San Francisco along with the rest of CA is heavily invested in their citizens smoking. Back in 2003 CA used future payments from cigarette sales to issue bonds.

Vaping products are not covered under the MSA, so these bonds are floundering due to drops in smoking rates. SF needs people to keep smoking.

They knew this was a bad idea back in 2000: https://www.sfgate.com/busines...

https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/c...

Just like kids gravitate to the wide assortment of Pinnacle Vodka flavors right? The "think of teh kids" argument is the standard cop out when some group wants to go nannystate. There does need to be enforcement of IP in ejuice branding, but an outright flavor ban is purely kneejerk, and harmful for the people trying to transition into a less harmful option.

My guess is that they did collect this info, but omitted it because it contradicted their conclusion.

I'd like to see the full testing scenario before judgement. Unfortunately most of these studies are performed by individuals that are not product users. Ecigs have an operating range, where once you exceed the operating temperature or wicking parameters produces unpleasant results. This study and the fancy 3d printed sensor might have just be showing the DNA harming effects of vaping a dry coil.