IOSH forums home
»
Our public forums
»
OSH discussion forum
»
Vaping and the potential to cause chest problems.
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Mick Noonan wrote:To those who feel that breathing in 'vaping' fumes poses a risk... how many of you have a fireplace? I presume you never use it anymore based on it's inherent dangers.
I believe that vaping should be treated like smoking. Regardless of the risk (if any) there is a nuisance factor and the users should step outside. It's courtesy.
I think everyone would agree that vaping is far safer than smoking and the only real threat here is to the multi-billion dollar tobacco industry. They're doing a good job of making e-cigs look just as dangerous.
If the smokers in your life are using e-cigarettes you should be singing from the hill-tops.
Mick I agree with you, but if your doctor told you that your fire place smoke was irritating your lungs and causing you problems would you go back and site next to it? Don't get me wrong I am all for vaping, it has to be better than the little death sticks themselves but common sense needs to be applied here. If the vaping is removed and the OP's son still suffers, then it must be something different and it could be resumed. Even if the company "ban" on vaping is only temporary to discover facts. Alternatively the OP's son could take time off (annual leave if apprentices are allowed such a thing ;) ) and see if it calms down. The point here is that the employer should be working with the employee to work out if the issue is work related and if it is then steps should be taken to safeguard the health of the employee. I don't think this post is an attack on vaping but rather some criticism of the employees H&S management and lack of desire to help an employee out. Firesafety, I would suggest your son needs a new job if the GP letter that both myself and Hilary recommended either doesn't materialise or doesn't help your situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
One months notice for what? I have worked with people who have had to give 3 months notice who have walked in gave their notice and walked straight out.
If it's the pay, sometimes you have to think health or pay.
Personally I think we get to involved in our kids lives. There is always a risk in everything they do and they need to see it for themselves. I understand he must be between 16-18 and the young workers assessment is needed in fact according to the regulations given in advance, but it still wouldn't off covered 'vaping' and I'm not sure it should!
Risk aversion is a dangerous thing kids lose the opportunities to develop both socially and mentally, insight and foresight of dangers. Education is wonderful but it has to be used correctly and kids also need to learn interpersonal, negotiation skills and tolerance.
Wrapping them in cotton wool and fighting thier battles will do them no favours as they move towards adult life. Yes I know youngsters are killed in work because of the percieved lack of skills, but kids/people drown, fall from trees, trip over, break legs playing football all sorts of things and most of us encourage them to be kids and enjoy life still.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Given how often batteries implode from this high street computer place is, I am very surprised that employees are allowed to smoke these things in the repairs room.
I would raise this further with their head office.... as your son is on work experience he is considered to be a young person. Therefore you can act on his behalf.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Thought he was an apprentice?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
He is an apprentice and a Young Person.
He works for the owner of the shop, doesn't have a head office, that's why the problem exists, very little knowledge of the law.
Today will be his final day on this job, he will be resigning and stating health issues as the reason.
His contracts states one month notice either side. We will try to convince the employer that my son will never go back so he might as well waive the notice requirement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Firesafety,
Apologies for earlier insensitive remark.
I guess the bottom line here is about decent behaviour, tolerance and respect for others, and in the context of your post: There are those who will literally blow smoke in your face, and those who will immerse you in a cloud of vapour - people issues.
Your son's issue is unlikely to be resolved amicably or by legal recourse.
What is unfortunate is the experience of your Son in his initial entry into the world of work - that I find very disappointing and I understand your frustration. I wish him well in his future endeavours.
On a related note on what is safe, what is acceptable and what is tolerable, I note you mention a GP issuing antibiotics for a chest infection, whilst another GP suggested a virus and advised rest. Again, not a perfect world, but worth pondering the relative global risks of second hand "vape" exposure and the widespread over-prescription of antibiotics?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
"The EU has revised the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD (2014/40/EU), or "TPD2", which must come into force by May 2016. TPD2 bans liquids being sold in bottles larger than 10ml, and any liquid stronger than 20mg/ml of nicotine (smokers looking to quit often start with 24mg/ml) and restricts the size of tanks. Manufacturers will also have onerous testing, reporting and monitoring obligations. Advertising the products will be prohibited" http://www.theregister.c...c_health_ecigs_analysis/And antibiotics are not over-prescribed. Just because the person had a virus does not mean the virus was the reason for antibiotics being prescribed. Co-morbidity old chap. You think they are over prescribed because you are told they are....but GPs' are seriously restricted in prescribing, their prescribing routines are examined several times a year. AND they are limited in the amount and frequency they are able to prescribe antiB in. I, for instance, have a lung-condition which leads me to have a more-or-less constant infection....which needs antibiotic prophylaxis for extended periods...that treatment is standard...but the GP cannot prescribe for that, so I am referred to an area specialty hospital for the same treatment the GP knows is needed, but is not allowed to prescribe. Meanwhile, GPs' are not allowed to prescribe measured and needed treatments, farmers are feeding cattle bucket loads of antibiotics...in the same antibiotic prophylaxis that my doctor is forbidden to do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Maybe so, john but globally ABs can be bought without prescription in so many countries, or ordered online. Not knocking UK gps, but there is a global problem is there not?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Ron, no problem, apology accepted.
My son has resigned from his apprenticeship.
The employer, who I spoke to on the phone asked why and I mentioned something in the workplace causing him health problems. I decided not to mention Vaping as that is not proven. I hope he thinks about it.
He said he was sorry, he has spent a lot of money and put a lot of time in, I said I have done the same and now have to start all over again.
This is not the first apprentice he has started and lost so I hope one day he will have a look back and see he has a problem.
We will provide a letter of resignation and will probably mention the Vaping in that, we do,believe that has been the cause Of the ill health.
Thanks for the interest everyone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
A good starter Young* Person's risk assessment should have been completed by the training provider prior to him going for/to the job and that should be in your possession at this time [*How old is your son as if he is under 18 he is not an adult so EXTRA care is required]
And perhaps* the employer is uneducated in H&S law so he needs support in the area so help him all U can as resigning has repercussions noting that all employment contracts are secondary etc. to law so if push comes to shove law wins but that may not mean that your son wins. Additionally the training placement people sound like they have no idea either. However they are very much target driven so let lots of things go in any case and people are glad of any job [slavery] so will put up with anything these days [*I am sure that he has no idea!]
PM me if you require 'on the ground' support
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
in your letter of resignation I would definitely mention that the vaporing [ noting COSHH etc.] may be the cause of the chest problems as if not in the future U may have to rely on evidence and U will not have any
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
"Maybe so, john but globally ABs can be bought without prescription in so many countries, or ordered online. Not knocking UK gps, but there is a global problem is there not"
Yes.
7 billion humans needing treatment for various illnesses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Ron Hunter wrote:Maybe so, john but globally ABs can be bought without prescription in so many countries, or ordered online. Not knocking UK gps, but there is a global problem is there not? Maybe you missed this: "Meanwhile, GPs' are not allowed to prescribe measured and needed treatments, farmers are feeding cattle bucket loads of antibiotics...in the same antibiotic prophylaxis that my doctor is forbidden to do" Up the road from me, cattle are being fed first-line AB to minimise risk of infection. Constant AB therapy. Meanwhile, people are denied AB. "In fact, the use in poultry of fluoroquinolones, a precious class of antibiotics, led to the development of resistant Campylobacter strains. Before fluoroquinolones were approved for use in agriculture in the United States, no fluoroquinolone resistance was reported in people unless they had previously taken the drugs for illness or traveled to a country that permitted their use in agriculture. But after the antibiotics were approved for agricultural use, resistant strains began emerging in samples taken from both humans and poultry. The correlation of the emergence of resistance with the use in animal systems was important evidence that agricultural use was the culprit" One article, among many, that have identified veterinary use of AB as a major source of AB resistance. My *DOG* gets more AB than I do!!!! (and at 25 quid a box)(plus the vet fee of 75 quid)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
bob youel wrote:A good starter Young* Person's risk assessment should have been completed by the training provider prior to him going for/to the job and that should be in your possession at this time [*How old is your son as if he is under 18 he is not an adult so EXTRA care is required]
And perhaps* the employer is uneducated in H&S law so he needs support in the area so help him all U can as resigning has repercussions noting that all employment contracts are secondary etc. to law so if push comes to shove law wins but that may not mean that your son wins. Additionally the training placement people sound like they have no idea either. However they are very much target driven so let lots of things go in any case and people are glad of any job [slavery] so will put up with anything these days [*I am sure that he has no idea!]
PM me if you require 'on the ground' support Cheers Bob. I am aware of all that but have tried to stay out of it as I am not the emoloyer's H&S person and yes the trainer should have been asserting their authority to get the YP assessment earlier, however as the employer does not consider Vaporing to be a hazard that would not have been considered. He quoted recent news of 95% better than cigarette smoking. I assure you vaporing will be the main reason for resignation as it has affected my son's health. He is 17.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Re Bob's posts above has anyone carried out COSHH assessments for vaporing?
If there are would you consider sharing one with me as it may be useful to us.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Seems a sad outcome, but it was unlikely the shop owner was going to give up. You are probably aware of this but there is currently and controversially a plan to ban their use in public spaces in Wales. May help your cause. Note list of those for and against at bottom. May be a source of info. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-33025872Chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Vaping must be the most ridiculous past time if adults could see that they look like babies sucking on a dummy. They wear them around the neck and continually puff on it. If they where smoking a real cigerette they would go out doors.
I was in the pub yesterday and the landlady asked people to go outside when vaping two young lads apologised and went out an elderly woman kicked up a fuss because it wasn't real smoking.
I packed in over 20 years ago 'cold turkey read a book by Alan Carr', so I would be fit enough to run around with my kids, 20 years later they both smoke and arn't fit enough to run around with me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
If you believe there is a causal link between the condition your son has experienced and the vaping you could ask for it to be put in the accident book. If he has been off work for more than seven days you can ask him why he has not reported it under RIDDOR. Then you could ask the local EHO to investigate. Then pop along to those nice people at "where there is a blame there is a claim" and see if they will take it on ......I can see some precedent case law here...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Why do we have to report to anyone. There is not a law against vaping in doors, some people can be susceptible to all sorts of things and are not suited to particular things. I worked cleaning in Fords halewood a few years ago, H&S was poor to say the least but there were people who couldn't do certain jobs, cleaning the primier booth because the paint burnt thier skin, working wih solvents because of breathing conditions, working at heights because they didn't like heights. Some times things don't go for you in a work place and you move on.
People walk away for all kinds of reasons and that's life. I quite sure the young lad will find something as sad as it might be for him at this time, but unfortunately at this time there is no legal requirement for the other employees to move outside so either get on with it or make the choice the lad and his parents made.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Away from the smoking debate - How is it possibly thought acceptable to allow an addictive drug such as Nicotine, to be released as an airborne pollutant into any enclosed space? Nicotine is an addictive stimulant. It is not part of a work place activity that can be controlled. It is the pure selfish activity of the individual.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
There is a Health and safety at work act the compels employers to look after the work environment which includes the breathing atmosphere. It was years before we were switched on to the effects of smoking so no one know what damage is being done.
The mere fact that any employer allows "vaping" during work hours or on its premises shows a total lack of control operationally never mind from any other functionality.
But if one accepts such standards as "they could clean the primer booth because the paint burnt their skin" then the response comes as no suprise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Oldroyd19659 wrote:There is a Health and safety at work act the compels employers to look after the work environment which includes the breathing atmosphere. It was years before we were switched on to the effects of smoking so no one know what damage is being done.
The mere fact that any employer allows "vaping" during work hours or on its premises shows a total lack of control operationally never mind from any other functionality.
But if one accepts such standards as "they could clean the primer booth because the paint burnt their skin" then the response comes as no suprise. 1 I said they 'couldn't', even wearing PPE they still couldn't and they didn't others did and 2, I like everyone else I have the right to an opinion and just because it is different to yours doesn't make it wrong. Vaping might be wrong but it is not illegal to do at present, I don't like it in workplaces or pubs, but like everyone I can choose. Until there is hard and fast evidence that it does damage, it will be overlooked at my place of work we treat it as smoking and therefore it is not smoked in the workplace, we didn't allow it in my last place of work either due to what we considered Health risks. The young lad or his Dr cannot be sure that it is vaper based, I don't know what else they do but it could be that, We seem to forget that one Dr said it was related but like always we take the advice of the one we want to believe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Or even: "if you wet your clothes and wear a face mask you can stay in there for 10 minutes. that's long enough to clear the track"
(supervisor: Stove enamel oven)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
First of all the HASAWA has a reverse bias in that an employer should be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the environment is safe. Given nobody really knows whether "vaping" is safe or not then a diligent approach of a responsible employer should remove the "potential risk" from the working environment ...very simple.
Yes you have a right to your opinion...that is the beauty of the democratic process and I totally agree with you. However given the reverse bias of HASAWA i would suggest your comment not your opinion was wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
First of all the HASAWA has a reverse bias in that an employer should be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the environment is safe. Given nobody really knows whether "vaping" is safe or not then a diligent approach of a responsible employer should remove the "potential risk" from the working environment ...very simple.
Yes you have a right to your opinion...that is the beauty of the democratic process and I totally agree with you. However given the reverse bias of HASAWA i would suggest your comment not your opinion was wrong as your opinion is entirely your to hold and express.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
"I don't like it in workplaces or pubs, but like everyone I can choose".
Why should anyone be forced into a choice of breathing an addictive stimulant, or leaving their job/avoiding the pub etc?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Letter of resignation handed in this afternoon, contains references to the Vaporing by three people at once and a conversation my son had with the employer re what the doctor said. Employer said it was a load of rubbish.
Also reference to possible need for COSHH assessment.
By the way I went cold turkey many years ago, didn't find it too difficult to stop smoking thirty a day. Immediately adicted to toffees instead ha ha.
Thank you all for your input, all opinions appreciated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Firesafety
I hope some of the comments were of use. I think your son has made the best decision here and the employer obviously needs a lesson in H&S and basic man/moral management.
I wish your son all the best and hope he finds another job soon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
sorry to hear that things have got to this point and how old is your sons as if he under 18 then an additional duty of care is expected and if U want further support/opinion PM me and it looks like again a placement provider has no idea and an employer has even less & if the employer needs support offer it to him as its not good for any party to have employment problems
after reading the health report [thanks Jay etc.] I find that it is all maybe's and very pro smoker with no regard for non smokers and I feel that people who inherit a heath problem or have one because of a no fault accident should be helped but those who bring things on to themselves should self manage the issue
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
paul-ps wrote:"I don't like it in workplaces or pubs, but like everyone I can choose".
Why should anyone be forced into a choice of breathing an addictive stimulant, or leaving their job/avoiding the pub etc?
Life is about choices, years ago before 05, people would choose to either sit in a smoky room for break, a pub, bus, train or go elsewhere, that was the way it was until smoking was stopped in public places. I'm not saying it is right I don't agree with it, but at present there is nothing to stop him, very little evidence to say it is harmful even the Dr's didn't have the same opinion. Doesn't it say somewhere in health and safety 'reasonably foreseeable' just because we all have opinions about it doesn't mean it is 'reasonbly foreseeable' that people will be effected by vaping in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
The effects of Nicotine are immediate in raising blood pressure, increasing the heart rate and stimulating the central nervous system. As a highly addictive substance, in the longer term a craving for more Nicotine may be triggered.
Everyone in that enclosed space is exposed to this, including (as often witnessed) children.
The step between being a non-smoker to smoker is significant. Vaping to smoking is a lesser step.
My other concern is that exhaled vapour may act as a vehicle for bacteria, in a way that breathing can not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
paul-ps wrote:The effects of Nicotine are immediate in raising blood pressure, increasing the heart rate and stimulating the central nervous system. As a highly addictive substance, in the longer term a craving for more Nicotine may be triggered.
Everyone in that enclosed space is exposed to this, including (as often witnessed) children.
The step between being a non-smoker to smoker is significant. Vaping to smoking is a lesser step.
My other concern is that exhaled vapour may act as a vehicle for bacteria, in a way that breathing can not.
I will take on board the nicotine argument but not the 'vehicle for bacteria'. If we took that into account we would never do anything at all, bacteria is all around I would be more worried about holding money, the amount on a coin is incredible, touching door handles, even touching the glass in shops. Everything yo touch has bacteria on it some more than others/ I think you would have trouble trying to prove that vapour was the course of a bacterial infection/virus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
I think with the suspension of a bacterial infection/virus in vapour, the likely spread and lifespan will increase. Watching a person exhale vapour recently, the spread was 2mtrs+ with the vapour hanging in the air for several seconds. you could not avoid breathing it in. To my mind, that provides an enhanced vehicle for bacterial infection/virus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Bare in mind, what you are breathing in has just seconds ago been through the respiratory system of another person. Vaping simulates sneezing with particles suspended/travelling in the air.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I can see were your coming from but I think that even in a Risk Assessment that's taking the extreme. If we looked at that then we would need to always add onto a risk assessment, what control measures we would introduce for someone sneezing. I am not sure that is what H&S was introduced for what is the 'significant harm' is it truly just created by work activity, vapour smoking in the sense it not a work activity, it's something done in the work place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Some of this product must also be ingested by both the user and passive user, yet there are no adequate controls over what concoction of chemicals/substances are used to create the liquid.
For all the reasons I have mentioned in previous posts, to allow vaping anywhere but in the open air, makes no sense to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
In all my posts I couldn't agree more, until we know it does no harm at all I think it is foolish.
But it's not illegal, and I would doupt that aCOSHH assessment is required.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I prepared an induction talk for a contractor I work for and it includes the following:
"CIGARETTE/CIGAR/PIPE SMOKING: Smoking must take place outside the rear of the unit and well away from the building so as to avoid others inhaling smoke and/or fumes from smokers.
This also applies to the use of “E-cigarettes” that may be confused as cigarette smoking, the fumes may be offensive to others.
Smoking E-cigarettes must be away from the harmful fumes of cigarettes.
Smoking must not take place in and around doorways."
That seems to be a good policy and has been accepted by the workforce.
Not a problem really, so why don't others do similar?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Besause as you said in an earlier post the boss didn't want to change and if the boss of the construction company didn't want to change then his workers would be the same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
IOSH forums home
»
Our public forums
»
OSH discussion forum
»
Vaping and the potential to cause chest problems.
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.