The letter concludes: "By taking action to apply the MSA to e-cigarettes, you could make a giant stride in protecting kids from a lifelong addiction to nicotine."

One might argue that this is just one errant professor. However, as it acknowledges on its :

Were I a reviewer of this grant, I certainly would not have funded it. Instead, I would have saved the money and encouraged the researchers to publish their pre-determined conclusions without wasting taxpayer dollars to pretend to be searching for an answer to a question that they have already answered.

Sadly, the tobacco control movement does not appear interested in holding itself to the same standards as we hold the tobacco industry.

As I point out in the piece, the CDC is partly responsible for the backlash against e-cigarettes because it publicly concluded that e-cigarettes are a gateway to smoking:

Curiously, however, this knowledge doesn't stop Glantz from using these studies to draw a conclusion about the efficacy of e-cigarettes as smoking cessation aids in his review article. Moreover, his review article omits any mention of the fact that these 5 studies "did not measure whether people were using e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation aid" and that these studies "did not directly test the efficacy of e-cigarettes as smoking cessation aids."

LAST：Vogue latest eLuv e cigarette eLuv charger case pcc e-cig |NEXT：Passthrougn series ego hot ce4 cigarette ego battery ce4 clearomizer