Sadly, Stan Glantz continues to feel the need to lie to the public in order to try to discredit opinions with which he does not agree. And while I have no problem discrediting statements by exposing the truth about financial relationships which present conflicts of interest, I do have a problem with spreading false lies that make the public believe that there is a conflict of interest present and which therefore defame the reputation of the individual. Not only is this unlawful, but it is unethical as well.
Importantly, the ERS did not qualify its statement. It did not state that it is opposed to the use of e-cigarettes by smokers who may be able to quit without them. It did not state that it is opposed to the use of e-cigarettes except among smokers who cannot quit without them. It simply stated its blanket opposition to any and all use of electronic cigarettes by smokers.
A group of U.S. Congressmembers - including Dick Durbin (D-IL), John D. Rockefeller (D-WV), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Edward J. Markey (D-MA), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Jack Reed (D-RI), and U.S. Representative Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ) - are calling for a in order to protect youth from "nicotine addiction."
The only bad news coming out of the actual data is that the efforts of anti-smoking groups and advocates appear to be working: they are being successful in discouraging smokers from trying to quit smoking using electronic cigarettes. Ironically, the results of public health efforts have been to impede smoking cessation, lower the overall motivation of smokers to quit, and decreasing the number of quit attempts among current smokers.
Is this really the kind of pure scientific expertise - unclouded by any ideological or political concerns - that we want to be making the critical decisions about how to regulate tobacco products which are killing hundreds of thousands of Americans each year?
For Stan Glantz:
LAST：Factory wholesale ce4 clearomizer,e cigarette ego ce4,ego ce4 clearomizer |NEXT：China supplier wholesale Original PCC Joyetech eRoll C