lets have a civil factual debate aboug E-Cigs

[Half-Century Man]

28. On the second hand vapors.

Years ago, I had a chemistry professor (a Phd) who pointed out that the claims about second hand smoke being so deadly had no real concrete proof. Because the strictly adhere to the scientific method, the study groups would have had to have had identical lives excepting for the exposure to tobacco smoke in the environment. He did clarify, in response to a thermonuclear melt down by a couple first year nursing students, that there was a mountain of circumstantial evidence.

I don't know if a comprehensive study has been done strictly following the scientific method on the effects of second hand smoke on genetically identical persons living near similar lives. Personally I'm satisfied by the many years worth and the monstrous amount of circumstantial evidence to agree about legislation on limiting exposure to second hand smoke.

I don't know if e-cigs have been around long enough to generate the amount circumstantial evidence which tips the scale in favor of suppressive legislation.

Question: anyone know anything about second hand smoke legislation in states which have or are moving toward marijuana decriminalization?