 19, 2015 at 5:48 pm
There are more than enough studies already done in the last 18 months showing that vaporizer aerosols are not just water vapor, there are other things in the vapor. A study published this month showed that Blu eCigs produce a vapor heavy in copper, although whether that level of copper is toxic or not was not determined. And I say this as someone who started vaping 4 years ago.
This whole issue is, on the whole, far overblown. The ordinance is going to say you cannot vape where you cannot smoke, nothing wrong with that. Even if the ordinance passes, in its current form, it is unenforceable legally.
crunchy2k • Feb 21, 2015 at 6:44 am
You are right about the studies, but incorrect about what they found. Dr. Igor Burstyn of Dexel University Pennsylvania, concluded in his review of all the emission studies done into 2013 that the aerosol from e-cigarettes pose no health risks to the user and absolutely none to a bystander.
Burstyn(2014), ‘Peering through the mist: systematic review of what the chemistry of contaminants in electronic cigarettes tells us about health risks.’
The UN funded a study of a very popular European e-cigarette. The administrative ‘Health’ officals went around saying look at the metals last September. Constantinos Sioutas, et al.(2014)’Particulate Metals and Organic Compounds from Electronic and Tobacco-containing Cigarettes: Comparison of Emission Rates and Secondhand Exposure’
See for yourself the emissions as compared to outdoor air. Here is that studies data page.
http://www.rsc.org/suppdata/em/c4/c4em00415a/c4em00415a1.pdf
The levels of metals in the air matched those in the e-cigarette and both were greatly below what we need daily in our diets. The other organic chems were below normal everyday outside air.
When you hear someone saying a chemical is being released and it is bad, go to the OHSA website and look it up. These anti-e-cigarette ‘health’ people are lying. There are threshold levels for most chemicals found in our environment. E-cigarettes emission levels don’t even come close to the levels of the chemicals they complain about.
https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=standards&p_id=9992
You are right people will still vape. Unless I blow it in someone’s face, they never know. That is not a valid excuse to create this ordnance. The very attempt of demonize this life saving device and send vapers out to stand next to smokers is just mind boggling. The whole point is to get smokers to stop smoking.
rfoshee • Feb 21, 2015 at 5:16 pm
I am not incorrect in what the studies found at all, in fact, all I said they found was that there are other things in vapor other than “just water vapor” which is exactly what the studies do say. I mentioned nothing about second-hand effects nor effects on bystanders, only that your assertion that vapor is “just water vapor” was incorrect based on published studies.
If you really want to get into the weeds, I can, despite the fact that we’re on the same side of the fight.
Farsalinos et al (2015) found that elevated levels of diacetyl and acetyl propionyl were found 74.2% of 159 samples. While these two chemicals are commonly found in food production they are also associated with increased incidence of respiratory diseases when inhaled.
Lerner et al (2015) found elevated amounts of copper in the aerosols of Blu eCigs that *may* be toxic but they did not determine whether such levels were toxic or not since that was not the point of their study. I already mentioned this.
Lerner et al (2015b) found that e-juices flavored with ingredients such as cinnamon have increased inflammation rates in lung epithelial cells, which could lead to respiratory issues.
Gennimatta et al (2014) found that vaporized aerosols could induce respiratory airway construction, although it was short-term. This likely was induced by allergic reactions to particulates, as some people are sensitive to PG.
Williams et al (2013) found that exhaled vapor contained elevated levels of tin and other metals in comparison to their reference cigarette.
Hutzler et al (2014) found that aldehydes were elevated in exhaled aerosols, though their toxicity was not under investigation.
And that’s just the studies I have on hand to actually reference. Many of these studies are executed by people that are pro-vaping, particularly Dr. Farsalinos and not a single one contends that vaped aerosols are “just water vapor” like was once believed, which was my entire point to begin with. Pisinger & Dossing (2014) conducted a great meta-analysis of literature contemporary to roughly September 2014 (article published in Oct 2014).
I think vaping is great and is an obviously successful cessation tool and I make no concessions that anti-smoking people are out to demonize vaping. But I also realize that, unlike cigarettes, the long-term effects are entirely unknown at this time and so much more research needs to be done.
crunchy2k • Feb 22, 2015 at 6:54 pm
Your references are good for making ‘Good Manufacturing Practices’ regulation. GMP regulations make sure we get what we pay for with our food money and nothing dangerous. That is Farsalinos’ total direction in investigating e-liquid flavorings and makeup. In none of these studies do the researchers find anything dangerous. They do find chems that need to be quantified on how much can be used. That is why I presented you with the OHSA website. With that table of threshold levels, you can see how most of the stories are based on misrepresentation of the science by the neo-tempest union crowd. I see 60+ years of studies on the three base ingredients that makeup e-liquid and only see GRAS for inhalation and ingestion stamped on each and every chemical from the 1940’s to now. Vegetable glycerin and propylene glycol were re-profiled because of the 1989 military base closings. Nicotine was given a clean bill of health (unless you are a pregnat woman) by the Swedish Snus studies and FDA acceptance of Nicotrol and other inhaler manufacturer’s studies. The flavorings are the exception.
Flavorings and scents have always been ignored by the FDA since it was formed in 1906. Perfume scents, food colorings when inhaled, and artificial flavoring are getting their day in the lab thanks to e-liquid.
In the end, there is no reason ingredients found safe for ingestion and inhalation after many decades of study should all of a sudden be suspected of causing long term harm when they only form a mixture.