Scotrail Bans Electronic Cigarettes.

[michael769]

After careful consideration, we have decided not to allow customers or staff to smoke e-cigarettes on our trains or at stations or train depots. Here’s why:

Their use may unsettle other passengers and cause people to think that smoking real cigarettes is allowed.

The British Medical Association (BMA) believes that e-cigarettes should be included in the ban on smoking in public places.

The BMA says there is a lack of rigorous, peer-reviewed studies to support the use of e-cigarettes as a safe and effective nicotine-replacement therapy.

It also says these devices may undermine efforts to prevent or stop smoking by making cigarette use seem normal in public and at work.

In June 2013 the Government announced that it will introduce legislation that forces these products to be licensed in response to scientific and market research into their safety and quality.

The Medicines and Healthcare Regulations Authority (MHRA) says that in the meantime people should use licensed nicotine replacement products – gums, patches, mouth sprays etc – to reduce the harms of smoking.

If, in future, new information comes to light about the efficacy and health implications of e-cigarettes we will be happy to review this arrangement.

http://www.scotrail.co.uk/electronic_cigarettes

 

[gordonthemoron]

boo, they'll be banning the use of Snuff next

 

[dysonsphere]

boo, they'll be banning the use of Snuff next

LOL can you still buy that I thought they banned it years ago. I remember my grandfather using it. (im 55)

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Not being a smoker, I think that I heard a discussion on Radio 4 some months ago, there what was exhaled was a water-based small particle spray similar to cigarette smoke, but having the same visual effect.

Please feel free to correct this, should I have misunderstood what the speaker was saying on the discussion programme.

 

[route:oxford]

It's not often you see the Scottish Government promoting the evidence of a British organisation...

The British Medical Association (BMA) believes that e-cigarettes should be included in the ban on smoking in public places.

 

[district]

Unbelieveably, I saw a Southeastern Conductor walk up the train ''smoking'' one of these.

 

[PauloDavesi]

A great move by Scotrail, hopefully all other TOC's follow their lead.

 

[big_dirt]

Obviously there would be no means of detecting people using these in lavatories or sleeper rooms.

 

[Mugby]

A great move by Scotrail, hopefully all other TOC's follow their lead.

But why?

 

[Gwenllian2001]

A great move by Scotrail, hopefully all other TOC's follow their lead.

Do you have a good reason for writing that or do you just hate to see other people enjoying themselves?

 

[GatwickDepress]

The BMA says there is a lack of rigorous, peer-reviewed studies to support the use of e-cigarettes as a safe and effective nicotine-replacement therapy.

It also says these devices may undermine efforts to prevent or stop smoking by making cigarette use seem normal in public and at work.

Provide a rigorous, peer-revised study to support the use of e-cigarettes as an unsafe and ineffective nicotine-replacement therapy. Look guys, there's a valid point to the psychological effects that an e-cigarette might have owing to the vague resemblance to real cigarettes, but it works both ways. I have a couple of friends who find patches and gums completely ineffective but e-cigarettes work for them owing to the resemblance to real cigarettes.

Fund a study, publish the results, then you have a valid source from which to reach a accredited conclusion.

 

[Bayum]

Provide a rigorous, peer-revised study to support the use of e-cigarettes as an unsafe and ineffective nicotine-replacement therapy. Look guys, there's a valid point to the psychological effects that an e-cigarette might have owing to the vague resemblance to real cigarettes, but it works both ways. I have a couple of friends who find patches and gums completely ineffective but e-cigarettes work for them owing to the resemblance to real cigarettes.

Fund a study, publish the results, then you have a valid source from which to reach a accredited conclusion.

Of course you have to be careful as to whom the funding goes to - funding to the BMA would cause uproar as they have already said what their views are against E-Cigs.
You'd need to be so careful with conflicts of interest.

 

[edwin_m]

They may have had this incident in mind too:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-18728303 (video)

A fake cigarette prompted armed police to swoop on a coach on the M6 Toll road and close the motorway for more than four hours.

Forty eight passengers on the Megabus Preston to London service were led off the coach and forced to sit apart in a cordon on the opposite carriageway.

The road was closed near Lichfield before police said they were no longer treating the incident as suspicious.

 

[EssexGonzo]

Provide a rigorous, peer-revised study to support the use of e-cigarettes as an unsafe and ineffective nicotine-replacement therapy. Look guys, there's a valid point to the psychological effects that an e-cigarette might have owing to the vague resemblance to real cigarettes, but it works both ways. I have a couple of friends who find patches and gums completely ineffective but e-cigarettes work for them owing to the resemblance to real cigarettes.

Fund a study, publish the results, then you have a valid source from which to reach a accredited conclusion.

Exactly.

The resistance to e cigarettes is based on illogical fear and prejudice.

If they ban these they should ban McDonalds and Burger King on trains - I'm fearful that they're harmful and I'm prejudiced against people who eat ****e food.

 

[cjp]

I am not a smoker but I see this as another restriction on liberties for no good reason.

I have therfore e-mailed Scotrail as follows.

My question is what gives you the right to restrict people in such a fashion? What condition of carriage or bylaw lets you do this?
Your power to prohibit smoking cigars, pipes or cigarettes comes from the Act giving you power to stop the smoking of tobacco. The so called e-cigarettes do not, as I understand it, involve tobacco.


I will let you know if and how they respond.

 

[Marklund]

My question is what gives you the right to restrict people in such a fashion?

They've banned alcohol after 9pm, so I guess they can ban anything else that may be perceived to be a nuisance to other passengers. E-cigs *may* be seen as something that causes a nuisance.

What condition of carriage or bylaw lets you do this?
Your power to prohibit smoking cigars, pipes or cigarettes comes from the Act giving you power to stop the smoking of tobacco. The so called e-cigarettes do not, as I understand it, involve tobacco.

They involve nicotine. You'd also have to have staff able to tell whether the e-cig is emitting purely vapour or not.

Easier to prohibit them all for the avoidance of doubt.

 

[transmanche]

I am not a smoker but I see this as another restriction on liberties for no good reason.

One could argue that the occupier of premises/operator of vehicles is entitled to prohibit you from doing anything they like.

In the same way my aunt doesn't let visitors wear shoes in the house.

My question is what gives you the right to restrict people in such a fashion? What condition of carriage or bylaw lets you do this?
Your power to prohibit smoking cigars, pipes or cigarettes comes from the Act giving you power to stop the smoking of tobacco. The so called e-cigarettes do not, as I understand it, involve tobacco.

Well the bylaws don't actually mention tobacco:

3. No person shall smoke or carry a lighted pipe, cigar, cigarette, match, lighter or other lighted item on any part of the railway on or near which there is a notice indicating that smoking is not allowed.​

or they may be relying on:

2.1. Except with written permission from an Operator or an authorised person, no person shall bring with him or allow to remain on the railway any item which, in the opinion of an authorised person, may threaten, annoy, soil or damage any person or any property.​

 

[gunn13]

I think the main reasoning behind it is that if a passenger is to see someone "smoking" what appears to be a real cigarette, even if it isn't; it could encourage some certain types to decide they fancy lighting up a real cigarette.
Besides the fact that nobody actually know if they are safe or not.

 

[Gwenllian2001]

One could argue that the occupier of premises/operator of vehicles is entitled to prohibit you from doing anything they like.

In the same way my aunt doesn't let visitors wear shoes in the house.

Well the bylaws don't actually mention tobacco:

3. No person shall smoke or carry a lighted pipe, cigar, cigarette, match, lighter or other lighted item on any part of the railway on or near which there is a notice indicating that smoking is not allowed.​

or they may be relying on:

2.1. Except with written permission from an Operator or an authorised person, no person shall bring with him or allow to remain on the railway any item which, in the opinion of an authorised person, may threaten, annoy, soil or damage any person or any property.​

Yes, I suppose that you might find that anything is open to the interpretation that suits you.

When it comes to 'no person shall smoke or carry a lighted pipe etc'., it should be pointed out that 'e' cigarettes are not lit; emit no odour and shed no ash. 'Smoking' does not come into it.

As far as the second point goes, that could apply to anything that might annoy another person. Stinking food is commonplace on trains as is the constant racket from mobile devices, particularly loud, one sided, conversations. There are endless possibilities for the busybodies of this world to complain about and I could go on all night enumerating them but why anyone should object to 'e' cigarettes is quite beyond me. What next? Are they going to ban people wearing nicotine patches or chewing nicotine gums?

I grew up in a country that prided itself on the freedom of the citizen. That country seems to have disappeared under a tide of American inspired 'political correctness'.

Remember the days when bodies had a chairman or chairwomen? Not any more; we now have to address the 'chair'. Ludicrous!

 

[Marklund]

I grew up in a country that prided itself on the freedom of the citizen.

Which included the lovely "right" to pollute another individual with smoke. :roll:

 

[Gwenllian2001]

Which included the lovely "right" to pollute another individual with smoke. :roll:

It still does. Walk down any street and you will be surrounded by other peoples exhaust fumes. Ask any veteran teacher and they will tell you that the incidence of childhood asthma has shot up following the explosion of road traffic.

I am not advocating that smoking be allowed in enclosed public places, I am merely pointing out that 'e' cigarettes do not emit smoke. All of us, whether we like it or not, are exposed to traffic and industrial pollution which is a 'right' that I, for one, do not enjoy but I do not go out blocking roads or picketing factories.

No one has yet explained why electronic 'cigarettes' should be regarded as a nuisance or why they should cause distress or discomfort to anyone.

 

[AlexS]

Certainly some of them cause me a pain in the arse - some emit a distinctly blue smoke, like tobacco, and I then have to stare at the user to try and work out if I have to undertake my legal obligation to tell them to pack it in, if it's a cigarette or a pipe, or whether to leave them to it. It's not always obvious until you're on top of them so to speak what they are.

My TOC's policy is that they are permitted, as per BTP advice, but I'm not convinced that will last forever.

 

[cjp]

One could argue that the occupier of premises/operator of vehicles is entitled to prohibit you from doing anything they like.

3. No person shall smoke or carry a lighted pipe, cigar, cigarette, match, lighter or other lighted item on any part of the railway on or near which there is a notice indicating that smoking is not allowed.​

[/INDENT]

Well as Davenewcastle informed us previoulsy the bylaws are created on the basis of the Act's authority which is to permit and authorise them to pass bylaws including specifically those to ban the smoking of tobacco

 

[Andrewlong]

Presumably when bylaws were created or last updated, these devices simply did not exist. Bit of a grey area.

Given these devices have been around for about 2 years, I am amazed the government has not already taken action to regulate their use and how they are advertised. E-cig manufacturers can advertise with very little restriction unlike their tobacco equivalents.

 

[michael769]

Trains are private property and the operators are entitled to set whatever conditions they choose. If you don't like it don't enter their property.

 

[Mojo]

I went on an aeroplane recently and there were announcements on both legs reminding customers that smoking, including the use of electronic cigarettes, is not permitted. I am not sure if this ban is to do with discomfort for other passengers or safety issues. I am reminded somewhat of the "terrorist alert" that arose with the use of one of these devices on a Megabus last year!

 

[michael769]

What is perhaps slightly odd is that the announcement bans using them in stations. As they currently allow smoking in unenclosed parts of stations, this part of the ban is rather irrational IMO.

 

[dcsprior]

Presumably when bylaws were created or last updated, these devices simply did not exist. Bit of a grey area.

Given these devices have been around for about 2 years, I am amazed the government has not already taken action to regulate their use and how they are advertised. E-cig manufacturers can advertise with very little restriction unlike their tobacco equivalents.

Why would the government want to regulate the use/advertising of them? The reason cigarette advertising is restricted is to discourage smoking - presumably we'd want to encourage people to switch to these electronic ones?

I gave up smoking about 6 years ago, without any nicotine-replacement, but I'm quite happy for a colleague of mine who has recently given to sit and "smoke" an electronic cigarette at his desk. I'm sure our employer is happy too as it means he does an extra 5 mins of work every hour.

 

[Gwenllian2001]

It is reported that a million plus ex smokers are now using 'e' cigarettes. It is not difficult to work out that the government is losing millions in taxes and the recent 'health scare' is a prelude to regulation, which really means taxation. So, to all you fine antis out there, be careful what you wish for. The lost revenue has to come from somewhere and if everyone gave up smoking the tax will have to be raised from another soft target. Energy supplies; motor fuel or how about VAT on train tickets?

 

[cjp]

Trains are private property and the operators are entitled to set whatever conditions they choose. If you don't like it don't enter their property.

I think not