This is the equivalent of a cigarette company refuting the required warnings that are made on a cigarette package. The cigarette companies are free to fight the cigarette warning labels as they are being considered, but once a federal body requires those warnings, the companies must not act to undermine the required warnings. In this case, Pfizer's actions are more grievous than those of a cigarette company undermining a package warning because the black box warnings are required by a federal regulatory safety agency, rather than by a Congressional act. More specifically, the black box warnings are an official part of the formal approval of the marketing and sale of the drug. The company may not sell the drug without the warning. By publicly undermining and refuting the warning, the company is essentially violating the terms of the drug's approval.

2. Letter to all Kentucky state legislators

In my view, this press release, including the headline and the quotes from Drs. Glantz and Dutra, is dishonest.

Sometimes, reality isn't what it seems. And once in a rare while, it is exactly the opposite. That is the case in today's Rest of the Story.

To be sure, the FDA should prohibit the marketing of electronic cigarettes to youth. But a total ban on electronic cigarette advertising would be throwing away the baby with the bath water.

LAST：Best portable nebulizer e-cigarette X6 e-cigarette,e-cigarette pcc 2014 |NEXT：100% original Innokin iclear 30 cartomizer clearomizer