While as I said, I do not begrudge the CDC for holding this position on e-cigarettes, the fact that it is resorting to fabricating evidence in support of its position suggests that its position is untenable. If your position is strong, you should be able to support it with actual facts and scientific evidence. When all you can do to support your position is to produce false and misleading propaganda, then it's pretty clear you don't have a leg to stand on.

I continued to smoke for a few weeks when I wanted to, but used my e-cig when I found it convenient. I found myself using my e-cigarette more and more and my tobacco cigarettes less and less. Within a month or two, I could not stand the smell of a cigarette…

The reference which supports this assertion is a by Dutra and Glantz which purports to provide data showing that electronic cigarettes are "aggravating the tobacco epidemic among youth."

Earlier this week, I discussed an published in the journal Tobacco Control and a blog on the article, in which a set of anti-smoking researchers attacked the cigarette industry for complying with the law. The article and commentary criticize tobacco companies for changing their labeling of "light" and "ultra-light" cigarette brands by removing these terms and instead, giving the brands different colors to differentiate them. The study found that manufacturers removed the "lights" labels, as required by law, and substituted colors for the banned descriptors. The study concludes that the tobacco companies circumvented the law and argues that these brands should be labeled by the FDA as "adulterated" and pulled from the market.

LAST：vision ego starter kit |NEXT：vision x.jet bdc ego clearomizer