This is not a public health policy. It is a moral crusade.

In other words, the blatant flaw in this study is that it enrolled smokers who had already made quit attempts using e-cigarettes in the past. By definition, this resulted in a sample of smokers who were more resistant to quitting. One would expect to find lower quitting rates among this population of e-cigarette users.

Like any regulation, there needs to be a way to fund it and this is where big brother comes in. Granted with a soon to be 3 billion dollar industry, many politicians want to get their greedy hands on it for taxation purposes, but will cripple the industry and many of the small business owners that own these vape shops (even the good ones). Although I am not opposed to taxation, 49% is a bit excessive considering it’ll be much more expensive to use E-Cigs vs regular cigarettes at that point (especially with how much E-Juice I go through a day). As of late there have and not being able to pay people back due to the rapid growth of the E-Cig industry.

The results of this study suggest that anti-smoking advocates such as Dr. Glantz are wrong in asserting that very few smokers "have switched away from cigarettes or managed to use them as a bridge to eventually go off cigarettes." Instead, there appears to be a large number of smokers who have indeed switched completely from smoking to vaping, and there also appears to be a large number of smokers who have successfully used electronic cigarettes as a bridge to complete smoking cessation.

LAST：Unque glass wax dry herb atomizer,airistech chilim airflow control vaporizer |NEXT：Alibaba China E cigarette Accessories Ego Twist Kit Ego Battery