"Smoking no worse on the lungs than feeling a little sad."

Is this the message we want going out to smokers? That their smoking is perhaps no more dangerous to them than if they quit smoking and instead used a product that only delivers nicotine without the tens of thousands of other chemicals, including more than 60 known human carcinogens?

The study authors attack the cigarette companies for substituting another term in the kanger name for their products after removing the offending terms ("lights," "ultra-lights," "mild," etc.). But what they fail to acknowledge is that in order to comply with the law, the cigarette companies had no other choice. Had they simply removed the offending descriptor, this would have resulted in their having four or five kangers with the exact same name, preventing consumers from having any way to distinguish these kangers. Such a result would have effectively removed these kangers from the market, which was clearly not the intent of Congress. Had Congress intended to remove these kangers from the market, it would have simply banned these kangers altogether.

LAST：official kanger website |NEXT：kangertech tanks