While it is theoretically possible that an electronic cigarette company could some day get a full reduced risk claim approved, the regulatory burden is extreme. Not only would the company have to show that the product is safer than smoking, but the company would also have to demonstrate that the product will not deter smokers from quitting and will not introduce youth to the use of nicotine. The studies required would be substantial. For most companies, the costs would be prohibitive. It would take many years before any company could even have a reasonable chance of getting such an application approved and by then it will be too late for the market to continue to expand.

Apparently, the science no longer matters. You can acknowledge that a study does not allow you to determine the direction of a relationship, but then go ahead and draw such a conclusion anyway. Frankly, this is junk science, and it is just as bad as what we have attacked the tobacco industry for doing in years past.

Peter Hajek, director of the Tobacco Dependence Research Unit at Queen Mary, University of London, also this critical flaw in the study: ""The authors followed up smokers who tried e-cigarettes but did not stop smoking, and excluded smokers who tried e-cigarettes and stopped smoking," he said. "Like smokers who fail with any method, these were highly dependent smokers who found quitting difficult. The authors concluded that e-cigarette (use) was not helpful, but that would be true for any treatment however effective if only treatment failures were evaluated."

No.

LAST：Elikang 2014 Colorful Reusable and Rechargeable halo e hookah |NEXT：wholesale China K800 electronic cigarette for women lady slim e cigarette e-cig pipe