The Rest of the Story

In taking this position, the FDA is virtually on its own. Most scientists and public health practitioners disavowed such crap decades ago, when it was first spewn forth by the old Big Tobacco companies. But now, there are only two entities that are still claiming this nonsense: (1) the FDA; and (2) Stan Glantz (see his to the FDA).

It is easy to see why this methodology is inappropriate to assess smoking cessation rates among smokers who use e-cigarettes in an attempt to quit smoking.

Banning smoking in public parks and beaches may have environmental benefits, but in terms of human health, there is no evidence that these policies are actually addressing any substantial public health problem. In contrast, the problem of secondhand smoke exposure in New Jersey's casinos is truly a life and death issue.

In addition to violating state law by enforcing a contract on a party not subject to that contract, Representatives Waxman, Harkin, and Welch are asking their Attorneys General to violate the Compact Clause of the Constitution by entering into a compact with other states without the consent of Congress. They are asking the states to conspire to an agreement by which they would force electronic cigarette companies to become parties to a contract to which they do not assent.

This argument is fallacious, I believe, because there are many things that changed from one cohort to the next. The introduction of cigarette filters is only one such change. To assume that any observed changes in cancer risk from one cohort to the next must be attributable to one particular change - the filter - is not appropriate, in my view.

LAST：ego w ce3 clearomizer,$14.99 double pack. factroy price! accept paypal |NEXT：Newest fashion standing pen electroic cigarette starter kit smart igo e cig vaporizer