For Dr. Glantz's argument to be correct, then it must be the case that there are literally thousands of smokers out there who would have simply quit smoking if only it hadn't been for electronic cigarettes. Readers must recognize two important points about this argument:

A defective cigarette is one which causes health effects "beyond those normally associated with tobacco product use."

Ironically, Stan Glantz criticized the study specifically because it examined the effect of electronic cigarettes on quitting among smokers who desired to quit. According to an in the New York Times: "Stanton A. Glantz, a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, said the study’s limitation was that it tried to measure the effect of e-cigarette use only among smokers who were trying hard to quit, not all smokers."

While I didn't highlight this in my earlier post, ANR makes another false statement on its site. It claims that electronic cigarette companies are calling what comes out of their products a "vapor" rather than an "aerosol" because they are trying to connote "reduced harm." ANR then calls this a "tobacco industry tactic," implying that the electronic cigarette companies are acting in a fraudulent manner.

There is no question that the best advice to smokers is to quit completely. But for those who are unable to do so, the use of electronic cigarettes to try to quit is sound advice. Clearly, if they quit completely with electronic cigarettes, they have accomplished a huge task in terms of improving their health. But even if they are still dual using, they may have substantially improved their health. And, they may have made it easier to quit completely at a later time.

LAST：A-touch Ecig Genuine Aspire Starter kit,CF G-power 900mah + K1 Glassomizer |NEXT：hottest colorful ego ce4 battery with different unique designs