I just thought of the dumbest thing....

I was thinking about the ban on smoking on the balconies, not just Disney, but now also NCL and Carnival.

I'm not sure if their ban is the same as DCL's, with E-Cigs being banned on the balconies also......but anyway, my dumb thought was....

DCL banned E-Cigs on the balconies, but no one would ever know if someone were using one in their stateroom. :confused:

So, was the balcony ban put in place just so people wouldn't see the vapor, think someone was smoking a regular cigarette, and turn them in???

Just as a note, so I don't get flamed, I did NOT say that I am against the balcony ban. I totally understand it, from the cruiseline's point of view, and from the non-smoker's point of view, even though I do smoke.

So, was the balcony ban put in place just so people wouldn't see the vapor, think someone was smoking a regular cigarette, and turn them in???

To a degree, probably. Some of the e-cig restrictions appear to be in place just because it was too complicated to create a separate list of rules for them.

Personally I think as long as the e-cig does not appear to be a real cigarette, then they should be allowed in all Adult ONLY areas, pool areas, bars, nightclubs etc (Restaurants, spa excluded) and on balconies.

Unless someone can demonstrate right here, right now, what the documented evidence of detriment to the health of others, and given we now have the ability to monitor the affects of theatrical haze and smoke, CO2, Nitrogen, pyrotechnic dust (which most choose to expose yourselves and children to during shows on DCL) on others to the parts per million in a cubic foot of air, any restriction is solely based on speculation, I stand by my comment above and await your verification.

ex techie

personally i think as long as the e-cig does not appear to be a real cigarette, then they should be allowed in all adult only areas, pool areas, bars, nightclubs etc (restaurants, spa excluded) and on balconies.

 

Unless someone can demonstrate right here, right now, what the documented evidence of detriment to the health of others, and given we now have the ability to monitor the affects of theatrical haze and smoke, co2, nitrogen, pyrotechnic dust (which most choose to expose yourselves and children to during shows on dcl) on others to the parts per million in a cubic foot of air, any restriction is solely based on speculation, i stand by my comment above and await your verification.

 

Ex techie

excellent point!!

Opinions are like noses--we each have one.

Mine is that if they are not offensive (by smell), don't present a health hazard to other than the user, and are not a safety/fire issue to the ship, who cares?

I guess my only point/thought was that the E-cigs are banned on the balconies, but they could be used in the staterooms. They have no smell at all.

All I can think of is that DCL didn't want to get calls to Guest Services with false "real" cigarette reports all day/night long.

:confused:

Sorry I wasted your valuable time. But at least you were warned in advance.

 

Ever see the movie "Bambi"? "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all.".....Ring a bell?

I'm just joking with you, lighten up Francis. :D

Seriously? Perhaps if you have nothing of value to add...

 

As for the e-cigs, it probably is so they don't have to field calls/complaints all day from people unable to distinguish between the two. Plus, the issue with the smoking (aside from the fire hazard) was the danger of second hand smoke. While the impact of the chemicals in the vapor is different, and I dare say less widespread, it isn't zero. Perhaps that's why they did it.

What could i possibly add to the subject of cigarettes, cigars and e-cigs.:D

What could i possibly add to the subject of cigarettes, cigars and e-cigs.:D

I guess I don't know?

Penny for your thoughts?

ex techie

Seriously? Perhaps if you have nothing of value to add...

 

As for the e-cigs, it probably is so they don't have to field calls/complaints all day from people unable to distinguish between the two. Plus, the issue with the smoking (aside from the fire hazard) was the danger of second hand smoke. While the impact of the chemicals in the vapor is different, and I dare say less widespread, it isn't zero. Perhaps that's why they did it.

I work with two guys that use e-cigs. I don't mind them a bit. I get an occasional faint whiff of mint. It's far better than the alternative, cigarette smoke or cranky co-workers. I injest more nicotine eating a potato.

I wonder how many people complain about the possible health risks of e-cigs then go up on deck and lay in the Caribbean sun.

I work with two guys that use e-cigs. I don't mind them a bit. I get an occasional faint whiff of mint. It's far better than the alternative, cigarette smoke or cranky co-workers. I injest more nicotine eating a potato.

 

I wonder how many people complain about the possible health risks of e-cigs then go up on deck and lay in the Caribbean sun.

Ain't that the truth!

ex techie

Actually complaints about e-cigs are sort of "Goofy"! :D

LuLu

Actually complaints about e-cigs are sort of "Goofy"! :D

LuLu

Funny!

I have asthma, so I sometimes have to leave the shows if there is too much of the smoke/fog, the same stuff that comes out of the e-cigs apparently (I know very little, so apologies if this is wrong). So as someone who has an underlying health concern, I am grateful for the policy.

I have asthma, so I sometimes have to leave the shows if there is too much of the smoke/fog, the same stuff that comes out of the e-cigs apparently (I know very little, so apologies if this is wrong). So as someone who has an underlying health concern, I am grateful for the policy.

No need to apologize......but they aren't the same.

No need to apologize......but they aren't the same.

They're surprisingly similar. Both use a glycerine and water mix. Where the difference is is in the volume. A fog machine can blow through more than a gallon an hour, e-cig use is closer to a milliliter. I can't imagine anyone being exposed to a fog-like concentration from an e-cig. My experience has been that it's a slight vapor with a mild fragrance even when getting it blown in my face by a wise guy.

They're surprisingly similar. Both use a glycerine and water mix. Where the difference is is in the volume. A fog machine can blow through more than a gallon an hour, e-cig use is closer to a milliliter. I can't imagine anyone being exposed to a fog-like concentration from an e-cig. My experience has been that it's a slight vapor with a mild fragrance even when getting it blown in my face by a wise guy.

You are correct Host Mick.

Here's some information about the effects of theatrical fog/smoke and haze:

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/music-and-theater-arts/21m-735-technical-design-scenery-mechanisms-and-special-effects-spring-2004/assignments/drkp_tn10.pdf

2 Ingestion and Inhalation Toxicity

The chemicals used in the fog fluids are not toxic. Despite some claims to the contrary, they are not carcinogenic and they do not cause asthma. Indeed, they can be safely ingested in fairly large quantities: drinking 30 milliliters of glycerol three times a day for fifty days has been proven harmless to healthy individuals, and drinking 1 to 1.5 grams of propylene glycol per kilogram of body weight is a safe dose for medical uses.

(it is sometimes used to reduce interocular pressure) [2]. This is far more than is ingested in normal use, and since most of us are not in the habit of drinking bottles of fog fluid, there is little danger of toxicity from ingestion.

There are similarly few problems with inhalation. The Actors’ Equity Association, which if anything has a conservative bias towards allowable limits, sets forth a recommended level limiting an actor’s exposure to 40 milligrams per cubic meter. [3]. This is a heavy level; Ruling notes that glycol levels on Broadway stages have consistently been measured at less than 10 mg/m3 [2]. The Equity report provides a summary of how long it takes for the glycol levels from various fog machines to drop below the recommended level; at three feet from the largest fog machines, the time is less than 230 seconds, and considerably less at greater distances [3]. It does not provide an analogous guideline for glycerol levels, but a similar limit would still allow for extensive use of smoke — indeed, the confusion from the dense cloud of smoke might become a danger before toxicity from the smoke itself would.

3 Irritation Effects

One valid concern, however, is that both glycols and glycerols have a throat-drying effect. The Cohen Group report to ESTA notes that “the chemical nature of glycols is such that prolonged or repeated contact with a glycol mist is likely to dry out moist tissues (i.e., the mucous membranes of the upper respiratory track and, possibly, the eye) [4].”

Since the effects may be partially psychological, it may help to inform the performers that fog is being used, how it is being used, the reason it is called for, and the safety information for it. (This is not a bad thing to do even if they aren’t complaining!)

ex techie

I guess my only point/thought was that the E-cigs are banned on the balconies, but they could be used in the staterooms. They have no smell at all.

 

All I can think of is that DCL didn't want to get calls to Guest Services with false "real" cigarette reports all day/night long.

:confused:

I disagree. Some of them do give off a scent that non-smokers find very unpleasant.

I disagree. Some of them do give off a scent that non-smokers find very unpleasant.

Some Guest's give off a smell that many others find unpleasant.

Body oder, perfume, aftershave, deodorant, etc.

Lets ban them too!

ex techie

Some Guest's give off a smell that many others find unpleasant.

Body oder, perfume, aftershave, deodorant, etc.

 

Lets ban them too!

 

ex techie

I would ahve no problem banning perfumes, colognes, etc. and enforcing a rule that requires at least one shower daily and the use of deodorant.

I would ahve no problem banning perfumes, colognes, etc. and enforcing a rule that requires at least one shower daily and the use of deodorant.

Unscented deodorant please.

ex techie

I wondor if part of the issue, is that the vapor from these e-cigs can incorrectly set off smoke alarms in the staterooms and that could be the reason that they have been banned.

I wondor if part of the issue, is that the vapor from these e-cigs can incorrectly set off smoke alarms in the staterooms and that could be the reason that they have been banned.

The vapor isn't strong enough to set off the smoke alarm in a stateroom.....it doesn't set one off in a tiny airplane bathroom. It isn't even as much steam as a shower would make....not even close.

But that is a thought, though....

I would ahve no problem banning perfumes, colognes, etc. and enforcing a rule that requires at least one shower daily and the use of deodorant.

I wish they would, too. I gag when a woman with too much perfume walks past me....being in a small elevator, twice as bad. Being in an elevator with someone who just left the gym....ugh....poopy baby diaper....ugh.....

But I can't imagine anyone signing up for the job of "Stink Police".

Over the weekend I heard a news report of an E-cig catching fire on a plane at Logan Airport. It may just be a safety concern for the cruise line.