The harshest questioning came from Senators Richard Blumenthal, Barbara Boxer, and Jay Rockefeller:

The major problem with Dr. Glantz's argument is that he is considering only smoking-related mortality. The literature he cites deals with mortality only. However, there is more to life than simply its length. The quality of life is also important (although apparently not for smokers, according to Glantz). And cutting down the amount you smoke substantially improves the quality of life by reducing respiratory morbidity.

Ironically, Dr. Glantz (and numerous anti-smoking groups) are supporting the protective legislation. Which raises the question: Who is acting more as a Big Tobacco front group? The e-cigarette associations, which are fighting protective legislation for tobacco cigarettes, or Glantz and the anti-smoking groups, which are trying to get protective legislation ensconced in every state throughout the country, so that cigarette profits are protected nationwide?

LAST：VV mod ,Vamo Mod ,E cigarette VV MOD |NEXT：Lastest Promotion brand new super cloupor cloutank M3 green smoke