Earlier this week, I discussed an published in the journal Tobacco Control and a blog on the article, in which a set of anti-smoking researchers attacked the cigarette industry for complying with the law. The article and commentary criticize tobacco companies for changing their labeling of "light" and "ultra-light" cigarette brands by removing these terms and instead, giving the brands different colors to differentiate them. The study found that manufacturers removed the "lights" labels, as required by law, and substituted colors for the banned descriptors. The study concludes that the tobacco companies circumvented the law and argues that these brands should be labeled by the FDA as "adulterated" and pulled from the market.

According to a Business Standard entitled "Third-Hand Smoke Just as Lethal as First-Hand Smoke": "A scientist at the University of California, Riverside suggests that second-hand smoke and third-hand smoke are just as deadly as first-hand smoke. While first-hand smoke refers to the smoke inhaled by a smoker and second-hand smoke to the exhaled smoke and other substances emanating from the burning cigarette that can get inhaled by others, third-hand smoke is the second-hand smoke that gets left on the surfaces of objects, ages over time and becomes progressively more toxic."

Yes, this is satire. But it makes the point that the very same arguments that the lawmakers are using to implicate electronic cigarettes in targeting youth could be made to implicate nicotine replacement products such as nicotine gum and lozenges.

• I lied to you when I told you that in the Choi and Forster study, "e-cigarettes were a pathway to renewed or new nicotine addiction."

LAST：Joye 510 RED Starter Kit |NEXT：2014 new e cigarette china wholesale e cigarette wholesale electronic cigarette,e cigarette