I'm less concerned with the supposed profit margins than where the report came from: France's National Consumer Institute Magazine. There is no arguable statment other than, [e-cigarettes contain] "a significant quantity of carcinogenic molecules." If you click on the link in the statement shortly after that it takes you to another article in an emag called "The Week" In that article it states that researchers in France used a new method of testing to determine that there were more cancer causing agents in ecigs than originally thought. The article doesn't quote the type of research conducted nor does it publish actual results. What was tested? Which products? How were the tests conducted? None of these questions were answered. Ok, so I read the rest of the article in "The Week". They then go on to quote an unnamed source in The Bangkok Post and then a quick quip by someone from "The Daily Beast". To be fair there is a quote at the very end from the NY Time, but, not having read the entire NYT article, I wouldn't place much confidence in it.
Ok, so lets review. France thinks ecigs are just as bad or worse than regular cigarettes and they have proof of this from a new method of
ecig testing that they haven't disclosed, nor have they disclosed their full results of their testing. "The Week" emag agrees with France that ecigs are bad and to back up their claim they've quoted "The Bangkok Post" and "The Daily Beast" and "The New York Times."
Well that's just great. I am going to publish my own report on yelling "fire" in a crowded movie theater. I think that yelling "fire" is bad and I believe that England agrees with me. I've been using this new method of testing and I can tell you conclusively that yelling "fire" is bad. As soon as I get my quotes from Highlights and Mad Magazine I'll be publishing soon.
