In fact, there are literally thousands of testimonials from ex-smokers as well as thousands of identified ex-smokers in surveys who testify that for them, e-cigarettes did work as a cessation aid. There is no legitimate scientific debate over whether e-cigarettes can work as a cessation aid. They can work, and they have worked for literally thousands of smokers.

The rest of the story is that if you ask the wrong question, you are going to get the wrong answer. By asking the wrong question about the effectiveness of electronic cigarettes, Dr. Glantz has obtained the wrong answer.

The European Respiratory Society, then, is opposed to the use of e-cigarettes at the present time in the United States. What this means is that the ERS would rather see smokers continue to use tobacco cigarettes than quit smoking by switching to electronic cigarettes.

If this statement was misquoted by the Times, then the CDC should have immediately corrected it. Since I do not see any correction (as of the time of the writing of this post), I have to assume that the statement is correct.

Long-term, there is a significant reduction in lung cancer risk associated with cutting the amount one smokes. The study that Glantz cites as showing no health benefits of smoking reduction actually found a associated with smoking reduction.

While as I said, I do not begrudge the CDC for holding this position on e-cigarettes, the fact that it is resorting to fabricating evidence in support of its position suggests that its position is untenable. If your position is strong, you should be able to support it with actual facts and scientific evidence. When all you can do to support your position is to produce false and misleading propaganda, then it's pretty clear you don't have a leg to stand on.

LAST：2014 Bauway Best Price 510 Atomizer refillable 510 cartomizer wholesale with Free cartridges |NEXT：smokjoy most popular products accept paypal amanoo new model electronic cigarette