Importantly, the ERS did not qualify its statement. It did not state that it is opposed to the use of e-cigarettes by smokers who may be able to quit without them. It did not state that it is opposed to the use of e-cigarettes except among smokers who cannot quit without them. It simply stated its blanket opposition to any and all use of electronic cigarettes by smokers.

Yesterday, a group of international lung health organizations issued a position statement on electronic cigarettes, which called for a ban (or severe restrictions) on these products until more is known about their health effects. In contrast, these organizations did not express any problem with real tobacco cigarettes remaining on the market, even though they kill millions worldwide each year, and electronic cigarettes are not known to have killed a single person ever.

The Marini study demonstrates that electronic cigarettes do lead to a reduction in exhaled nitric oxide, which suggests that they have a mild respiratory irritant effect and induce some inflammation in the airways. This is a finding which has been reported previously in a number of studies. It is not surprising because propylene glycol is known to be a mild respiratory irritant.

An established principle of contract law is that both parties must agree to the terms. There must be mutual assent. However, the electronic cigarette companies were not party to the Master Settlement Agreement. Thus, the terms of that settlement cannot be imposed upon them involuntarily, even if electronic cigarettes were considered by the Attorneys General as meeting the MSA's definition of cigarettes.

Destroying this selling point helps no one except for the UK's cigarette companies, which stand to enjoy a bigger run of profits due to CAP's stupidity.

LAST：Kuqi high quality blister pack electronic cigarette, electronic cigarette ego ce4 |NEXT：Bottom changeable coil protank 2 pyrex e cig glass protank mega clearomizer