Another anti-smoking group, responding via email, told me that: "This is precisely how the tobacco industry has influenced the reporting of science. By funding research at universities and engaging professors and researchers as consultants, the industry introduced a bias that influenced these scientist's conduct and reporting of their subsequent research. While the financial relationships may have ended in the light of the public's disdain for the tobacco industry and the public revelations that came out of the DOJ lawsuit, these biases do not just disappear overnight. It is irresponsible and unethical for these researchers to hide their past financial relationships with Big Tobacco, even if the money changed hands more than 36 months ago."

Yesterday, I explained that the of electronic cigarettes by Stan Glantz and colleagues published this week in the journal Circulation is because it draws conclusions about the efficacy of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation from studies that were not designed to measure such effects in the first place. These studies did not examine smoking cessation rates among a cohort of smokers who were identified at baseline as using e-cigarettes with the intention of quitting smoking. Moreover, smokers who use e-cigarettes are likely more heavily addicted to nicotine and may be more resistant to quitting, thus making inferences about cessation effectiveness from these studies inappropriate.

E-cig Taxes

The Rest of the Story

Thus, the authors readily acknowledge that it is impossible from this study to determine whether or not e-cigarettes lead to smoking or whether smoking leads to e-cigarette experimentation.

LAST：Newjoye Best Design SS Mod Ecig K800 match special k800 atomizer |NEXT：100% e cigarette Original Kanger all products