First, the advocates want e-cigarettes to be taxed, and it would be easier to tax these products if they are defined as tobacco products. It's hard to turn down a revenue stream when you see one, and "anti-smoking" advocates are apparently no different. They see a nicotine-containing product that some people are using for pleasure, and they immediately want to tax it, regardless of the fact that taxing e-cigarettes will increase cigarette use and kill people by removing the economic incentive for smokers to switch from real cigarettes to e-cigarettes.

According to : "The average level of cotinine (metabolized nicotine) among nonsmokers increased by 456% and the average levels of the carcinogen NNAL increased by 112% after four hours of exposure to secondhand smoke in a smoke-filled casino with a "sophisticated" ventilation system."

Clearly, this requested action brings up significant issues under the Compact Clause, issues which certainly do not qualify for an exception from this clause under the Supreme Court's decision in United States Steel. (For a detailed discussion of how enforcing the MSA on electronic cigarette companies would violate the Compact Clause, see the excellent submitted by the Competitive Enterprise Institute in S&M Brands.)

And what are the right and wrong ways to quit? The wrong way to quit is using electronic cigarettes, which have been so effective in reducing cigarette consumption that some tobacco analysts have predicted that there could be as much as a 50% decline in the combustible tobacco market due to e-cigarettes. The right way to quit is using FDA-approved medications that have been proven to be quite ineffective, with long-term success rates of less than 10%.

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

LAST：AOBA ego w giant atomizer oy smoke e cigarette ego-w pen style e cigarettes ego w |NEXT：New design high end igo 4 e-cigarette magma atomizer