Would one therefore conclude that taking an exam is just as risky, in terms of respiratory effects, as smoking a cigarette? Apparently, Dr. Glantz would draw such a conclusion. But it is easy to see why this is an inappropriate conclusion. And we would never disseminate messages to the public that smoking is no more hazardous than taking an exam.

• The truth is that the study we relied upon did not measure the time course of electronic cigarette and cigarette use. Thus, it could not determine whether the kids who were using both cigarettes and electronic cigarettes had initiated with smoking or with electronic cigarettes.

Senator Richard Blumenthal stated that: ""tobacco companies are using the same despicable tactics with e-cigarettes that they used in previous decades with traditional cigarettes to lure youth down a path of nicotine addiction and eventual death."

Clearly, the actual scientific evidence doesn't matter to an agency that is being guided purely by ideology and which has come to a pre-determined conclusion that e-cigarettes are evil. Today's story demonstrates how a strong pre-existing schema, propped up by ideology, leads to such preposterous scientific statements such as arguing that although many ex-smokers have used e-cigarettes successfully as a cessation aid, there is no evidence that any ex-smokers have used e-cigarettes successfully as a cessation aid.

LAST：Huge vapor ecig exgo 2014 newly magnetic ecig atomizer exgo |NEXT：New AIO 510-t electronic cigarette pcc