Frankly, I find it horrific to learn that the FDA - the agency which is going to supposedly be using science to make informed, evidence-based decisions regarding tobacco products - is not sure that cigarette smoking is any more hazardous than the use of fake cigarettes that contain no tobacco, involve no combustion, produce no secondhand smoke, have much lower levels of carcinogens, and have been found to acutely improve the health of smokers who switch to them.

(8) A statement that participation is voluntary, refusal to participate will involve no penalty or loss of benefits to which the subject is otherwise entitled, and the subject may discontinue participation at any time without penalty or loss of benefits to which the subject is otherwise entitled.

"Down the corridor in BAT [British American Tobacco] you have a division who are spending all their days trying to work out how to gut, thwart, and ruin any policy like plain packaging."

Nevertheless, this does not stop the authors from drawing a conclusion. They conclude, despite their acknowledged inability to draw such a conclusion, that: "e-cigarette use is aggravating rather than ameliorating the tobacco epidemic among youths."

The first of these two debates is over whether or not to legalize the sales of electronic cigarettes in county jails, where the goal of this law requested by North Carolinas’ Sheriffs’ Association, would be to nullify a law passed earlier this year banning county inmates from possessing any and all electronic cigarettes and/or vapor related products. This new measure which has been quietly snuck into house bill 1133 specifically gives only county jails and “not” state prisons the authority to sell e-cigarettes and other smoking “cessation” items like nicotine patches or lozenges, which has the potential of raising millions in desperately needed revenue for the ever increasing costs of running, improving and maintaining county jail operations.

Although I agree with most of the overall goals of ANR in terms of reducing the public's exposure to secondhand smoke, I denounce its tactics of disseminating false and misleading information to the public and especially, trying to smear its declared enemies with false, misleading, and defamatory attacks.

Clive goes on to cite two specific examples of conclusions that Glantz disseminated to the public which were not supported by his own research.

LAST：innokin electronic cigarette |NEXT：itast vv v3