State and local governments have been tightening the noose on tobacco for decades now—and employers, eager to reduce health costs and sick days and increase attendance and productivity, started with banning smoking in most workplaces and then added employer-sponsored smoking cessation programs to the mix. Then, just when it seemed that the whole endeavor was reaching the two-steps forward mark, it took one giant step backwards, as e-cigarettes exploded into the market.
vchal / iStock / Getty Images Plus / Getty Images
About 3% of U.S. adults are e-cigarette users, while about 15% are cigarette smokers—but the number of cigarette smokers is decreasing, while the number of e-cigarette users is on the rise. “Vaping”—smoking e-cigarettes—grew from a $416 million industry in 2010 to an $8 billion industry in 2015. Among minors, vaping has surpassed cigarette smoking.
Is this bad news—or good?
A Healthier Alternative?
Health-wise, e-cigarettes have been heavily promoted as a far less damaging alternative to tobacco cigarettes. Like their tobacco-based predecessors, they offer users a fast-acting chemical hit—generally of nicotine, the same chemical that makes tobacco cigarettes so addictive—but without the tar, carbon monoxide, and many of the other chemicals that make cigarettes so toxic to the body. In support of this position, defenders of e-cigarettes cite a 2015 review by Public Health England that estimated that e-cigarettes carry only about 5% of the health risks of traditional cigarettes. They also point out that more than half of younger users don’t even smoke for the nicotine, opting for flavor-only e-cigarettes.
Public health professionals on the other side of the argument are quick to point out that nicotine alone is bad for you: it’s bad for your heart, probably bad for your blood vessels, and extremely bad for brain development in both the teens who favor them and in the unborn. They also note that we don’t have much in the way of long-term data on the health effects of e-cigarettes—the product has been around for barely a decade, after all, and “no data showing that they’re harmful” is not the same thing as “plenty of data showing that they’re safe.” Even the flavor-only vaping liquids contain toxic chemicals, including formaldehyde and other volatile organic chemicals; flavoring chemicals like diacetyl, acetoin, and 2,3-pentadione that can lead to serious lung disease; and heavy metals like nickel and tin.
Employers should also be aware that users who don’t vape nicotine may be opting for other hazardous substances, like marijuana: just under 10% of young users currently report vaping marijuana, but that number may increase as recreational marijuana use is legalized in more U.S. states. And, as a final caveat, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) notes that mislabeling of vaping products is common—users may not know exactly what they’re smoking.
Vaping in the Workplace
So, how should employers respond to vaping at work and to workers’ contention that it’s a far healthier alternative to tobacco cigarettes? Taking their cue from the CDC and antismoking advocates, many have banned or severely limited vaping at work. Others have seen it as an opportunity. After all, isn’t reducing exposure to hazardous chemicals by changing the product or the process a legitimate tool for creating a healthier workplace? Couldn’t it be a step along the road to reducing smoking-related health effects?
Tomorrow, we’ll look at the case for (and against) vaping as a smoking cessation strategy.