Well maybe it's because Juul bought the journal or maybe the researchers found no correlation between Juul's profits and public health.
Well maybe it's because Juul bought the journal or maybe the researchers found no correlation between Juul's profits and public health.
This is the 21st century equivalent of attempting to disprove the links between smoking and cancer.
The undercutting of understanding the risks of cigarettes was happening when the risks would have been blatantly obvious to researchers, unlike with current vaping products. So while the PR technique is similarly appalling, the context is different.
Vaping for fun can be done without nicotine, though. They could place some more visible stickers that say "Smoke only nicotine free - same fun, no stupid addiction!" or something.
And locking e-cigarettes behind a prescription would just make people continue smoking the freely available tobacco products. Nicotine patches failed to gain wide adoption in part because of that.