Advice needed for first time non-smoker with cigarette smoke allergies!

[usha]

(This was copied and pasted from Medicine Net)

What does an allergy mean?

 

An allergy refers to a misguided reaction by our immune system in response to bodily contact with certain foreign substances. It is misguided because these foreign substances are usually harmless and remain so to non- allergic people.

 

Somehow, this doesn't seem to put cigarette smoke in the same category with pollen and peanuts.

[greeneg]

Usha, I think that what you are missing here is that it is not the allegen, but the reaction to that allergen that is important. Because these reactions are so highly indiviualized, it is very difficult to generalize about how serious they may or may not be: most people eat peanuts without difficulty unless they happen to choke on them. There are certainly other people, though, who will die if they eat a peanut. Just one peanut.

 

It is well known that cigarette smoke can produce very serious allergic reactions in sensitive individuals. Those particular people have to avoid areas where there are significant concentrations of tobacco smoke. What is a "significant" concentration? The answer is one to which your immune system reacts, that's how individualized the situation is. How serious is the reaction? Depends on how much reaction your immune system produces. Status Asthmaticus ( a severe asthma attack not controlled by inhalers or other usual methods of treatment) can and often does require hospitalization and very aggressive therapy. It can be fatal. Cigarette smoke certain can produce Status Asthmaticus. I have seen this in my own practice on a number of occasions.

 

The use of the term "misguided" by Medicine.net probably understates the potential serious nature of some reactions: I would tend to use "inappropriate" rather than "misguided".

 

Of course, that's one of the problems with Doctors: ask any two of them a question and you will usually get at least three answers. :)

[uktog]

We were on Summit two years ago in a balcony cabin. Our initial cabin reeked so severely of smoke that we had to have our cabin changed. I don't mean that it smelled a little of smoke, but it was REALLY HORRIBLE! The previous occupants must have smoked the entire cruise, lighting one cig from the other. I'm not one of those fanatics who goes around preaching and complaining about smoke in most places, but this was our cabin and we were going to have to be in there for 10 days. The staff worked hard to get us a different cabin but since we were in Concierge Class "we might not have another cabin available." I told here I didn't care.....put me in an inside cabin on deck 2 before I spend 10 days in my present cabin. Thankfully, they were able to find us another cabin just down the hall from our initial one. When the Concierge came down to our cabin to help us move herself, she was horrified at the smell. She could not believe that a cabin smelled that bad. For the next 6 or 7 days of the cruise, every time we passed our smoke filled cabin, there was the sound of machines running inside - I'm sure some kind of air purification system.

 

Having said that, we have cruised 7 times, and this was the only problem with smoke in a cabin that we have ever experienced. Smoke in a lounge can sometimes be an annoyance, but for the most part, if you stay on the "non smoking" side of the ship, you will have very little problem.

 

Robert

Robert

We were not so lucky - we had booked a Celebrity Suite - so no option to open doors and windows. We were told as the ship was full, no swaps were possible. The rooms stank so the only option was to have some special cleaning process done each day when we were out - so instead of smoke the place stank of chemicals. I was a little disappointed than no one from the ships management came to even say sorry to us however, we put it down to a rather badly managed ship - previously we have alwasy had courtesy visits from the Housekeeped or hotel director - I am also assuming we were just unlucky so will carry on with all our bookings as before. To the OP if you are really allergic, I would be careful as there are a lot of situations on board where people smoke and you cannot guarantee that your cabin will be smoke free

[usha]

.

Of course, that's one of the problems with Doctors: ask any two of them a question and you will usually get at least three answers. :)

 

Yes, that reminds me of a joke:

What do you call the guy who graduates last in his class from medical school?

 

 

Doctor:rolleyes:

[greeneg]

Yes, that reminds me of a joke:

What do you call the guy who graduates last in his class from medical school?

 

 

Doctor:rolleyes:

 

 

Same as the guy who was first in his class, Doctor. ;)

[bostom]

Sorry, Usha, no flame intended here, but you are simply wrong on this one. There are any number of scientific papers which have been written which strongly implicate both active and passive smoking in allergic reactions, both local and systemic.

 

Can you cite one? I ask as the American Lung Association would seem to disagree with you. From their website under "irritants"

 

"Cigarette smoke, air pollution, strong odors, aerosol sprays and paint fumes are some of the substances which irritate the tissues of the lungs and upper airways. The reaction (cough, wheeze, runny nose, watery eyes) produced by these irritants can be identical to those produced by allergens.

 

Cigarette smoke is a good example, because it is highly irritating and can trigger asthma. Most people are not allergic to cigarette smoke; that is, there is no known immunologic reaction. Nevertheless, this irritant can be more significant than any allergen."

 

That said, as an ex-smoker who more frequently than he'd prefer lands in ER's with episodes - some more dramatic than others - of ideopathic anaphylaxis, I'm not a proponent of smoking, nor of taking unpleasant vacations. But I think it's important to make a distinction between what bothers people (right now it's dry leaves for me) vs what could kill them. And while smoke - of cigarettes or anything else - has never been implicated in my problems, I find the smell repulsive and wonder now how anyone ever could stand to be in my presence when I smoked. The world is (or at least was) filled with people far more tolerant than I am today of the smell of cigarette smoke.

 

The simple fact is that no line (except, once, Carnival, with one ship) has ever offered a smoke-free ship. As I don't see it referenced here, perhaps it wasn't a financial success. If it is still a possibility it'd be a good alternative. No doubt there are those who think that the experience on Carnival wouldn't measure up but that pales compared to the potential medical problem.

 

The OP is correct to have concerns and - from all the evidence - ought to avoid a ship where smoking is permitted onboard if they think it will cause a problem. But to conflate what is annoying (as many posters have) with what is life-threatening is like comparing apples to oranges.

[QQRZZA]

I made the mistake of starting a thread asking "Do any of the cruise lines offer non-smoking cruises?". I thought that this was a legitimate non-judgemental question. I got flamed. Seems some folks are allergic to even the discussion of a possible non-smoking venue.

 

Having been treated for allergies and on allergy shots for over 30 years, I must agree with the good doctor who points out that the "allergic reaction" is the key issue. Avoidance of triggers is the first rule of protection, then mitigation, medication... In addition to the usual variety of grasses, mites and critters, I get airway constriction from smoke, even the remnants left after the smoke has visibly cleared. We can parse definitions of what "allergic" means, but some folks do react in asmatic fashion to smoke, whether from tobacco, or something else. It's not their choosing, nor their self-richetousness, it's a plysical fact. They have every right to enquire about the environment as it legitimately effects their health and enjoyment, particularly on a ship which is a restricted space.

 

We have never experienced a cabin with smoke problems, but we have had balconies that we were unable to use due to smokers nearby. I have seen cabins which were receiving incoming tobacco smoke in their ventillation system.

 

I am able to cope successfully, and we enjoy cruising several times a year. The original question of this thread is important and it should be noted that, depending on your individual reaction to tobacco smoke, it can be a problem. Most ships are full, so the possibility of being reassigned to a different cabin is slim.

[greeneg]

If anyone is interested, a google search for "Smoking Asthma Allergy" will bring up about 81 pages of reference materials.

 

Certainly not all of those articles will trumpet the call that smoking causes all of these things, nor have I stated that it does. But it is certainly a recognized risk factor and trigger in Allergic Individuals.

 

What I have tried to say is that smoking is much more than an irritant, it is a recognized and significant factor in the development and progression of allergic disorders, particularly respiratory one in succeptible individuals.

 

Runny nose, runny watery eyes, headaches to full blown episodes of respiratory distress: if smoking produces this sort of picture for you then you need to avoid a smoking environment.

 

Please rest assured that I am not inflating the significance of this; I have personal experience with patients in clinical practice where smoking was definitely the culprit in asthma attacks requiring hospitalization and respirator treatment. It doesn't happen to everyone, but it can.

 

For most people, including myself, a smoking environment is another kind of irritant, a non-medical one. There are people however, for whom this is a true risk and that does need be recognized.

 

To the best of my knowledge, the only cruise line where smoking is not permitted inside the ship is Windjammer Barefoot. As Bostom pointed out, the Carnival experiment was not successful and that ship reverted to the usual Carnival practice. In a way, I guess that it is too bad that it worked out that way, but economic reality in the Cruise Industry says that smoking has to be tolerated on board. Perhaps someday that will change.

[gonetoexplore]

I want to thank everyone for their advice, shared experiences, similar concerns about exposure to cigarette smoke, and the medical discussion as to whether one can actually be allergic to cigarette smoke. I never imagined I would spark such a technical discussion!

 

I do think, however, that we are not going to book a cruise and will unlikely book one without designated non-smoking rooms. I have heard Oceania has designated non-smoking rooms, but the prices are rather high, and our travel agent didn't recommend Oceania for a first-time cruiser. The thought of not being able to switch rooms seems just too risky for us, due to my sensitivities/allergies (choose one) to cigarette smoke. I had come to the conclusion that we wouldn't be able to utilize several areas/amenities on the ship including the discos, the lounges and the casino due to the amount of smoke that would be in those areas, but I am unwilling to have a smoky room. Our vacation would be ruined.

 

Thanks again for your advice. This message board might have saved me a headache. Enjoy your cruising!