However, the anti-smoking groups did not buy this argument. One organization's spokesperson told me: "The conflict of interest form clearly asks for the disclosure of all financial relationships that could be perceived as biasing an author's opinion, and there is no 36-month limit for such disclosures. Section 5 of the form refers to any and all conflicts of interest, regardless of when they occurred. These researchers are breaking not only the spirit, but also the letter of these policies."

This issue is particularly important because based on the arguments of these authors, the FDA should ban filtered cigarettes in order to protect the public's health. But in my opinion, such a move could be disastrous because it would result in a dramatic increase in tar delivery and possibly carcinogen dose, potentially leading to an increase, rather than a decrease in cancer.

The FDA is undermining decades of public health efforts to underscore the ubiquitous danger of cigarette smoking and the lack of value of even major design changes, such as filters and lower yields. By doing so, the agency is negating any positive effects of its own anti-smoking media campaign.

The unfortunate part of the story is that California taxpayers funded this proposal to the tune of a quarter of a million dollars. What a waste of money. They could have saved the money because the researchers had already drawn their conclusions. Why waste the money on actually conducting research when the conclusions of that research have already been drawn, and disseminated!

"In terms of acute effects on respiratory function, active smoking is exactly equivalent to the effects of taking a math test."

LAST：Cheapest price e cig battery e cigarette/electric cigarette ego t 650 900 1100mah |NEXT：2014 new design ego-t glass tank mini protank 2 clearomizer kit hot sale mini protank2