Advertisement
Editorial

Tobacco Substitutes: Harm Reduction or Smokescreen?

  • The PLoS Medicine Editors
  • Published: July 31, 2007
  • DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040244

Reader Comments (4)

Post a new comment on this article

Damned smoking!

Posted by plosmedicine on 31 Mar 2009 at 00:11 GMT

Author: Gary Goland
Position: Mr
Institution: GE Dept, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woodville, South Australia
E-mail: gary.goland@nwahs.sa.gov.au
Submitted Date: August 01, 2007
Published Date: August 2, 2007
This comment was originally posted as a “Reader Response” on the publication date indicated above. All Reader Responses are now available as comments.

Thank you for the discussion article on smoke reduction. Great you have decided to ask readers. Opinion should be backed by numbers when ever possible. Social analysis is more pliable than physical measure, so I trust responses may provide you the answer you seek from readers.

I support the view to publish the article. I do so because it provides discussion on potential harm reduction. We can continue the argument with those we need to convince most, the smokers, further down the track. My father has always been a smoker and complained bitterly when filter tips were introduced, but he still smokes!

No competing interests declared.