Re: Vaping does normalise smoking
Smoking is already considered normal.
And has never been 'un-normal'.
There is absolutely no evidence of a gateway effect (which is what the normalisation argument always points to), there never has been; the only gateway the evidence shows - and population level data is good evidence - is of a gateway for smokers, away from smoking.
Relevant data from ASH, an anti smoking, and frankly anti-vaping org
"Use of the devices is confined to current and ex-smokers and use amongst never smokers remains negligible and has not changed since 2012. Over time the proportion of current electronic cigarette users who smoke tobacco has fallen and the proportion who are ex-smokers has risen (figure 1)."
" In March 2013 an additional survey of children aged 11 to 18 was conducted, the ASH Smokefree Youth survey. This has been repeated annually since then. For use among children please see the ASH factsheet. In summary the ASH Smokefree Youth Survey shows that regular use of electronic cigarettes amongst children and young people is rare and is confined almost entirely to those who currently or have previously smoked"
You can have your 'concerns' and 'worries', I'll stick with actual evidence using data relevant to the population, by an organisation that is tacitly (and in the past has been openly) anti-vaping, because even the don't agree with your assessment of the situation.
"Today they'd love vaping to be allowed everywhere, including No Smoking areas, because it makes it harder to spot anyone smoking tobacco"
That would be because it's not tobacco, and it's not smoking. This is fairly straightforward stuff.
"try distinguishing a vaper from a smoker on CCTV. "
You look for hte one who's always leaving a trail of smoke behind them. That's the thing with lit tobacco - it doesn't go out between puffs.
That, and you know, cigarettes don't have a fist sized, brightly coloured battery pack attached to them...
"Besides, who knows what's in the vaping goo? Of course, they'd never flavour it with anything addictive or something that research showed created a craving for tobacco, would they?"
The people doing serious research into harm from vaping, and who can't find any notable harm, even to the end user, and strong evidence of a lack of harm (or barely any interaction) to bystanders.
And all your arguments? Half truths and outright lies pushed by none other than the public health bodies who are repeatedly told that their facts are out of date, being taken out of context, or flat out lies.
What industry does that remind you of...?