Has anybody seen the commercials for these "smokeless cigarettes"? They're downright creepy.

Posted By Anthony F on November 8, 2010, 11:35 AM

Why not just chew the nicotine gum, if you really need your fix??

Posted By AA on November 8, 2010, 2:32 PM

Personally I would ask to be re-seated if someone next to me was smoking an E-cigarette. They have not been tested by the FDA and therefore there is NO PROOF tthat the steam emitted from them is harmless. The FDA is in the process of trying to ban them in the US and they have already been banned in other countries and some states in the US. Bad move for this airline!!!!

Posted By Deborah on November 8, 2010, 5:11 PM

The fact is that for all intents and purposes it is a form of medication. A nicotine delivery system that uses water vapor. It is no more dangerous to others than when someone uses an asthma inhaler.

There is no smell of cigarette smoke, no carcinogens being distibuted in the air and it actually has fewer harmful chemicals than what we breathe in when we go to pump gas in our car. But hey, paranoia and the nanny state will always win out.

Posted By Larry S on November 9, 2010, 9:47 AM

Why would the airlines want to make it easier to get cancer?

Posted By Sandy on November 9, 2010, 3:57 PM

Electronic cigarettes are the only safe and effective method to stop smoking available. I have used one to quit smoking, and love it. I feel 20 years younger...

I also fly alot for work, and would never consider using one on an aircraft for two reasons. #1 the person next to me does not need to see me blowing steam, even if it is 100% safe. #2 Flight attendants have enough problems getting people to turn off phones, and buckle up. They don't need another problem.

I also think perfume should be outlawed on aircraft. Asthmatic people suffer, and the cost to taxpayers is astronomical.

Posted By Dale on November 9, 2010, 6:49 PM

No, I don't think they should be allowed.

Posted By DinM on November 11, 2010, 10:05 AM

People in this country are the most uptight & unhappy people. You guys bitch & complain about everything.

Posted By Lisa M. on November 11, 2010, 11:07 AM

Wear a patch

Posted By Christl on November 11, 2010, 11:23 AM

Ignorance can be corrected through education. Stupidity cannot be cured. Those who vote to allow can chose which camp they are in.

Posted By Richard on November 11, 2010, 11:27 AM

Hell no, they should not be allowed! We have fought too long and hard to get the smoking problem under control and get people to quit. This would encourage them to not quit and it is still not known how safe they are as a carcinogen and as a safety hazard because they have not been scientifically tested by the FDA or any other official organization.

Posted By Frank on November 11, 2010, 11:38 AM

I agree... please ban perfume, cologne!! In addition can we please ban crying babies and children, ppl that can't fit in the seat, people with poor hygiene, those that try to cram their luggage that should have been checked, oh and also burping and passing gas.... Let see, coughing too, no coughing as well as no touching.

Heck, lets just ban flying all together! Free country eh?

Posted By Gallo on November 11, 2010, 11:42 AM

I'm a smoker and I believe that there could be a section which would allow people like myself the comfort of our bad habit...

Posted By lisa on November 11, 2010, 11:59 AM

Not a good idea. No proof they are safe, and just more "bad manners" being encouraged. These are banned in much of USA. I'd not fly any airline that allowed these to be used on board. I can remember the smoke filled cabins of DC-7s and B707s. Horrible way to travel, glad no smoking finally won out.

Posted By Eagleeva on November 11, 2010, 12:10 PM

No, I don't think they should be allowed. For one, it's just another device that would have to be checked for the possibility of being turned into a bomb. And yes, I know some on this discussion would have you believe that all "No" responses indicate a "nanny state", but terrorism in the air WILL do that to one. Last thing, if those "cigarettes" are so darn safe, then why are they still banned in some places. Smoking habit? Chew gum.

Posted By Darlene on November 11, 2010, 12:58 PM

I'd take an e-cigarette user over someone who dips (and spits into a cup) any day of the year.

Posted By Matthew on November 11, 2010, 1:20 PM

The reason they're still banned in most places is because people don't understand what they are. It's not a cigarette and there is NO smoke involved anywhere in the process. What is exhaled is a harmless vapor (not technically water vapor, but the ingredients are all food-grade chemicals, no worse than what you eat in any processed food), which dissipates almost instantly. In fact, if a person using one didn't exhale for a few seconds after taking a draw, you'd likely never know what they were doing. (They don't always look like cigarettes - some look like pens.) E-cigs are a nicotine delivery system, and nicotine itself is NOT what gives people cancer. It's a chemical in a similar class to caffeine.

That said, there would be a faint odor of whatever flavor vapor the person is using (less strong than a perfume), so if they are allowed on flights, I would agree that they should be in designated rows only, like the smoking sections of yore.

Posted By Elizabeth on November 11, 2010, 1:32 PM

Is the airline getting a kickback from the manufacturer?

Posted By Pat on November 11, 2010, 1:50 PM

No. Aren't we trying to discourage people from smoking? This would only encourage them and support addiction.

Posted By Andre on November 11, 2010, 1:53 PM

Of course they haven't been proven as safe, but have not been banned anywhere outside of the US. 98% or more of prescription drugs sold and peddled by the pharmaceutical companies in this country have not been proven safe! Ever read the enclosure that's included with all Rx's? Keep the no smoking policy as it is and make it mandatory for those who buldge over the sides of their arm rests, to purchase two airline seats. I am sick of overweight travelers feeling entitled to take some of my seat! Most of the snack foods provided on the airlines are, in fact, hazardous to health. All children under the age of 10 should fly grouped together in the back of the plane to avoid disturbing other flyers, and never should an infant be allowed to fly in an adult's lap (to save a few dollars. If one can't afford to buy the seats needed, select another mode of transportation. All fragrances of any type should be banned due to the increasing incidence of allergic reactions experienced by more and more people.

Posted By Kristen on November 11, 2010, 2:22 PM

Homeland Security should investigate these electronic cigarette products to determine if these items can stll be MacGyvered into ignition devices (sans open flame) for explosives.

Posted By Elmer Gantry on November 11, 2010, 2:37 PM

I LOVE this idea. Also, the airlines could sell cute little kits for mainstreaming heroin. And an inflight video to show the kiddies how it's done. And in place of the stewardesses, some of those Amsterdam ladies. Flying heaven!!

Posted By Taylor on November 11, 2010, 2:52 PM

Sugar kills way more people than smoking, and let's face it it's also awfully offensive to watch people stuff their faces with carbs of any sort. E-cigs were banned because of pressure from tobacco companies and if the vapor is harmless and not too smelly then I say allow it. Ban donuts and pretzels instead.

Posted By mick on November 11, 2010, 3:08 PM

I have absolutely no problem with the e-ciggies.

I fly frequently and happily chew nicotine gum all the way leaving my fellow passengers---especially the hateful, prigs who despise the notion that anyone is engaging in a pleasurable activity, unaware that I'm doing so. To do otherwise, no matter how harmless, would invite the open derision of the self-righteous, hypocritical piggies (many of whom are probably gargling beer, wine or cocktails on the same flight). As a nicotine user, I find it more pleasant and much safer to "fly under the radar", as it were. These haters are a scary bunch! I'll admit though, using and enjoying my nicotine freely under their upturned, unsuspecting noses is a bit of a hoot and the joke is on them! HA!

Posted By Delta Pearl on November 11, 2010, 3:23 PM

I think the majority of conscious people agree that is is not just a bad idea it is just a bad idea! Why promote something that tax payers are ultimately going to have to pay for in the long run, reduced work performance, ill health cancer treatments>? We need to grow up and take a long hard ethical look and realize smoking is bad bad bad. can we be any clearer? There are no positive effects associated with the ingestion of poisonous gases and toxic substances, unless you see shin disease stroke lung and heart disease, emphysema, and premature skin aging as positive. . As another reader mentioned. I too want to be isolated from the unknown and unwanted risk of any spill over of poisons. I'd even pay more to fly in a smoke free (even supposedly artificially) environment.

Posted By James Welch on November 11, 2010, 3:32 PM

Just give the damn fools a free nipple to suck - make them happy.

Posted By Jimm on November 11, 2010, 3:54 PM

Nicotine is a poison. There also other poisons emitted in the vapor.
What non-smoker who is aware of the poisons would want to be exposed to that?
To say that an e-cigarette is safe is a lie.

Posted By Stan Meyer on November 11, 2010, 4:06 PM

NO, it should definitely not be allowed! I can not believe this is even being considered. How many steps back do we have to keep taking!

Posted By robyn on November 11, 2010, 4:57 PM

I'm having a hard time understanding why those who oppose are so bent out of shape. The dangers of smoking are just that - SMOKING. Nicotine in and of itself is just a stimulant similar to caffeine. Some of you are hell bent on punishing those who use tabacco in any form. Maybe we should ban coffee and alcohol on flights as well. The person sitting next to you may not want to smell the steam coming off your hot cup of coffee or sit next to someone who has had a couple of bloody marys and gets chatty or loud. If a smoker gets on the plane and buys a pack of $10.00 smokeless cigarettes, maybe he would decide that they were pretty good and use them all the time, putting you that much closer to your objective of a smokeless world. I would think that an alternative like that could only help - unless it's not about health and smell at all, but a control issue on your part.

Posted By Sherrie on November 11, 2010, 5:19 PM

Why have flight attendants and passengers think someone is smoking a cigarette and causing a disturbance. People make it through flight now without having to light up. Keep them off the airplanes.

Posted By Frank on November 11, 2010, 6:18 PM

How long before some knucklehead figures with all these people smoking e-cigs they won't be noticed if they smoke a real one?!

Posted By rudy on November 11, 2010, 7:17 PM

I say ban them.. forget the greater debate on health effects for a moment and realize that I don't want some stranger's wet breath on me.

Posted By tits mcgee on November 11, 2010, 7:18 PM

I have never read a greater amount of spew from ignorant people than this collection. Everyone forgets that without tobacco, the American south would not have been colinized for another century. Once again, most are just ignorant children saying what their favorite tslking said, garbage. These are the same people that feel like the Constitution is out of date. I say, go back to europe, theylove socialism as much as hitler did.

Posted By mike on November 11, 2010, 7:57 PM

Ecigarettes are harmless. If smokers choose to smoke them then they should not have to undergo such critisisms as have been written here. The vapor is only water which I would rather breath then perfume or "bugs". Maybe everyone should have a complete check up including lab work before being allowed on an airplane as I surely don't want to get some illness. As for all of the nasty colognes please don't apply it before getting on an airplane. Plus maybe everyone should have to shower at the airport so everyone knows that it is done.

Posted By Sandy on November 11, 2010, 9:07 PM

I can't bring lotion or a bottle of water on a plane, but it's ok to have this electronic device??

Posted By holly on November 11, 2010, 9:10 PM

Tobacco is downright unhealthy and burning tobacco has a very nauseating stench to it.

I refuse to sit next to a smoker and if a smoker lights up, I immediately make a wide circle around him or her in public. One of my pet peeves are smokers who light up in entry ways even if outdoors forcing non-smokers to walk through a cloud of nasty smelling tobacco smoke.

If people are going to smoke on planes, I will refuse to fly on planes. I am sensitive to tobacco smoke. It makes me cough and it stings my eyes.

I can't imagine the stupidity of subjecting especially young children, babies, people who are very elderly or ill to tobacco smoke after all that has been said about lung cancer, asthma and other respiratory ailments linked to and/or aggrivated by exposure to tobacco smoke.

Why force people who are in an enclosed environments from which there is no escape for hours on end like planes for example to a nasty, evil-smelling, sickening and dirty practice like smoking? It's bad enough to have your clothes, skin and hair reeking from someone else's smoke without having to cough as well from it.

Ever have to be next to someone who had just smoked? Even if they have finished the cigarette, when they walk into a place, the air around them immediately smells terrible. There is something about tobacco smoke that clings to everything for a long while include the smoker and his and her clothes. It coats everything with a malodorous and sticky film that won't leave unless the smoker showers well and washes his or her clothes soon.

So some of the airlines to European are allowing this insanity? I plan to ask if a flight is non-smoking before I book a seat on it. I am shocked that an airline would hold non-smokers, children, and infants and the elderly captive for hours on end in an enclosed space for which there is literally no escape once the plane is in the air with inconsiderate people smoking.

Posted By Morgan on November 11, 2010, 9:15 PM

As a smoker I think it'd be a good thing. I've wanted to go to Ireland for years but the thought of a flight that long without my cig fix is awful. If no one else is subjected to the effects, what's the problem?

Posted By Penny on November 11, 2010, 10:05 PM

NO smoking on flights over 8 hours.
OR scented smoking OK

Posted By stephen russell on November 11, 2010, 11:21 PM

Nice screed, Morgan, but you obviously didn't read either the article or the descriptions of e-cigarettes in the above comments. THERE IS NO SMOKE, no burning tobacco, no poisonous chemicals, no lingering odor. There just isn't, but hey, don't let facts get in the way of your ranting.

Posted By Anna on November 12, 2010, 8:49 AM

Thank you Anna! I couldn't have said it better. Reading the article should be a prerequisite to posting a comment.

Posted By Sherrie on November 12, 2010, 9:32 AM

Sandy, airlines shouldn't care how easy it is for you to get cancer, they care about getting you to a destination. That's there only business, duh?

Posted By Robert on November 12, 2010, 11:55 AM

There is no such thing as a FREE LUNCH. If the airlines are going to provide this FREE then the cost is picked up in the price of EVERYONES ticket. Maybe we should get smokers to provide their own (baby) nook.

Posted By Joe Vukonich on November 12, 2010, 12:01 PM

Should Airlines Allow E-Cigarettes onboard?

Absolutely not. Smoking is a disgusting habit which should not be perpetrated in any form. It is not only a known cause of heart and lung disease, cancer and developmental problems (in the fetus and also small children) for the imbiber himself or via second-hand smoke to those around him, the expenses involved in health care for those who are afflicted are not simply borne by those who smoke; all of us are paying our shares, too.

If E-Cigs actually had the ability to cure the smoking habit, physically and mentally, then, I would say, 'Rock On!', but they don't do anything but feed the smoker's habit, which is only giving that person permission to continue a bad habit onboard, whether or not it affects the persons sitting nearby. What kind of a message is this sending? "Go right ahead and do what you want, and don't worry about anybody else or their concerns." I say, we have enough problems with lack of respect toward fellow passengers on flights today, we don't need anything like this to make it worse.

Posted By Jen on November 12, 2010, 12:50 PM

Joe V (1st paragraph and Jen (2nd paragraph)

Who said anything about FREE? The airline mentioned in the article is selling the things for $10.00/pack. They don't hurt anyone. There is no smoke!!! No smell! No danger to anyone. With the income from selling these alone, the airline might decide that they don't need to charge YOU for every little thing just to keep their doors open.

I was a smoker and Nicorette has a similar product that is a cartridge that fits into a little cigarette type holder. It was prescribed by my doctor. THAT IS HOW I QUIT SMOKING.

The government is making so much off of smokers that there's no way they are going to outlaw cigarettes. Where do you think that most of the $5.00+/pack is going? If they were to encourage smokers to use these instead of smoking, maybe the Tobacco companies would wise up, manufacture and promote these to insure their own future existence. It would be a win/win situation.

I agree that cigarette smoke is horrible and a danger to those around it, but again...THERE ISN'T ANY SMOKE.

Posted By Sherrie on November 12, 2010, 1:42 PM

I'm very negative towards smokers. Smoking causes litter, it pollutes, the impact on others and the environment is terrible. How many smokers actually use an ashtray? And how many of you defending your habit haven't thrown a cigarette on the ground? We already have a huge impact on the environment by flying, now to add more plastic garbage to the earth just for a nicotine fix? And never mind you look like junkies smoking those things. How do you defend that?

And, yes, I'd ban perfume too. It pollutes the air and forces others to breathe it in.

Posted By Pam on November 12, 2010, 2:15 PM

Oh, just give up the filthy habit.

Posted By jc on November 12, 2010, 6:21 PM

Electronic smoking in an airplane, a confined space, is wrong! Innocent members of society have spent years getting sick or even dying because of this selfish addiction of these people who can't do without nicotine. They should have to use a nicotine patch if they can not control themselves. Once again, the few out of control get preferred treatment over those who want to be healthy and wise. Does any of this special treatment for smokers have anything to do with airline profits?

Posted By Ray on November 12, 2010, 6:32 PM

NO!

Posted By Loup Garou on November 13, 2010, 12:08 PM

Smokers should be allowed to go outside just like many public buildings.

Posted By Lumpy on November 13, 2010, 6:58 PM

It's pretty simple. These e-cigs contain no smoke and aren't a danger to the user or anyone around them. Similar devices have been and still are used to help smokers quit. Why on earth couldn't someone use these as there is no danger to anyone? Seems to me like it isn't any worse than having to sit next to someone chewing on their gum like a regurgitating cow, hearing the beeps and clicks from electronic games or inhaling wafts of sickening perfume.

The denigration and rudeness from some people who left comments here are as intolerant and disrespectful as the smokers who don't care about blowing smoke in your face. And the ignorance is striking. Before going borderline 'racist' over this issue, read up on the FACTS of this little device. No sense going on a hate campaign when you don't know what it's really all about! It's interesting to see how some comments are close to sounding something like 'the Aryan race is the supreme race...'. Huh!

Posted By CBT on November 14, 2010, 11:23 AM

People are saying that it would encourage people to smoke. F*** OFF! It's not up to you to encourage or discourage what I do to my body. You don't pay my healthcare premiums. The vapor is harmless! Damn I went to bed and woke up in a brainwashed Communist country!

Posted By Jim on November 15, 2010, 3:42 AM

Having read lab reports of whats in the vapor, I would appreciate it if the airlines fogged the whole cabin with it (PG kills airborne bacteria). However, people that don't know are likely to have a panic attack at the mere sight of an e-cig, so I suspect they won't fly:-)

Posted By MarkE on November 15, 2010, 8:04 PM

I can't believe how ignorant people can be. Obviously they are opposed to just about everything.
I just started using the e-cig. There is no smell. Believe me. My boss can always tell when I've had a cigarette. With e-cigs; shes clueless. You prudes probably don't think twice when you do drugs, pop diet pills, slam down booze, shoot botox or board a plane smelling like garlic, onions and BO. Plenty of times I've had to share part of my seat with you on the plane. But I've kept my mouth shut and sucked it up. WHY DON'T YOU

Posted By Jane on November 15, 2010, 10:06 PM

Well put, Jane. And ditto on the comments about actually reading the article before posting a comment! Let's face it--the banning of things is getting out of control. To the people worried about "inspecting" ecigs and the threat of hiding some sort of "explosive" inside--please re-read the article; it states that the flight attendants/airline would make the ecigs available for either sale or for free, depending on the airline (I believe they only said one airline was considering providing them for free). Therefore, they are no more a threat than all of the other items sold by the flight attendants, and I don't hear anyone getting their panties in a wad because there aren't extra inspections of the Coca-cola, V8, or pretzel packets.

Speaking of coca-cola and junk food in general, for all those fearful of the "chemicals" from ecigs or cigs in general, have you read your food labels? Most of what many Americans eat are FULL of chemicals!! as is the air you breath on ANY street with traffic--WORSE than the one breath of smoke you might get from smokers "near an entrance", as one commenter wrote. There is mass whining when people have to breath in 1-2 breaths of second-hand smoke, OUTDOORS of all places, but no one whines that they walk down a street or in a parking lot full of way more carbon dioxide emitted from cars--even "green" cars...guess what?? more than cigarettes!! And some might say, "Well, we need cars to get around...." Actually, many Americans could bike or walk to work (or use public transit), but they don't. Hey, maybe we should ban cars for people over a certain weight--they could use the exercise to burn weight!!! Two years ago, obesity surpassed smoking as the "#1 cause of preventable death," so hey--let's ban EATING for people who are overweight, and make them walk or bike everywhere!

Sound crazy? So do all the comments whining about the healthcare costs of smoking because people choose to do it. Before you judge them, look at your own lifestyle choices--the sedentary lifestlye of most Americans, coupled with disgusting diets (and I agree--I don't want to sit next to an overweight person on a plane eating a donut, as someone said--THAT is offensive to me!)....these are costing our healthcare system. No one is forming a lynch mob for fat people, though, are they??!

Airlines should be able to do whatever they want--if you don't like a policy, instead of whining, try this: JUST DON'T FLY THAT AIRLINE. But please--STOP trying to make everyone follow your own personal set of rules. Bossy, bossy.

And as a final note: all this garbage about such-and-such being the "#1 cause of preventable death"....existential awakening here: death is not preventable!!! I am a healthy, active female in her late 20s, and I hereby acknowledge that I too will die!! And so will all of you nuts trying to prevent death and trying to dictate to others what they need to do to "prevent" death--it's inevitable!!! And it's not necessarily so that a smoker/ecig user is going to die a miserable death while you, you prodigal non-smoker, die comfortably. It's all a gamble. Can we please unwad our panties and enjoy life a bit, instead of tsk-tsking with all the laws and banning???

Posted By Laura on November 15, 2010, 11:05 PM

Oh please, all you that say no. How many of you want the world to smell your purfume? Seriously? Please, think about that next time I almost throw up on you. Try doing a bit of research before you go spouting off. E-cigs would sure make all the freakin crying babies a lot easier to handle.

Posted By Karrin on November 17, 2010, 2:42 PM

E cigs do not smell and are certainly less offensive than your seat "buddy" reaking of booze - which they do sell on planes, that sell makes me nauseas yet I say nothing. What about the overweight person next to you with thighs spilling onto your seat, the person reaking of perfume - most of us find that offensive and a very large portion of people are allergic - do you even care that you are making me sick, but you'll whine about my e smoke with no odour. AIRLINES MAKE ALL YOUR FLIGHT SCENT FREE. Body odour next to you for 6 hours, now that's nasty. Crying babies, people with colds, coughs even the flu all fly and you say nothing, but use an e cig and you are ready to lynch the culprit. How many of you puritans actually read the article (not many) before jumping on the band wagon. Thank goodness airlines have limited the size of carry ons - nothing worse than standing/sitting while some person tries to cram an over size case above you - now that could do some damage if it fell on you, but an e cig is not going to smell of booze, cry for the entire flight, take up a portion of my seat, cover itself with perfume, fart or burp. Get a life you puritan non smokers. I am a non smoker by the way.

Posted By Crystal on November 25, 2010, 12:51 PM

These e-cigarettes are making a mist (not heating a liquid to make a steam) of mostly propylene glycol with a chemistry set of other chemicals. Check out the FDA website. If you like to breath second hand propylene glycol, acetonitrile, methylene glycol, ... then you will be happy sitting in a plane with people 'smoking' these e-cigarettes. In addition some of the e-cigarettes are refillable by the user so if there is some other drug aside from nicotine they would like to be puffing they could make a solution of that drug and be blowing it in your face.

Posted By Michael D on November 28, 2010, 1:25 PM

I was addicted to ciggs for years and I knew it was deteriorating my health. It’s those 4000 to 7000 chemicals found in cigarette smoke that kill you. Seriously, you are breathing a controlled brush fire every time you light up.
So I started researching E-cigs for months before I took the plunge and bought my first e-cig.

The nicotine used in e-cigs is the same as what is put in "stop smoking patches" like Nico Derm. There is no medical evidence that nicotine by itself causes cancer or other ailments associated with smoking traditional cigarettes. And whereas traditional tobacco contain about 4000 + chemicals, {many very dangerous to your health} e-cig liquid has about 4 and of which the bulk is Poly Glycol liquid or Vegetable Glycol which are both food grade FDA approved compounds. It’s also used in pharmaceuticals to administer medication, and was surely the inspiration for e-ciggs.
After ordering my first E-cig, I stopped smoking cigarettes completely the same day I have not smoked a traditional cigarette in 11 months. The betterment of my health without smoking tobacco has been profound. Now my blood pressure has lowered with no other lifestyle changes other than stopping tobacco usage and changing to e-cigs.
I can now puff my water vapor everywhere. Even my wife doesn’t complain when I use it in the car.
If the USA government bans these, its not because they care about “Joe - Blows” health, it’s because they haven’t figured out how to tax the eyeballs out of consumers like they do for traditional cigarettes.
E-ciggs are the biggest threat to the tobacco industry in the history of the world. You can bet the cigarette companies are lobbying their Washington cronies to ban e-ciggs altogether.
Keeping e-ciggs legal is a matter of life and death for many people who are hopelessly addicted to cigarettes.
Also if you put a blind fold on someone and a person sitting next to them was smoking an e-cigg, I doubt the person with the blind fold would have any idea.
The only downside to using them next to someone on a plane is the visual wisps of water vapor might be distracting.
====================
“Government doesn’t create jobs, except for the government”
“Government doesn’t create wealth; it redistributes other people’s wealth”

Posted By David on December 14, 2010, 1:14 PM

If people are determined to kill themselves, someone will invent a way to do it to make money. And money-grubbing airlines will enable ...for the same reason. That will make it harder for the "addicted" to get UN-addicted.
I know it helped me quit when I could not smoke more places and it became less and less convenient to find a place to feed my habit.

If someone is "hopelessly addicted" , ie has NO willpower,and does not care about quality of life or length of his/her life, of course we should enable them to smoke everywhere ...but then NO subsidized payment for medical bills for cancer or for respiratory illnesses.

Posted By MS on January 3, 2011, 4:02 PM

Well to all u who are opposed to this u are ignorent why should I have to put up with your knees in my back elbows in my ribs and smelling ur discusting purfume and suffer a nick fit if I want to breath pg water and nicotine then I should airlines should cater to my needs too and for all of u who say I pay for your helth care when u get cancer and die well chew on this I pay more taxes than u so shove that in ur pipe and smoke it no pun intended

Posted By ashley on January 28, 2011, 12:26 AM

Mike - YOu realize of course that A lot of european carriers allow esmoking. Maybe that socialism breeds people who GET ALONG. Have you even been to Europe.

Posted By cwi on May 10, 2011, 11:14 PM

Hello - Me and my husband extremely admire the lengthy effort you have done for this content. Actually, my dad and I have also been writing a website on exotic fruit. Your blog's information has been a great guide for our own site. Keep up the amazing content! Looking forward to seeing more info from you! We just added this blog to my own bookmarks.

Posted By Billi Hillsman on February 24, 2012, 5:25 PM

Ich hätte nie gedacht, dass ich lesen Blogs genießen, aber dieser Artikel ermutigten mich. Thx

Posted By odszkodowanie on March 5, 2012, 12:39 PM