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).

The piece highlights Dr. Alan Blum's documentary which reveals that the tobacco control movement has degraded into a fight for prestige and money rather than a fight against tobacco-related morbidity and mortality: "On the 50th anniversary of the 1964 report, Alan Blum, director of the at the University of Alabama, released a documentary that highlights what he calls “the persistent foot-dragging, fear, and squandering of funds by public health agencies, universities, and medical associations alike in ending the smoking pandemic.” This is the real story of the modern-day tobacco control movement. It demonstrates that the tobacco problem is far from over, and that today’s leading antismoking groups have squandered the opportunity to continue Terry’s legacy."

"Smoking is the single greatest cause of preventable illness and early death in England and most of the Western world," it said.

(2) A description of any reasonably foreseeable risks or discomforts to the subject; …

LAST：First union technology disposable cheap disposable ecig |NEXT：wholesale high quality blister pack electronic cigarette ego ce4