May be the Puff Bar Targeted at Reducing the Addiction Potential of ELECTRIC 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, that makes it a great option to traditional ice cream treats. Puff Bar is made 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 needing to prepare the ice cream every time. It’s ideal for kids and for parties because it’s easy to 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 are 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 because it is made from completely 100 % natural ingredients including fruits, sugar and mint.
One of the primary issues in public areas 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 individuals who use their product to lose excess weight can easily do so when they only need to carry around the small product. The makers of Puff Bar know that since public health officials have already been calling to find out more on the dangers of empty e-cigarette cartridges it’s pretty clear that the public wants to learn about Puff Bar and whether it poses a risk to public health.
By calling their product a “reusable” cartridge they are 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 that allows one 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 has an extinguisher it is also in violation of the law. The reason being that since there is no ash made by a puff Bar e Cigarette it isn’t a valid device to utilize to refill a preexisting e cigarette with nicotine or even 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 they have marketed their product in a manner 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 company’s lawyers have suggested that they call it a “tobacco alternative”.
What the legal team has done isn’t entirely surprising. The issue 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.
In addition to the possibility of a lawsuit being filed by municipalities the inclusion of flavored e cigarettes on the market could result in a reduction in the sale of tobacco by non-smokers. Research suggests that smokers who are offered non-tobacco flavored e-cigs will replace those cigarettes with Juul Pods those that contain nicotine. By making tobacco less accessible to young people and to 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 a number of tobacco-flavored electric cigarettes could lead smokers to search out “real” cigarettes and not rely so heavily on an alternative that may not provide them with nicotine.
It appears that the UK government could have a point. There is currently no requirement of tobacco companies to include warning labels on the products nor is there 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’s being overlooked. A solution just like the puff bar would seem just like a much better way to earn money for tobacco companies because they’re essentially creating products that are more difficult to consume, which implies that fewer people will purchase them.