The weakness of the scientific argumentation of those opposed to electronic cigarettes demonstrates that in 2014, there simply is not much of a scientific argument to fall back on in opposing this innovation. The science isn't going to do it, so opponents have to rely on trite and meaningless assertions like:

The most telling point is Dr. Glantz's opposition to legislation that classifies electronic cigarettes as being separate from tobacco products. The electronic cigarette associations have been lobbying local and state governments not to classify e-cigarettes as tobacco products. This makes perfect sense because they are not tobacco products. They contain no tobacco. They are orders of magnitude safer than cigarettes and should not be treated in the same category for regulatory purposes.

I had tried to quit smoking many times. I tried going cold turkey, the patch, the gum, , the pill, and even a mild form of shock therapy using a rubber-band on my wrist. I could not quit. I hated cigarettes, but I did not have the willpower to quit using them. I felt weak and depressed. But when I found electronic cigarettes, everything changed.

"The findings demonstrated that manufacturers did not simply remove descriptors, to be in compliance with the law, but introduced new color-coded brand name descriptors which smokers were able to recognize and easily identify the formerly labeled "lights" brands. We did not examine the use of colors themselves, which may be protected by the First Amendment, but rather the use of color terms. The marketing materials examined make explicit the fact that the use of substituted color terms in brand names is similar to the dropped "descriptors, so that consumers will continue to recognize these brands as "lights"."

To the best of my knowledge, this assertion is false. I do not believe that Mistic is a tobacco company. I believe that Mistic is an electronic cigarette company, and I do not believe that Mistic is owned by any tobacco company. Thus, I believe that this accusation is false.

"Support public education: Buy cigarettes."

Although the survey approach described above would lead to "invalid" results, I would never argue that survey studies should be thrown out and that we should only be conducting RCTs. My point is that there are strengths and limitations of various study designs, and causal inference is enhanced by having research evidence from multiple study designs. On balance, the strengths and weaknesses balance each other out, leading to a much greater ability to draw valid conclusions.

LAST：2013 hot health electronic cigarette ego t +CE,ROHS,FCC,FDA,Certification |NEXT：eGo Stardust Clearomizer V3 - Rebuildable! CE4 atomizer