In taking this position, the FDA is virtually on its own. Most scientists and public health practitioners disavowed such crap decades ago, when it was first spewn forth by the old Big Tobacco companies. But now, there are only two entities that are still claiming this nonsense: (1) the FDA; and (2) Stan Glantz (see his to the FDA).

a. Classic tobacco

Furthermore, the deceptive statements of both authors appear in a press release, not simply as quotes in a newspaper article. This implies that they had plenty of time to think about these statements and were not just speaking off the cuff or being misquoted.

The information emerged in documents obtained under Freedom of Information laws by the ABC.

What it means is that the ERS would rather that a smoker who cannot quit using other means continue smoking than switch to electronic cigarettes. The ERS clearly states that it opposes the use of electronic cigarettes, period. Thus, it implies that it opposes the use of electronic cigarettes by a smoker who is unable to quit via any other smoking cessation method. For such an individual, the ERS statement implies that it would actually prefer the smoker to continue smoking than to quit via the use of electronic cigarettes.

LAST：2014 ego smoke product 510 electronic cigarette cartomizer |NEXT：wholesale Aspire CE5-S BDC Clearomizer with Bottom Dual Coil