The study concludes: "Among smokers who have attempted to stop without professional support, those who use e-cigarettes are more likely to report continued abstinence than those who used a licensed NRT product bought over-the-counter or no aid to cessation."

The point is that there was no way for the cigarette companies to comply with the law, other than to change the banned descriptors to a new term. And no matter what term they chose, consumers would have figured out which brand was which. Moreover, the law did not specify or imply that the companies were prohibited from informing consumers which brand was which.

Sure, but only if the revenue is used to directly benefit those who are bearing its burden. Raise the cigarette tax and use the money to fund anti-smoking programs and services, research, and treatment for smokers, especially in poorer communities and communities of color, and the policy is no longer regressive but progressive. It could reduce, rather than exacerbate existing income and health inequities.

By this definition, it would be illegal to sell not only the e-liquids used in modular electronic cigarettes, but also the refill cartridges used in rechargeable electronic cigarettes. Thus, this legislation would remove from the market a huge chunk of the electronic cigarettes that are currently sold in New York State. Only disposable electronic cigarettes would remain, and it is unclear if even these would be allowed to be sold, since they do contain "a liquid composed of nicotine and other chemicals" that is "used in an electronic cigarette." Thus, it is conceivable that this legislation would ban the sale of all electronic cigarettes in the state of New York.

LAST：On sale e cig green smoke for promotion products |NEXT：Youde UD 2014 new arrival e cig drip tips 510 drip tips Pyrex drip tip