The problem is that Lorillard did not create this ad, had no part in its development, and is not running the ad now. In fact, Lorillard has absolutely nothing to do with the ad.

If there were any evidence that electronic cigarettes inhibit, rather than enhance smoking cessation, I too would join Dr. Glantz's camp and oppose electronic cigarettes. But such evidence does not exist. Not a shred of it so far. Not a single study suggests that electronic cigarette use results in lower quit rates than what would occur in the absence of electronic cigarette use among smokers who try these products.

In other words, Glantz has hidden this information from the reader in the review article, even though he felt it was important enough to mention in the other article. In my opinion, this is knowing dishonesty. It is hiding critical information from the reader that would affect the reader's assessment of the validity of the study's conclusions. Moreover, the review article proceeds to do precisely what the other article argues cannot and should not be done with these studies (i.e., draw conclusions about the efficacy of e-cigarettes as smoking cessation aids).

According to a issued by Columbia University Medical Center, a team of researchers from Columbia University have concluded that electronic cigarettes may serve as a gateway not only to cigarette smoking, but also to illicit drug use and addiction, such as cocaine addiction.

LAST：e-cig mods k600/k300 vaporizer vapormate e cig |NEXT：US Made eLiquid - Watermelon Bubble Gum