The misinformation in the tobacco control field is so widespread that hardly a day goes by that an anti-smoking advocate somewhere doesn't publicly declare that smoking may be no more dangerous than vaping. Yesterday, it was the Sedgwick County Health Department (Wichita, KS), which wrote in an op-ed in the Kansas City Star:

Apparently, the science no longer matters. You can acknowledge that a study does not allow you to determine the direction of a relationship, but then go ahead and draw such a conclusion anyway. Frankly, this is junk science, and it is just as bad as what we have attacked the tobacco industry for doing in years past.

If the policy were based on health principles, then it would certainly include other behaviors, such as those related to obesity, which have large health care costs and which set a "bad example." It would certainly include alcohol use as well.

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.

Remember that I did not argue that a smoker switching from a non-filtered to a filtered cigarette brand will reduce her cancer risk. It may be that vigorous compensation offsets the impact of such a change. However, I do believe that the scientific evidence supports the contention that all else being equal, a lifelong smoker of non-filtered cigarettes faces a slightly higher cancer risk than a lifelong smoker of filtered cigarettes.

LAST：2014 Ivogo 1:1 clone newest hot product RDA Atomizer dark horse |NEXT：2014 hotest selling ecigator ecig mini lambo 3.0-6.0V vv ecig mod 26650 wholesale from china