Electronic cigarettes

[faffod]

Can electronic cigarettes be used inside airports or on aircraft?

[JUAN TRIPP]

Certainly on BA we do not allow these 'cigarettes' to be used on board. Have no idea what the situation is i the terminals.

[Load Toad]

Mate, I smoke - it isn't hard to lay off the ciggies for a few hours whilst flying. Man up a bit y' wuss ;-)

[PaperTiger]

Certainly on BA we do not allow these 'cigarettes' to be used on board.Under which rule or regulation are they prohibited ? Assuming the CC don't just make one up on the spot of course.

[jetset lady]

Of course we made it up on the spot. We make up all the rules on the spot just to spoil the passengers fun. Didn't you know that PaperTiger? :rolleyes:

This is the reply from BA when the question was asked by a member of cabin crew following the arrival of these cigarettes on the market...

Electronic cigarettes – we operate a strict non-smoking policy, which includes electronic
cigarettes (used as an alternative to smoking)

[Load Toad]

What about weed?

Can we bring space cakes on board?

[Dual ground]

Paper Tiger, given the fact that Ryanair actually sell electronic cigarettes aboard their aircraft, I am guessing that this is a BA company policy, as opposed to any Regulatory bodies ruling. I stand ready to be corrected though, as things may have changed since I last flew Ryanair which was January of this year,

[PaperTiger]

We make up all the rules on the spot just to spoil the passengers fun. Didn't you know that PaperTiger?Yes, I do know that. Any announcement preceded by "For security reasons..." or "Government regulations..." has a 90% chance of being a complete fabrication. :ouch:

[Nick Riviera]

Flying back from Stockholm on BA last month the guy sitting next to me asked the hostie if he could 'smoke' his electronic cigarette. She didn't know and had to check with the Captain who advised that it was not acceptable.

[CornishFlyer]

The reason why some airlines say no is that if people use them, it may cause confusion and/or distress to some passengers which could lead to more passengers lighting up, some passengers getting worried that it may cause a fire or if used in a toilet, activating the smoke detectors.

[vctenderness]

The problem with these is that unless you hold a large notice in the air saying 'DONT WORRY ITS ONLY AN ELECTRONIC FAG FOLKS' everyone else on board thinks they are real and will complain or light up a real one.

So BA policy has been to play safe and not allow them. Simples!

[Load Toad]

I would of thought any company can have any rules it wants about how you act or don't act on it's property & if you don't like it you can choose to vote with your feet?
Which seems fair to me.

[wascrew]

nicotinelle inhalator or boots equivalent


if you need a substitute

recommended sadly by yrs truly

[jetset lady]

Yes, I do know that. Any announcement preceded by "For security reasons..." or "Government regulations..." has a 90% chance of being a complete fabrication.

In which case, please accept my apologies PaperTiger. I never knew that so I bow to your obviously superior knowledge.

(nod and smile, just nod and smile....)

[Phileas Fogg]

Don't knock him, personally I'd like to thank Faffod because when I read "Electronic Cigarettes" I had no idea what he was talking about until I went to, faithful friend, Google and ..... this evening I have purchased/ordered a 510 PCC kit and 30ml of 'Marlboro' refillable liquid.

I've endured 14 hours (ish) on aircraft without a cigarette but this is not the reason for my purchase, if I can switch my habit from fags to these electronic things then unhealthy habit solved.

Thanks again Faffod.

[CD]

Actually, it is possible that you may simply be exchanging one unhealthy habit for another:

The FDA’s Division of Pharmaceutical Analysis analyzed the ingredients in a small sample of cartridges from two leading brands of electronic cigarettes. In one sample, the FDA’s analyses detected diethylene glycol, a chemical used in antifreeze that is toxic to humans, and in several other samples, the FDA analyses detected carcinogens, including nitrosamines. These tests indicate that these products contained detectable levels of known carcinogens and toxic chemicals to which users could potentially be exposed.

FDA and Public Health Experts Warn About Electronic Cigarettes (http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm173222.htm)
Public Health Focus: Electronic Cigarettes (http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm172906.htm)
Health Canada Advises Canadians Not to Use Electronic Cigarettes (http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media/advisories-avis/_2009/2009_53-eng.php)

[Phileas Fogg]

CD,

It still hasn't been established if mobile phones are hazardous to health or not. I shall happily refrain from electronic cigarettes if the rest of the world refrains from mobile phones, I'm fed up with tripping over the users whilst driving, in supermarkets, as soon as they get off an aircraft etc. etc. etc, probably even whilst they're having a crap :)

[MathFox]

Fogg, there is significant evidence that e-cigarettes are healthier than the tobacco based ones.
About mobile phone use... I think the loo is a safe place to use it, at least you're seated and inattentiveness does little damage to bystanders.

[Summer breeze]

two weeks ago Stansted - Valencia, Ryanair, you could buy electronic ciggies on board

[vctenderness]

two weeks ago Stansted - Valencia, Ryanair, you could buy electronic ciggies on board

Knowing 'Mad Mick' I would not be surprised if you could buy a .44 magnum on board if he could make a buck (or a Euro) on it!!:}

[wiggy]

Interestingly these items got a mention very recently at a certain West London training centre and the party line was indeed:

BA policy has been to play safe and not allow them. Simples!

Well it may indeed be very sensible and logical rule but without a written reference crew are indeed in danger of being accused of making the rules up - and I sure as heck can't find any reference to them on ba.com or more importantly "the blue book".........:ok:

[flapsforty]

faffod, for the reasons mentioned by Cornish and vctenderness, few airlines if any will allow the use of electronic cigarettes on board.

*******************************************************

PaperTiger, just because this is the SLF forum doesn´t make it ok for you to spout complete bovine excrement.

When a passenger claims that flight attendants make up a rule, 999 times out of a 1000 this reflects that passenger´s lack of knowledge.
No shame or surprise in a lack of knowledge; knowing the myriad rules is our job, not yours. But the fact that you as a passenger are not aware of a rule means nothing.

Aviation is a very highly regulated business. Cabin crew have to enforce rules set by the regulatory authorities under which their airline falls, the regulatory authorities of the country the aircraft is flying into and rules set by the airline itself. Knowing and enforcing the rules is a large part of our job. A part not made any easier by people who decide that a particular rule is nonsense and therefor does not apply to them.

Yes, some rules seem or even are utterly nonsensical. Makes no difference though, the cabin crew is obliged by law to enforce it, and under the same laws you are obliged to behave in accordance with it.

So to come onto PPRuNe and claim that we make up rules on the spot clearly indicates how little you actually know about our business.
As a frequent flyer you are an expert on seating, service aspects and maybe pricing.
When it comes to knowing rules and regulations, being able to enforce them, the execution of safety procedures, crowd control, first aid, dealing with aggressive passengers etc etc; cabin crew working for a well run airline are the experts. They have to prove it twice a year to the regulatory authorities .
So spare us your BS.

If you want to talk nonsense, do so on any of the endless sites out there unsullied by the professionals who actually work in the air. Who knows, people there may even think you know what you're talking about.

Here on PPRuNe we know you don´t.

[AOB9]

I am a light smoker, about 10 per week. I tried the electronic ciggies, mostly because of my fascination with gadgets. For what it's worth I think they only re-enforce the nicotine habit. There is no substantial "throat hit" with these things, (something only a smoker would understand) so you end up sucking ferociously on them and burning your lips with the hot vapour. I found myself pulling on an e-cig for half the evening where normally I would have only a single cigarette. Mine ended up in the bin.

As for substantial evidence about them being safer than real cigarettes, that would be easy considering how lethal real cigarettes actually are. But bear in mind that these things are not regulated and come from China, two facts that amount to the end user having absolutely no idea what he/she is actually inhaling. They may eventually serve a purpose as a quitting aid but only if they were to be manufactured in a regulated/controlled environment.

[Phileas Fogg]

AOB9,

Once I learned of e-fags, and before purchasing, I read some reviews including on Amazon. I read that many are a waste of time, some say you get what you pay for, I've gone for a refillable kit with some 24mg Marlboro liquid, if the 24mg liquid isn't enough then there is a stronger one.

But anything is worth a try to give up, or cut down on, the habit.

flapsforty,

You show me where the CAA have regulated that e-fags are forbidden in airports and aircraft and I'll say "You know what you are talking about"!

[west lakes]

You show me where the CAA have regulated that e-fags are forbidden in airports and aircraft It can be nothing to do with them

and rules set by the airline itself.It is their (the airlines) aircraft and they are free to set their own rules.
It seems some folk would only be content if airlines were to publish all their internal procedures, no doubt so they can pick holes in them.

Looking at a national carrier at random: -

In section IX of their T&C's

1. The Carrier reserves the right to assess, in a reasonable manner, the behaviour of Passengers on board the aircraft, and to estimate according to the circumstances whether said behaviour is likely to obstruct, threaten, or endanger one or more persons, items of property or the aircraft. Passengers must not obstruct the crew from performing their duties and must comply with the crew’s instructions and recommendations in order to ensure the security and safety of the aircraft, the smooth running of the flight and the comfort of the Passengers. The Passengers must, in Carrier’s reasonably opinion, refrain from behaving in such a manner to which other Passengers may reasonably object.4. Smoking (including conventional cigarettes, electronic- or other artificial forms of smoking) is strictly prohibited on board the aircraft.It seems that there is this underlying movement to decide that rules are not to be followed and can be challenged.
If you have an issue with an airlines rules why not write to them?

[Phileas Fogg]

west lakes,

So that carrier forbids nicotine patches (an artificial form of smoking), how do they enforce this one may ask?

[west lakes]

I would not class a patch, gum or lozenge as artificial smoking.

Any device where the user is going through the motions of smoking however.

(oh and I have thought of cigarette shaped sweets - that would be silly to go there)

[wiggy]

It seems that there is this underlying movement to decide that rules are not to be followed

No, I don't think that is what is being said at all.

I think some are questioning wheter the rules exist in the first place. I refer you to my last post (#21) about a lack of references within one particular company's publications - it's not obvious from the sources available to the public and crew that I have checked.

[west lakes]

wheter the rules exist in the first placeBut what defines a rule?
Legislation, a company procedure, a memo from a company management to staff, a decision made by a person delegated to do so by their employer (or by legislation)?

All are equally valid and enforceable

[wiggy]

But what defines a rule?
........a decision made by a person delegated to do so by their employer?

All are equally valid and enforcable



Really? What happened to the concept of a lawful command?

[Phileas Fogg]

west lakes,

Nic patches contain nicotine which is hazardous to health, e-fags do not contain nicotine or tar etc.

I guess the answer is to develop an e-fag that does not emit smoke then no third parties will be any the wiser!

[west lakes]

IMP it would be a lawful command

lawful legal definition of lawful. lawful synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary. (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/lawful)

[hseldon]

Nic patches contain nicotine which is hazardous to health, e-fags do not contain nicotine or tar etc.No nicotine? E-cigarettes work by producing vaporized nicotine for you to inhale. You claim earlier in a post you've gone for 24mg Marlboro liquid. What do you think the 24mg refers to? I'll let you figure it out yourself.

There's a reason health authorities in many countries have not approved them and some of them have outright banned them. Unlike the approved cessation methods like inhalers or gums or patches whose manufacturing and dosage follow certain provisions and controls, the e-cigs have none of that.

Having some passengers unsettled and some others thinking it's ok and lighting up real cigarettes is a situation airlines would want to avoid. Besides, (regardless of what the e-cigarette marketeers claim) until someone can prove that part of the nicotine vapours inhaled will not be exhaled (for others next to you to breathe in turn), I'm not convinced that passive smoking can be ruled out. The rule makes sense.

[flapsforty]

The Tokyo Convention applies to crew and passengers on board an aircraft.

It is a sensible document and if more passengers were aware of its ramifications and the extended powers of a captain and his/her crew to ensure good order and discipline on board, there would be a lot less day to day trouble and aggravation for both crews and passengers.


Convention on Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft, Tokyo, 14 September 1963 (*)
The Convention applies to offences and other acts prejudicial to good order and discipline on board an aircraft, committed while the aircraft is in flight or on the surface of the high seas or of any other area outside the territory of any State. It does not apply to State aircraft, for example, aircraft used in military, customs and police services.

The purpose of the Tokyo Convention is to protect the safety of the aircraft and of the persons or property thereon and to maintain good order and discipline on board. The aircraft commander, members of the crew and, in specific circumstances, even passengers on board, are empowered to prevent the commission of such acts and to disembark the person concerned. The aircraft commander may also disembark the offender or, if the offence is serious, deliver him to the competent authorities of a Contracting State when the aircraft lands. The Convention protects the aircraft commander and any crew member or passenger assisting him in imposing the measures he finds necessary from any proceedings in respect of actions taken by them.

(*) Summary courtesy of ICAO

[Phileas Fogg]

Having received my 'personal atomizer' today, and having tested it, and whilst it may take some getting accustomed to I am pleased with the result and, because nothing is burning, one may cup it in one's hand whilst swallowing the smoke and nobody in the vicinity would be subject to any discomfort nor be any the wiser that one is receiving one's nicotine intake!

[MathFox]

Phileas, I have no objections at all when you enjoy your vapouriser in the privacy of your home (or the home of consenting friends.) If it helps you to get rid of your tobacco addiction, even better!
But with my condition of my lungs, I would appreciate if you would refrain from using your vapouriser in a plane when I'm seated next to you... for my health and comfort during the flight. I know they are better than cigarettes, but please give me clean (as clean as possible) air on a plane.

[MPN11]

Both I and my wife use e-cigs ... as a part-solution to the assorted non-smoking rules that now exist.
At our age, any health risk has long been overtaken by decades of 'the real thing' :uhoh:

What they do allow us is to have a quick nicotine fix [usually 2 or 3 puffs] when needed. We're perfectly comfortable with the BA "No Use" rule ... if we used our e-cigs on an aircraft it would cause substantial confusion, and a full runway-lighting set of call bells!

We don't care how excited people choose to get over the subject; if anyone objects, we won't have a puff. If they're not allowed, we won't use them. BUT ... in some places, and in some circumstances, they are damned useful for the addicts.

[PS ... MathFox ... all you are seeing is water vapour. Don't panic! ;) ]

[jetset lady]

MPN11, do they have any type of odour? I'm wondering whether they would be of use in hotels. Anything that saves the other guests from the sight of me wandering through the hotel lobby with my coat over my pyjamas and slippers when I can't sleep, has got to be a good thing!

[MPN11]

@ JSL ... to the best of our experience they are effectively odourless. I'll put it another way, the T5 Sofitel didn't bill us £250 for cleaning the room after using them last month!! ;)

It's that 'prisoner' factor that actually got us started on them. We can do the TATL, but being stuck in the hotel from 1400-0900 without 'skipping behind the bike sheds' was just unacceptable to us.

A couple of puffs to get the nicotine level back [no need to smoke a complete ciggie, costing £0.25+] and you're sorted.

[PS .. feel free to PM for a lot of detail. The others won't want to know about us dirty people.]

[Phileas Fogg]

I noticed yesterday that there is an e-cig 'stealth liquid' on the market that emits little, if any, smoke!

I always recall an ex work colleague, he had never learned to drive nor held a licence, if someone complained regarding his smoking polluting their atmosphere he'd hit straight back complaining that their driving of a car was polluting his atmosphere.

[Chuchinchow]

if someone complained regarding his smoking polluting their atmosphere he'd hit straight back complaining that their driving of a car was polluting his atmosphere.

That's as maybe, but two wrongs have never made a right.

[MPN11]

We all pollute the Planet, and our environment, in various ways. I think it's the price we pay for being a developed society.

I just get a bit aggrieved when people jump on various band-wagons.
Speeding.
Litter.
Smoking.
Drinking.
Diesel emissions.
etc. etc.

[Phileas Fogg]

I get disgusted at all these BMW, 'Chelsea Tractor', etc. type car owners/drivers, I'd like some of the world's resources to be left for my children. grandchildren etc, I, myself, drive a 998cc car, you should all be ashamed of yourselves and you have no grounds to gripe at an e-cigarette smoker or few!

[MPN11]

@ Phileas Fogg ...
I own a "Chelsea Tractor" with a 3.5L V6 engine ... which I drive for less than 1,000 miles a year.
How many miles does your 'ecological' 998cc do each year?
I bet my motoring carbon footprint is smaller than yours ;)

I am also disgusted by people wearing beards and sandals telling me how to live my life. :}

[dany4kin]

It's a shame that even smokers (like myself) don't actually realise how small their addiction is. Despite sometimes smoking 20 a day, I can also go for a day or so without even thinking about it. I've smoked for 10 years so don't try and tell me I don't have an addiction...

When you sleep your body manages quite nicely without smoking, the craving doesn't even wake you. Most people can even make it downstairs and put the kettle on or be on their way to the bus stop before lighting up - after a good 8-12 hours without a smoke.

The point I'm try to make is ANYONE can go for an UNLIMITED amount of time without smoking... It is not a basic human need. If you actually think about it (if you're a smoker) the craving isn't THAT bad. You feel it, but you deal with it.

A certain best selling quit smoking book goes further into these points and I recommend it.

In the mean time, start thinking about how your life is being dominated by a drug if you can't manage 12 hours on a plane and think SERIOUSLY about how that makes you feel.

One more point (from the book) ..... The very act of smoking is to make the smoker feel like a NON-smoker does.... The non-smoker does not have any craving, just like the smoker doesn't after finishing their cigarette. Crazy right?!

Kind of makes you think about cutting out the middle man and just feeling like a non-smoker all the time...

[Mr Optimistic]

Well if you can comfortably go without for a day I don't think you do have an addiction (having smoked for 45 years I claim more knowledge !). You are however right that it is entirely possible to manage without for even long haul, it's all a question of the right frame of mind. Not exactly like going over the top in the Somme is it lads ?

[Phileas Fogg]

Well I have been using my real cigarettes up over recent days inbetween puffs on my e-cig, I smoked my last cigarette last evening and today has solely been my e-cig.

I live a 2 minute walk from Tesco's cigarette counter, yes I am just the other side of Tesco's car park, I've had some urges to nip across there today but think I'm over those now and I'll hopefully stick to my e-cig.

And I've been smoking circa 35 years!

[ExXB]

Congratulations ... :Dyou are well on your way to kicking your addiction. It is difficult, but not impossible. Even I did it!

I found the patches helped, but regardless KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK! (sorry for shouting)

[Phileas Fogg]

Thanks ExXB,

Forget patches, these e-cigs are fab, you still have something to twiddle in your hand, something to puff at, get a 'throat hit' from, inhale etc, it's not actually that difficult because I'm still getting my nicotine fix but without all the other nasties that cigarettes contain.

Out of habit I'm finding myself reaching for a packet of fags that isn't there, it is now 2100, Tesco's is open until 2359, but I won't be going across there!

[MPN11]

Well done, P F.

I'll admit that we both still mix the 'real thing' with the e-cigs, but try to ensure that the real cigs are in a different room instead if immediately to hand!

[Mr Optimistic]

...not that you are watching the clock or anything ! Well, maybe I'll give them a go too. Good luck.

[benhurr]

I don't smoke. Quit 15 months ago from 40/day to nothing by willpower. Since stopping I have become really sensitive to the smell of smoke, probably from the guilt of knowing that I inflicted it on my nearest and dearest for 25 years.

So E-cigs are banned, what about inhalators?

People don't want the risk of breathing in minute traces of nicotine fumes (odourless and tasteless) whilst sitting on an aircraft? You don't care about all of the bacteria and viruses being concentrated in the recycled cabin air? Or the fumes from burned JET A1 coming through the vents?

E-cigs are banned probably because of the risk of upsetting other smokers and causing a riot, or the risk of fire, Either way they are banned for a sensible reason.

If people are worried about the quality of their cabin air then I would suggest people with a diet rich in brussel sprouts and pickled eggs would pose a greater risk and ought to be banned from all long haul flights.

And I am a born-again anti-smoking Nazi at this moment in time!

[Load Toad]

Smoking isn't a necessity. It's a smelly habit and it's bad for your health. You don't need to smoke. You are not 'addicted' - you just have a lack of will power and you don't respect others. If you can't lay off the ciggies for a few hours whilst on a 'plane then you are a pathetic loser. Honestly.

I smoke, sometimes, since I was 18, I can go for days or weeks without smoking or can do a pack in a night whilst out on the lash.

I now understand airlines banning smoking, It stinks, it upsets others. Its a safety risk. If people saw someone 'lighting up' with some faux cigarette it would cause some people ill feeling, others would take it as an excuse to light real cigarettes, it would be an unnecessary confusion as to if you can smoke or not on a 'plane. It has a potential to cause irritation and rile fellow passengers. Disharmony in the cabin is not conducive to cabin safety.
People are bothered about smoke & smoking - it's visible - there is a lot of information out there. Far less so about jet fuel fumes and the air quality in the cabin. Anyway - smoking is the visible and obvious action of one or two people on the many; its a selfish little bad habit not the last drink of water before you cross a dry dessert.

For a few hours, man up a tiny little bit and lay off the nipple substitute.

[MPN11]

There seems to be a lot of focus on e-cigs on aircraft and individuals not being to survive a long-haul sector.

I would like to be supportive of my fellow smokers who are, at some personal expense, trying to reduce their "smoke footprint" by using e-cigs where permitted. We are not bad people. ;)

[Slasher]

Smoking an electronic cigarette is like shagging a rubber doll - it'll have to do till you get the real thing again.

Do the outfits who ban e-cigs give any practical reasons? Or are they simply saying " Nah, we dont even like watching you smoking" ?

[Phileas Fogg]

Slasher,

Actually, it's been 7 days for me now without the 'real thing' whilst, as you put it, I've been shagging a rubber doll.

I took a few days of transitioning from real fags and then I went totally e-cig, I use Marlboro e-Liquid and once tasted one realises that a real fag gives the same taste as the liquid aswell as cancer and one hell of a hole in one's pocket etc.

I can understand the airlines not allowing it, if you were sitting a few rows behind an e-smoker seeing clouds of smoke/vapour emitting then you'd be excused for believing they were smoking!

But there are ways around it, it only emits a water vapour that one can swallow, they are virtually odourless etc. however, a week in to smoking e-cigs I can feel the addiction lessening which should make it much easier to survive a long-haul flight without a craving.

[danielson81]

sorry go to off topic a bit...

But I was at Bournemouth airport a few weeks ago and the sign in the landside smoking area said something along the lines of "There is an additional smoking area located airside".

Do any other UK airports still have an airside smoking area? Balcony somewhere?

[jimd-f]

i have never found this at bournemouth, so asssume it is something new.
anyone any ideas where it is.

[Phileas Fogg]

Just an update,

I was a seriously addicted smoker, thanks to the OP of this thread I learned of e-cigs and it has now been a month since I smoked tobacco.

Please allow me to stress to all you smokers out there, particularly UK smokers, don't pay for these 'very vocal' anti-smoker's National Health Service etc. by your purchasing of cigarettes, I've guesstimated that I would spend/smoke, over the next 12 months, circa £4,380.00 yet with e-cigs (e-liquid and equipment) I will spend a mere £200.00 and without risk/damage to my health.

Let these very vocal anti-smokers pay their own taxes rather than us 'smokers' subsidising them!

[west lakes]

Well done, I gave up on June 1st with the help of Lozenges. Stopped using them after 6 weeks.
Not smoked or needed one since

[MPN11]

@ Phileas Fogg ... congratulations, and glad to have possibly helped in the debate. :ok:

As Christmas is almost here, you may wish to consider sending me a small share of your c. £4,000 pa saving!! :cool: ;)

[ExXB]

Just an update,I was a seriously addicted smoker, thanks to the OP of this thread I learned of e-cigs and it has now been a month since I smoked tobacco.

Congratulations! :D :ok:

[Shack37]

I'd like to revive this thread to learn if there has been any update or change to airlines attitude to e-cigarettes. Mrs. s37 has tried all the usual methods to stop smoking and has, at last, found success with e-cigs. This in turn revived the family debate about using them aboard aircraft.

I have quoted chapter and verse from this thread but she has been assured by some people/friends/aquaintances in "bar debates" that they have "e-smoked" on board commercial flights. She had not asked which airline(s) were involved so I've asked her to get more information on this which I'll post if/when available.

In the meantime, has anyone heard of any relaxation on the banned use of them by any airline?

[ExXB]

Well the US DOT has just clarified (http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2011/02/11/us-electronic-cigarette-flight.html?) they cannot be used on US flights.

[AOB9]

As an ex smoker I occasionally turn to e-cigs in moments of weakness. I think they should be treated as a "giving up" aid and not a "permanent alternative" to smoking. I personally would never smoke an e-cig anywhere I wouldn't/shouldn't smoke a real cigarette. I totally support the airlines' view on this.

As for the legality, I imagine they will be legalized when they can be regulated. This will increase the price but it will also ensure that "vapers" are inhaling regulated liquid as opposed to cheap/nasty compounds manufactured by (some) cowboys. My concern about e-cigs in their current form is the content of the juice, not the nicotine content per say. Much of the juice is manufactured in China, a country where certain companies were willing to kill their own babies with cheap and nasty alternatives to milk products in order to make profit. I'm not having a deliberate go at China here but they have a long way to go before they catch up with quality regulations compared to Europe/America.

[Mr Optimistic]

I agree about not using them where you can't smoke: just a recipe for misunderstanding and more. Last year, the taxi driver back from Heathrow proudly told me how he walked up and down the concourse with an e-fag on the go to annoy the cops. Not everyone has a helpful attitude.

[rareair]

Just to clarify (and I'm not a smoker) the products sold on Ryanair are not e-cigs but these The Smokeless Cigarette: The Cigarette that can be smoked anywhere (http://www.similarshop.eu/commerce/smokelesscigarettes/index.jsf)

They seem to sell quite well on long (for FR) flights to the canaries

[Shack37]

They seem to sell quite well on long (for FR) flights to the canaries


There are four airlines logos shown in the advert. In the FAQ's it clearly states that this product can be used on planes. As the main reason for prohibiting the use of e-cigs is to prevent CC and other pax thinking someone is really smoking surely the same logic applies here.

Does anyone know if the airlines in the advert allow pax to use this product, as well as sell them?