In an published today in the Wall Street Journal, I highlight the fact that many legislators and health organizations have demonized electronic cigarettes, largely on the basis of the erroneous conclusion that there is scientific evidence demonstrating that these products are a gateway to cigarette smoking among youth. The piece points out that there actually is no such scientific evidence and in fact, it presents evidence to the contrary.

How is it that anti-smoking advocates and health groups, including the state's physicians, could possibly oppose a simple ban on the sale of e-cigarettes to minors?

The effects of such a regulation would be to force thousands of ex-smokers back to cigarette smoking. It would also result in thousands of dual users who have substantially cut down on their smoking to return to their pre-vaping cigarette consumption levels. Of course, the net effect of such a policy would be to substantially harm the public's health.

Thirdhand smoke is as dangerous as active smoking, according to anti-smoking researchers at the University of California, Riverside.

Today, I reflect on what this story demonstrates about the scientific bias that is apparent in the anti-smoking movement, particularly among researchers like Dr. Glantz, who has repeatedly misinterpreted scientific studies in order to skewer electronic cigarettes.

LAST：New product ecig r80, foldable mechanical mod electronic cigarette R80,competitive price, from Globalsell |NEXT：france top popular blister packs e cig ce4 with lowest factory price