Moreover, the study was a laboratory study involving mice. How could these reporters possibly extrapolate from a mouse study showing impairment of healing and liver damage in mice exposed to thirdhand smoke to the conclusion that thirdhand smoke is as harmful as active smoking?

In a recent in Forbes magazine, Jacob Sullum reviews some of the evidence which demonstrates that many former smokers have quit smoking successfully using electronic cigarettes as a cessation aid. Sullum writes:

The rest of the story is that despite the Common Rule and the intense efforts to try to prevent human subject violations in research, there are still occasional studies which find their way through the cracks. This is one bad example. It is an example of an unethical experiment that should never have been approved by an IRB in its current form because it blatantly violates the ethical principles of both consent and informed consent.

2. In contrast to what we reported above, the anti-smoking groups have not - I repeat, have not - criticized the researchers for failing to disclose their conflicts of interest. They did not argue that "section 5 of the form refers to any and all conflicts of interest, regardless of when they occurred," and that "these researchers are breaking not only the spirit, but also the letter of these policies." We apologize for having incorrectly insinuated that these anti-smoking groups are concerned about the scientific and ethical integrity of published tobacco control research.

LAST：eLiquid - Butterscotch |NEXT：2014 newest e cigarette Sigelei 100W new innovation cartomizer e cigarette wholesale