Destroying this selling point helps no one except for the UK's cigarette companies, which stand to enjoy a bigger run of profits due to CAP's stupidity.

At the Rest of the Story, I don't have that luxury. I make the call based on what I see as the most credible scientific evidence available. And at the current time, I believe that for many smokers, electronic cigarettes are a reasonable option for smoking cessation or dramatic smoking reduction. These benefits of electronic cigarettes are demonstrable and there is no evidence that they are being undermined by these products serving as a gateway to tobacco cigarette addiction. In fact, all the evidence at the current time points to a strong relationship between e-cigarette use and decreased overall use of tobacco products, not the other way around.

But we know this is not the case because in journal articles published by many of the report authors, they have acknowledged multiple conflicts of interest with Big Pharma.

Is this really the way we want our federal health agencies to treat cigarettes? As a product that is of such little concern that it may be no more harmful than the combination of nicotine and propylene glycol in an electronic cigarette?

Long-time tobacco opponent Professor Simon Chapman, from Sydney University, said describing e-cigarettes as medicine was "Orwellian" and destructive to society.

Ironically, Stan Glantz criticized the study specifically because it examined the effect of electronic cigarettes on quitting among smokers who desired to quit. According to an in the New York Times: "Stanton A. Glantz, a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, said the study’s limitation was that it tried to measure the effect of e-cigarette use only among smokers who were trying hard to quit, not all smokers."

LAST：E-Slim Esmart Electronic Cigarette ecig igo 4 vaporizer |NEXT：NEW LED electronic cigarette mt3/4 clearomizer Ztop-e1