According to the press release: "The ERS agrees with the recent report from the World Health Organization (WHO) and is opposed to the use of unregulated e-cigarettes. While the short-term negative impact on health appears not as great as tobacco cigarettes, the long-term effects of e-cigarettes are not known. As a Society grounded in scientific principles, ERS believes that the precautionary principle should be applied when scientific evidence is inconclusive and insufficient."

The main difference between this study and those touted by Glantz as showing that e-cigarettes are ineffective is that unlike Glantz's cited studies, this one actually examines cessation rates among smokers who reported using e-cigarettes for smoking cessation. In other words, Brown et al. included smokers who reported having used e-cigarettes with the intention to quit smoking. In the studies cited by Glantz, smoking cessation rates for all e-cigarette users were examined, even if a smoker just tried a puff of an electronic cigarette to see what all the hype is about.

Instead, these advocates argued that surveys are the best way to study the potential benefits of e-cigarettes. Surveys measure the real-life situation of how e-cigarettes and vapor products are actually used.

As much as I condemn this advertisement, I also condemn the defamatory tactics that Glantz and Chapman are using to falsely accuse Lorillard of producing the ad.

LAST：Joye eGo Lanyard |NEXT：2014 newest design best seller ce5 e cigarette atomizer