The AHA concluded their report by recognizing how e-cigarettes are changing the landscape of tobacco control. The policy and guidance they provide is developed from the current evidence compiled from the United States and international studies. The AHA will continue to monitor the impact of e-cigarettes and their newly developed technologies paying special attention to how it impacts cardiovascular health and the effect these devices has on youth and adolescents. As more research emerges, the AHA, and other health organizations, will clearly evolve their position on electronic cigarettes as we all watch this ever changing marketplace continue to grow.

Earlier this week, I discussed an published in the journal Tobacco Control and a blog on the article, in which a set of anti-smoking researchers attacked the cigarette industry for complying with the law. The article and commentary criticize tobacco companies for changing their labeling of "light" and "ultra-light" cigarette brands by removing these terms and instead, giving the brands different colors to differentiate them. The study found that manufacturers removed the "lights" labels, as required by law, and substituted colors for the banned descriptors. The study concludes that the tobacco companies circumvented the law and argues that these brands should be labeled by the FDA as "adulterated" and pulled from the market.

Tobacco control advocates have often criticized scientists who were supported by the tobacco industry for failing to disclose their funding or other conflicts of interest, such as being paid to author commentaries critical of tobacco control policies. And rightly so. However, if we now engage in the very same tactics, then we become hypocrites, and our credibility in criticizing tobacco industry "hacks" is shot. We don't have any credibility in attacking "tobacco hacks" if we are "Big Pharma hacks."

LAST：Promotion hot selling and high quality nemesis atomizer |NEXT：Starstone 2014 newest orchid v3 RTA rda atomizer