The authors admit this in the paper. They write: "This is a cross-sectional study, which only allows us to identify associations, not causal relationships."

This piece by the American Lung Association is completely disingenuous. First of all, the Lung Association opposed an amendment that would have eliminating the menthol exemption in the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. Second of all, the Lung Association is not also calling for a ban on flavors in cigarettes that attract kids (i.e., menthol).

This morning, the FDA finally released its draft for electronic cigarettes. Here is my initial take on these draft regulations from a public health perspective. I have divided my analysis of the 241 pages of provisions into three sections: the good, the bad, and they ugly.

There is little question that electronic cigarettes are much safer than tobacco cigarettes (even Glantz himself admits that). And further, there is little question that the most important piece of information consumers need in deciding whether to continue to smoke real cigarettes or switch to the fake ones is that the fake ones don't contain or burn tobacco and are therefore much safer than the real tobacco cigarettes.

The letter concludes: "I really hope you will reconsider your approach – it does not serve public health or the public interest. It is wrong simply to assume that e-cigarettes will play no part in reducing the expected one billion 21st Century deaths from smoking. The evidence that there is, taken as a whole, is actually very encouraging, and certainly not a reason to mount a ‘dirty tricks campaign’ against these products. In any event, there is never a case to mislead the public, policy-makers and legislators even if you are convinced the end justifies the means, which in this case it does not."

LAST：kangertech products |NEXT：kanger aero tank coil