In other words, Glantz has hidden this information from the reader in the review article, even though he felt it was important enough to mention in the other article. In my opinion, this is knowing dishonesty. It is hiding critical information from the reader that would affect the reader's assessment of the validity of the study's conclusions. Moreover, the review article proceeds to do precisely what the other article argues cannot and should not be done with these studies (i.e., draw conclusions about the efficacy of e-cigarettes as smoking cessation aids).

By relying on this false evidence, the politicians are essentially lying to the American public. They are misrepresenting the scientific evidence, twisting it to try to support their pre-determined conclusion.

LAST：Topwell hot selling ecig Ceramic Disk Heater 3.7v / ceramic disk |NEXT：Joye eGo Mega Atomizer - Stainless