The truth is that Dr. Glantz is simply wrong. He is not a medical doctor and therefore has no personal experience treating patients upon which to draw. As a physician, I can testify to the fact that when smokers substantially reduce the amount that they smoke, they experience immediate and significant health benefits.

Who should fund it?

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.

"Support public education: Buy cigarettes."

LAST：Shenzhen China e cigarette Atomizer 510 clear cartomizer |NEXT：Folding Electronic Cigarette Handle