I am very familiar with the tactics of ANR because I served on the ANR Executive Board for several years. The reason I resigned from the ANR Executive Board was that they told me they were more concerned with the political impact of their statements than worrying about whether their statements might be defamatory. Thus, the potentially defamatory statements that ANR is currently making about electronic cigarette companies and groups appear to be in line with its long-standing philosophy of using unethical tactics to smear, attack, and defame what it views to be its enemies.

In other words, it is time to acknowledge that the law was flawed. It is not the cigarette companies that are to blame for the fact that consumers still understand which brand is which. The law is to blame. If the intent of Congress were to ban any brand that might mislead consumers, then the Congress should simply have banned these brands, requiring them to be pulled from the market.

"As usual, both these companies are main sponsors of the conference—apparently there is no problem having corporations that are vociferously opposed to the most promising development in smoking cessation paying for a conference about smoking cessation."

While the new law may provide for "consistent, uniform healthful environments from town to town," it doesn't do so if that town is named "Atlantic City."

This is not the way public health is supposed to be. But this is what happens when an abstinence-only mentality takes over in any area of public health, whether it be nicotine addiction or heroin addiction.

LAST：Seavapo vaporizer pen exgo w3 popular svp 710 wax vaporizer exgo |NEXT：Alibaba express high quality dragon mod&silver dragon mod&dragon mechanical mod from China supplier