Would one therefore conclude that taking an exam is just as risky, in terms of respiratory effects, as smoking a cigarette? Apparently, Dr. Glantz would draw such a conclusion. But it is easy to see why this is an inappropriate conclusion. And we would never disseminate messages to the public that smoking is no more hazardous than taking an exam.

For this reason, I believe there is a serious question as to the constitutionality of this provision of the deeming regulations. The government cannot interfere with commercial speech unless that interference is necessary to promote a legitimate government interest. The only way that the government could show that a ban on stating that electronic cigarettes are safer than tobacco cigarettes advances a legitimate government interest would be to provide evidence that electronic cigarettes are not safer than real cigarettes. Since such evidence does not exist, the government would have a difficult time making the case. Therefore, I believe that if the deeming regulations are promulgated in their current form, this aspect of the regulations will be successfully challenged by the electronic cigarette industry.

To add icing to the cake, Medical News Today that: "researchers from this latest study say thirdhand smoke is left on surfaces and ages over time, becoming increasingly more toxic. The team suggests second and thirdhand smoke are just as harmful as firsthand smoke."

LAST：2014 CE5 atomizer 1.6ML ce5 clearomizer wholesale cheapest price in alibaba factory offer |NEXT：2014 hot new products rechargeable dispsable electronic cigarette 400puff rechargeable e-cigarette soft tip cartomizer