Is the Puff Bar Aimed at Reducing the Addiction Potential of Electronic Cigarettes?
Puff Bar is an excellent alternative to a traditional ice cream treat because it has none of the cons connected with an ice cream treat. Puff Bar is 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’s a healthy alternative for individuals who are watching their diet. In addition to that, Puff Bar is easy to create, you can make it normally as you want without needing to prepare the ice cream each time. It’s great for kids and for parties because you can serve.
Puff Bar is a relatively new product, which was developed to test people a reaction to herbal cigarette alternatives. When we smoke we have been exposing ourselves to thousands of chemicals, some are good, some are bad. Puff Bar does 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 natural ingredients including fruits, sugar and mint.
One of the biggest issues in public areas health today is obesity and diet. For this reason many companies are developing products that help people stay trim. The Puff Bar is one of these brilliant 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 take with you the small product. The makers of Puff Bar are aware that since public health officials have been calling to find out more on the dangers of empty e-cigarette cartridges it’s pretty clear that the general public wants to know more about Puff Bar podsmall.com 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 which has nicotine must contain an insert that allows you to put it into your mouth, this means that you can’t put it into your pocket or purse to go on it where ever you may go. If the product also offers an extinguisher additionally it is in violation of the law. The reason being that while there is no ash made by a puff Bar e Cigarette it isn’t a valid device to use to refill a preexisting e cigarette with nicotine or even to smoke another one.
Since 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 manner that is illegal. Along with 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 that they no longer make reference 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 regulations. This is because there is currently no law mandating that electric cigarettes need 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 case being filed by municipalities the inclusion of flavored e cigarettes on the market could result in a decrease 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 those that contain nicotine. By making tobacco less accessible to young people and to younger generations, this could substantially reduce the number 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 seek out “real” cigarettes rather than rely so heavily on an alternative solution that may not supply them with nicotine.
It appears that the UK government could have a point. There is currently no requirement for tobacco companies to add 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 can 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 such as a much better way to earn money for tobacco companies because they’re essentially creating products which are more difficult to consume, which implies that fewer people will purchase them.