But is there any truth to the assertion that electronic cigarettes are a gateway to youth smoking? New evidence from the UK suggests not. Despite the widespread proliferation of electronic cigarettes throughout England during the past few years, and a concomitant increase in youth experimentation with these products, smoking rates among 11 to 15-year olds has declined to an of just 3%.

Before making an accusation like this, it is imperative that Dr. Glantz have evidence that electronic companies have mobilized these think-tanks to push their policy agenda. But the evidence that Glantz cites to support his accusation merely demonstrate that these groups have taken positions which support electronic cigarettes as a potential harm reduction strategy for tobacco control. None of the documents that Glantz cites indicate that any electronic cigarette company had anything to do with orchestrating, mobilizing, or affecting the positions taken by these groups.

The rest of the story is that this assertion by the FDA - that cigarette smoking may be no more hazardous than vaping - appears to be more politically-based than science-based. President Obama, in his inaugural address, called for a return of science to public policy. He asked that science be restored to its rightful place. However, the assertion that cigarette smoking is not known to be any more harmful than inhaling the aerosol produced by heating a solution of nicotine and propylene glycol is hardly something that can be viewed as science-based. Especially when e-cigarette vapor has been extensively characterized and shown to be far less toxic than cigarette smoke.

Nevertheless, this does not stop the authors from drawing a conclusion. They conclude, despite their acknowledged inability to draw such a conclusion, that: "e-cigarette use is aggravating rather than ameliorating the tobacco epidemic among youths."

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.

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."

Why not It doesn’t smell. There’s no danger ofsecondhandsmoke. Vapor dissipates and doesn’t leave a lingering smell. So why can’t we take a few puffs during Happy Hour at Applebee’s! Simple answer is we want to be courteous ofothers and the owner(s) of the establishment.

LAST：E cigaret 300 puffs 808d pcc e cigarette 808d atomizer wholesale |NEXT：2013 SAILING ego carry case pure color ego zipper case