In my view, this refutation and undermining of its own black box warning violates accepted standards of pharmaceutical company conduct, and should prompt either penalties or the removal of the drug from the market. If Pfizer is going to publicly undermine the required black box warning, then clearly that warning is not adequate to protect consumers and the FDA must either penalize Pfizer so that it desists from this behavior or pull the drug from the market since it is becoming clear that the company is undermining that warning in the eyes of the public.

I find quite sad that an article needs to be published imploring tobacco control researchers to be honest and rigorous and to use good scientific practice and draw conclusions based on evidence rather than emotions.

"these studies will also help adult smokers understand that their family members are severely affected if they undergo surgery and return to a THS-polluted environment because their healing process will be not only be altered but will also be significantly delayed. ... the proposed work will benefit the public by providing a better understanding of the cause of impaired healing among individuals who are constantly exposed to Third Hand Smoke, i.e. smokers themselves, children and elderly parents in households of smokers, waiters and waitresses in bars and housekeepers in hotels or houses of smokers."

And all the way from Pakistan: ""

However, from a public health perspective, the relevant question is not what results one would obtain if smokers were forced to use a particular strategy, but what results are obtained when smokers make the choice to use a particular strategy. This is why Stan Glantz's approach is inappropriate.

LAST：Hot product for 2014 510 cartomizer 510 battery ecigator China manufacturer |NEXT：Efest IMR 18350 LiMn 800mAh Battery - Button Top