The report is also hiding the fact that many of its authors have or had financial conflicts of interest with pharmaceutical companies that manufacture the products about which the report provides a misleadingly positive review.

The study authors attack the cigarette companies for substituting another term in the brand name for their products after removing the offending terms ("lights," "ultra-lights," "mild," etc.). But what they fail to acknowledge is that in order to comply with the law, the cigarette companies had no other choice. Had they simply removed the offending descriptor, this would have resulted in their having four or five brands with the exact same name, preventing consumers from having any way to distinguish these brands. Such a result would have effectively removed these brands from the market, which was clearly not the intent of Congress. Had Congress intended to remove these brands from the market, it would have simply banned these brands altogether.

LAST：Top selling real e cigarette/disposable e-cigarette D5 with over 300 Hangsen flavors - Hangsen holding co ltd |NEXT：new ego t battey/ ego twist battery/ ego battery with 350/650/900/1100/1300mah capacity