It is worth noting that the conclusions which Dr. Glantz is disseminating are destructive because they undermine decades of public education about the severe hazards of smoking. If the public thinks that smoking is only as risky as vaping, then it is likely that many smokers will decide to continue smoking rather than quitting using electronic cigarettes. And many ex-smokers who have quit with electronic cigarettes may return to smoking, thinking that they might as well since they are not getting any definite health benefit from having made the switch.

This story further illustrates the depths to which electronic cigarette opponents are sinking. They cannot defend their opposition to e-cigarettes based on actual sound scientific research or reasoning. Thus, they have to either twist and distort the science or grossly extrapolate from studies that actually have little relevance to the clinical situation at hand.

Sure, I understand that it is a lot more politically advantageous to go after smokers than it is to go after corporations and the wealthiest citizens. But it is also uncourageous. And it is certainly not leadership. Nor does it show vision.

Let's just take three of the Surgeon General's report authors alone (Dr. Neal Benowitz, Dr. Jack Henningfield, and Dr. Jonathan Samet). According to a D.C. District Court filed by R.J. Reynolds and Lorillard:

LAST：2014 hottest wholesale e cig atomizer three in one e cig |NEXT：Conrys 2014 Newest colorful accept 18650 ar mod vape ar mod e cig on sale