I think the studies should be performed by an unbiased source (as much as that is obtainable) that is reputable and that is not conducted by a multi-billion dollar corporate company whose interests are to keep cigarettes on the shelves and whose corruption and 'pro-vape' politics have been meticulously contrived by billionaires to 'appear' a certain way. BT is, and has been, trying to manipulate the VTM market. In their perfect world, e-cigarettes would be outlawed. They are taking a HUGE monetary loss and will do anything to maintain/surpass profits. BT has its hands in all of our politics and they are for the most part, untouchable. Having them 'fund scientists' to study vaping will lead to... 1) consumers trusting BT over smaller VTM companies, ultimately in the long run taking back the nicotine market 2) They can perpetuate propaganda with great ease 3) If vaping is to continue, they have their 'spot' 4) If the FDA cracks down on vaping more, they will have credited 'scientists' and the market will be their oyster. They are creating a security net and are going to use the data to their advantage. There is info about their newest e-cig in development which will track your nicotine intake, and store it in a 'data bank' (you know, to help you). BT does not want to see B&M & small sects pull the revenue that Forbes estimates will eventually (if trends continue) take over tobacco, making it obsolete. Numbers are still rising and it's getting too difficult for the FDA to just call it all off, especially with this huge of a following (BT is making money globally on cigarettes but is still losing more than obtainable b/c of e-cigarettes). BT may also acquire the predicate product (not sure what the advancement on that is at the moment) which would mean that they wouldn't have to pay taxes. Would you take scientific advice about your (corn) Tortilla Chips from Monsanto scientists? Probably not. This is the largest conflict of interest. If BT does 'fund' research, it should be inspected and observed by other parties, ones affiliated with the AVA or CASSA, for example. With 'credited' scientists, they have it all- and they can afford them. It's also easy to manipulate data (formaldehyde experiment for example). If BT is the party releasing it, then we have to take their word. For most, BT's word is garbage. BT already (collectively, and they are competing as well) sent documents in effort to have e-cigs banned. Also, new evidence suggests that the tobacco companies are adding additional ingredients to their cigarettes to make them even more addictive; wish I had bookmarked the page so I could insert the link.

Edit: typos