Is the Puff Bar Aimed at Reducing the Addiction Potential of Electronic Cigarettes?
Puff Bar is a good alternative to a traditional ice cream treat since it has none of the cons connected with an ice cream treat. Puff Bar is a simple sweet treat, which makes it a great alternative to traditional ice cream treats. Puff Bar is made with only natural flavors, so it’s a healthy alternative for individuals who are watching their diet. vapinger.com Moreover, Puff Bar is easy to make, you can make it as often as you want without having to prepare the ice cream every time. It’s great for kids and for parties because you can serve.
Puff Bar is really a relatively new product, that was developed to test people a reaction to herbal cigarette alternatives. Whenever we smoke we have been exposing ourselves to thousands of chemicals, some are good, some are bad. Puff Bar will not contain any artificial flavors, colors or nicotine and in addition has zero calories. The manufacturers claim that Puff Bar doesn’t really taste like cigarettes since it is made from completely 100 % natural ingredients including fruits, sugar and mint.
One of the primary issues in public health today is obesity and diet. Because of this many companies are developing products that help people stay trim. The Puff Bar is one of these products, they are currently marketing them under names like Puff Nosh, Pop Tart and Popcorn Squeeze. The makers of Puff Bar declare that people who use their product to lose weight can easily do so when they only need to take with you the tiny product. The makers of Puff Bar know that since public health officials have been calling for more information on the dangers of empty e-cigarette cartridges it’s pretty clear that the public wants to learn about Puff Bar and whether or not it poses a risk to public health.
By calling their product a “reusable” cartridge they’re in direct violation of the U.S Food and Drug Administration (FDA). According to the FDA any e-cigarette that contains nicotine must contain an insert which allows you to put it into the mouth area, because of this you can’t put it into your pocket or purse to take it where ever you may go. If the product also has an extinguisher it is also in violation of regulations. The reason being that since there is no ash made by a puff Bar e Cigarette it isn’t a valid device to use to refill an existing e cigarette with nicotine or to smoke another one.
Because the maker of Puff Bar realized this their lawyers have sent letters to the companies that produce puff bars claiming they have marketed their product in a way that is illegal. As well as sending cease and desist orders from the lawyers have demanded that the manufacturers cease and desist distribution of Puff Bar of Cigarettes and refund customers money. The letters request they no longer refer to their product as a “smoke machine”. Instead the business’s lawyers have suggested they call it a “tobacco alternative”.
What the legal team has done isn’t entirely surprising. The problem with Puff Bar is that its e Cigarette product is itself a loophole in the law. This is because there’s currently no law mandating that electronic cigarettes need to include warning labels or advertising. The inclusion of a “smoking alternative” could start a flood of lawsuits that might be filed by municipalities that wished to charge cigarette companies for introducing another polluting form of tobacco in to the marketplace.
And also the possibility of a lawsuit being filed by municipalities the inclusion of flavored e cigarettes out there could result in a reduction in the sale of tobacco by non-smokers. Research shows that smokers who are presented with non-tobacco flavored e-cigs will replace those cigarettes with the ones that contain nicotine. By making tobacco less accessible to teenagers and to the younger generations, this could substantially decrease the number of people who die from tobacco related illnesses. Also it seems that the addition of the puff bar to several tobacco-flavored electronic cigarettes could lead smokers to seek out “real” cigarettes rather than rely so heavily on an alternative that may not supply them with nicotine.
It appears that the UK government may have a point. There’s currently no requirement for tobacco companies to include warning labels on their products nor will there be a ban on flavoured tobacco or e-liquid. The only thing that these products all have in common is that they will not cause cancer or other diseases. It appears to be a question of economics that is being overlooked. A solution like the puff bar would seem like a much better way to earn money for tobacco companies because they are essentially creating products which are more difficult to consume, which in turn means that fewer people will purchase them.