If the FDA doesn't have the evidence needs at the current time to conclude that smoking is more dangerous than vaping, then what kind of evidence will it take?

If a company were to make such a claim, it would constitute a reduced exposure claim, which is prohibited under section 911. To make matters worse, such a claim can only be approved by the FDA if the company shows that if consumers hear that the product is free of tobacco, they will not be led to believe that the product is safer. In other words, to simply make the truthful and uncontroversial claim that your electronic cigarettes are free of tobacco, you would have to first demonstrate that consumers will not interpret the absence of tobacco as indicating that the product is any safer. But we know for a fact that consumers will interpret (and should interpret) the absence of tobacco as an indication that vaping is safer than smoking. Therefore, the deeming regulations place a de facto, permanent ban on electronic cigarette companies making the simple claim that their products do not contain tobacco.

The truth is that this paper provides no evidence whatsoever that e-cigarette use is a gateway to smoking. Instead, it is entirely possible - and quite likely - that youths who use e-cigarettes are more likely to be heavier and more resistant smokers.

Were I a casino worker in New Jersey, I would be pissed off that GASP is supporting legislation to protect the public from the imaginary public health threat of deadly secondhand smoke exposure on beaches and in college parking lots, while that very legislation does nothing to protect me from the very real threat I face every day from the devastating effects of 40 hours or more per week of high levels of secondhand smoke exposure.

The required text for the corrective statements and their required placement is as follows:

LAST：Rebuildable atomizer full mechanical stainless steel 510 thread igo w3 for handsome man |NEXT：Dual coil! !! Dual tank!!!2014 ICIGA the most unique DTC dual coil cartomizer