Is the Puff Bar Targeted at Reducing the Addiction Potential of Electronic Cigarettes?
Puff Bar is a wonderful alternative to a traditional ice cream treat because it has none of the cons connected with an ice cream treat. Puff Bar is really a simple sweet treat, that makes it a great alternative to traditional ice cream treats. Puff Bar is manufactured with only natural flavors, so it is a healthy alternative for those who are watching their diet. Moreover, Puff Bar is easy to make, you can make it as often as you want without having to prepare the ice cream each and every time. It’s ideal for kids and for parties because you can serve.
Puff Bar is a relatively new product, which was developed to test people reaction to herbal cigarette alternatives. Whenever we smoke we have been exposing ourselves to a large number 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 declare that Puff Bar doesn’t really taste like cigarettes because it is made from completely natural ingredients including fruits, sugar and mint.
One of the primary issues in public health today is obesity and diet. Due to 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 claim that people who use their product to lose weight can easily do so if they only need to carry around 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 know more 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). Based on the FDA any e-cigarette that contains nicotine must contain an insert that allows you to put it into the mouth area, therefore you can’t put it into your pocket or purse to go on it where ever you might go. If the product also offers an extinguisher it is also in violation of the law. The reason being that since there is no ash produced 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 a different one.
Because the maker of Puff Bar realized this their lawyers have sent letters to the companies that produce puff bars claiming that they have marketed their product in a way that is illegal. In addition to 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 make reference to their product as a “smoke machine”. Instead the business’s lawyers have suggested that they call it a “tobacco alternative”.
What the legal team did isn’t entirely surprising. The problem with Puff Bar is that its e Cigarette product is itself a loophole in regulations. This is because there is currently no law mandating that electronic cigarettes have to include warning labels or advertising. The inclusion of a “smoking alternative” could start a flood of lawsuits that would be filed by municipalities that wished to charge cigarette companies for introducing another polluting form of tobacco in to the marketplace.
Plus 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 are more likely to replace those cigarettes with the ones that contain nicotine. By making tobacco less accessible to teenagers and to younger generations, this could substantially decrease the amount of people who die from tobacco related illnesses. Also it seems that the addition of the puff bar to several tobacco-flavored electric cigarettes could lead smokers to search out “real” cigarettes rather than rely so heavily on an alternative that may not provide them with nicotine.
It seems that the UK government may have a point. There is currently no requirement of tobacco companies to add warning labels on the products nor is there a ban on flavoured tobacco or e-liquid. The thing that these products all have in common is that they will not cause Juul Compatible Pods 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 make money for tobacco companies because they’re essentially creating products that are more difficult to consume, which in turn implies that fewer people will purchase them.