Puff Counts Inflated: Who Will Safeguard Consumer Interests?

Special Report by 2FIRSTS Leona Zhu, edited by Sophia Lv
Apr.08.2024
Puff Counts Inflated: Who Will Safeguard Consumer Interests?
E-cigarette industry exposed for overstating puff counts, raising concerns over deceptive marketing practices.

Special announcement:

This article is limited to research on the global atomization industry and does not involve recommendations for any brands or products. 

The scope of this article is limited to the business sector and does not include any comments on regulatory policies or international current affairs.

Minors are prohibited from accessing.


 

 Inflated Puff Counts: Inside Story

by 2FIRSTS Leona Zhu

 

Recently, editors at 2FIRSTS purchased a disposable e-cigarette in the American market that claims to contain 16 milliliters of e-liquid and provide up to 15,000 puffs in "single-coil" mode. However, after conducting tests, 2FIRSTS staff found that the actual number of puffs was only 3,000 (the test subject was a female with normal vaping habits).

 

Why is the actual number of puffs far lower than the advertised quantity? 2FIRSTS editors consulted industry insiders and learned that this is not an isolated case, with the phenomenon of "inflated puff counts" being widespread in the e-cigarette industry.

 

Compared to traditional cigarettes, e-cigarettes come in varying capacities, so they cannot be measured in the same way as traditional cigarettes by using "packs." The measurement of e-cigarettes typically involves "puffs." Overstatement of puff count in e-cigarettes refers to the discrepancy between the advertised puff count on the packaging and the actual count, with the majority of products having a much lower actual count than what is claimed. The reason for this phenomenon is that some e-cigarette manufacturers, faced with intense competition and unable to break through in product technology, inflate the puff count to highlight the value of their products and compete for market share.

 

Inflated Puff Count: Recurring Incidents

 

Exaggerating the number of puffs has long been a phenomenon. In August 2021, foreign media exposed the e-cigarette puff exaggeration incident: PUFF BAR was sued by consumers, claiming that it advertised an e-cigarette with 800 puffs, but the actual usage was far lower than that.

 

Discerning American consumers have exposed the practice of falsifying puff counts on e-cigarettes. The class-action lawsuit in question states, "Although the defendant acknowledges that due to technical issues unknown to ordinary consumers, the Puff Bar Plus cannot truly provide 800 puffs, the defendant failed to provide this information anywhere on the product packaging."

 

There have been no updates on the handling of the case available through public channels. However, based on the current market situation, the case has not deterred manufacturers from exaggerating their product specifications. On the contrary, the situation has escalated.

 

An insider that has been running business in U.S. for a long time told 2FIRSTS that overstating the number of puffs has become an unwritten rule in the e-cigarette industry. Some industry insiders even claim that almost all products on the market (mainly referring to the American market) are unable to meet the claimed number of puffs.

 

On the well-known American retail website DAMANDVAPE, 2FIRSTS compared the e-liquid amount and labeled nicotine strength of its flagship e-cigarette products. The results are shown in the following graph:

 

Puff Counts Inflated: Who Will Safeguard Consumer Interests?
Comparison of puff counts for key products featured on the popular US distribution website DAMENDVAPE | Graphic by 2FIRSTS

 

According to the labeling of these products, the average number of puffs per milliliter of e-liquid ranges from a minimum of 347 puffs to a maximum of 1250 puffs. In Europe, in accordance with the EU's TPD regulations, e-liquid content cannot exceed 2ml, with 2ml of e-liquid generally considered to provide around 600 puffs. Therefore, most compliant disposable e-cigarettes on the European market claim to have 600 puffs. Some manufacturers have advertised achieving technological breakthroughs, such as IVG (2400 puffs) and products using Smoore FEELM 2.0 technology (1000 puffs).

 

思摩尔在英国推出一次性千口技术FEELM 2.0,斩获行业创新大奖
Smoore's FEELM 2.0 Technology | Source: Smoore

 

Based on the default rules of the European market, the number of puffs that can be taken from each milliliter of e-liquid is approximately 300 puffs. Therefore, without any technological breakthroughs, some brands in the American market label their products with a significantly higher number of puffs than the default average in the European market.

 

However, whether it is the puffs in the European market or the puff counts in the American market, these are all figures provided by the manufacturers.

 

An engineer from Shenzhen Elements Testing Co., Ltd. told 2FIRSTS that due to different testing parameters, there are significant differences in the test results of the number of puffs. Laboratories typically use international standard parameters for testing - "3S, 55mL" (3 seconds per suction port, flow rate of 55 milliliters. Note: flow rate refers to the volume of gas sucked). According to this parameter, about 200 puffs can usually be generated from 2 milliliters of e-liquid, but products are usually labeled as 600-800 ports. However, the engineer believes that achieving 600-800 puffs is not entirely impossible, but the parameters need to be adjusted to "1S, 18mL" (1 second per suction port, flow rate of 18 milliliters) to reach that amount. However, it is understood that the suction time and gas flow rate of normal users are much higher than this parameter.

 

Puff Counts Inflated: Who Will Safeguard Consumer Interests?
E-cigarette aerosol generation and bechtop machine - definition and standard conditions" developed by the International Cooperation Centre for Tobacco Science Research | Image source: coresta

 

Industry insiders pointed out that typically, the actual number of puffs can be obtained by subtracting half of the number of puffs indicated by the manufacturer. This has become the default unspoken rule in the industry.

 

In addition, it is understood that the reason for the significant discrepancy between the labeled number of puffs and the actual number of puffs is not only due to different testing conditions or falsely labeled puffs. There is also a more hidden reason - some e-cigarettes have a phenomenon of falsely labeling the content of e-liquid, with some labeling 3 milliliters more when the actual amount is lower, and others labeling more than double when the actual amount is higher.

 

Inflated Figures: Result of Compliance or Competition?

 

Why has the issue of exaggerated puff numbers become an "open secret" in the e-cigarette industry? Behind the chaos is profit driving forces.

 

In a fiercely competitive market environment, some manufacturers, unable to make breakthroughs either technically or in terms of cost, have resorted to the tactic of "false advertising," focusing their attention on numbers directly tied to pricing. Once this rule is broken, false advertising becomes a trend.

 

An industry insider once said that he could openly admit to clients that the number of units on his product packaging is "overstated" because "everyone else does it, so I can't afford not to do it."

 

The practice of false advertising exists in every aspect of the supply chain for a reason. The co-founder of a U.S. e-cig brand pointed out that from a production perspective, determining the number of product uses is crucial before the product is released to the market. If the production does not follow the trend of mainstream usage numbers, then the only way to compete in the market is by falsely advertising the number of uses.

 

From the perspectives of wholesale and retail, products with high thread counts are usually able to be sold at higher prices. Some lesser known brands may falsely advertise thread counts to lower product costs, in order to compete with low thread count products from larger brands. For example, pricing a product with a claimed thread count of 8000 the same as a well-known brand with a claimed thread count of 5000. This will increase the competitiveness of the product to some extent.

 

Exaggerated claims are so widespread because, in addition to profit motives, they also benefit from consumer "acceptance." The insider stated that most consumers are actually aware that numbers on labels are exaggerated, but nobody really questions it. Experienced consumers will evaluate the true flavor based on their own smoking habits, while some will use e-liquid capacity as a reference standard.

 

"You can't weigh a packet of snacks when you buy it outside." A senior industry expert in the e-cigarette industry used this vivid metaphor to illustrate why the practice of exaggerated claims in the e-cigarette market has not been given enough attention.

 

In addition, a senior industry expert pointed out that disposable e-cigarettes are in a "grey area" in many countries, making it difficult for consumers to protect their rights.

 

In addition to the aforementioned phenomenon of inflated descriptions, there is also a situation that is the opposite. That is, the deliberate underreporting of figures in the European market.

 

In compliance with regulatory requirements, the e-liquids in Europe must not exceed 2 milliliters. However, editors at 2FIRSTS found that when using a European-purchased e-cigarette with a labeled liquid content of 2 milliliters, they actually took more than 600 puffs.

 

In light of the previous incidents of e-liquid overdosing in multiple e-cigarette products in the UK, the practice of underreporting nicotine levels on e-liquid labels has also raised suspicions. Underreporting nicotine levels intentionally to evade regulation, even in compliance with regulations, is another form of misleading labeling.

 

Exaggerated Puffs Highlight Regulatory Blind Spot

 

In a chaotic market where companies can profit without fear of punishment for false advertising, some companies without technical expertise but willing to deceive disrupt market regulations at low cost. This exacerbates the culture of "bad money driving out good" in the e-cigarette industry, with reputable manufacturers facing a dilemma between "business interests" and "business ethics." Unscrupulous manufacturers profit in the short term through false claims but further deteriorate the regulatory environment and social reputation of the e-cigarette industry, hindering its long-term, high-quality global development.

 

Consumers are the ones who end up paying for the exaggerated number of mouths. As mentioned earlier, consumers "accept" the exaggerated number of mouths, which is just a result of the difficulty in protecting their rights. 

 

In reality, consumers are not indifferent to the issue of exaggerated mouthpiece numbers. 2FIRSTS discovered on international social media platforms that many e-cigarette consumers are dissatisfied with this, with some even proposing a collective appeal to uphold their rights. However, due to the lack of intervention from regulatory authorities, manufacturers do not seem to feel deterred.

 

Puff Counts Inflated: Who Will Safeguard Consumer Interests?
A consumer expresses their dissatisfaction with false advertising on social media platforms | Image source: reddit

 

The exaggeration of numbers in advertising is not adequately addressed by industry self-regulation alone. Why is it that we don't need to monitor the quantity of snacks we purchase every time? It is because a robust system of consumer protection has been put in place to act as a strong barrier against deceptive practices, and to deter counterfeiters. A similar mechanism should also be established in the realm of e-cigarette consumer protection.

 

However, the inadequacy of relevant consumer protection mechanisms highlights a blind spot in the current global regulation of e-cigarettes. For major e-cigarette consumer markets worldwide, such as Europe and the United States, regulatory efforts primarily focus on addressing the societal harms associated with e-cigarettes, including underage protection, illicit trade, and tax revenue loss. While these regulations are undoubtedly crucial, consumer protection should not be overlooked as e-cigarettes are consumer goods. Establishing product quality standards, monitoring systems, consumer rights protection mechanisms, and combating counterfeit products not only further safeguards the safety and interests of e-cigarette consumers but also significantly promotes the healthy development of the global industry, facilitating the displacement of inferior products with superior ones.

 

We welcome news tips, article submissions, interview requests, or comments on this piece.

Please contact us at info@2firsts.com, or reach out to Alan Zhao, CEO of 2Firsts, on LinkedIn


Notice

1.  This article is intended solely for professional research purposes related to industry, technology, and policy. Any references to brands or products are made purely for objective description and do not constitute any form of endorsement, recommendation, or promotion by 2Firsts.

2.  The use of nicotine-containing products — including, but not limited to, cigarettes, e-cigarettes, nicotine pouchand heated tobacco products — carries significant health risks. Users are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions.

3.  This article is not intended to serve as the basis for any investment decisions or financial advice. 2Firsts assumes no direct or indirect liability for any inaccuracies or errors in the content.

4.  Access to this article is strictly prohibited for individuals below the legal age in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright

 

This article is either an original work created by 2Firsts or a reproduction from third-party sources with proper attribution. All copyrights and usage rights belong to 2Firsts or the original content provider. Unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or any other form of unauthorized use by any individual or organization is strictly prohibited. Violators will be held legally accountable.

For copyright-related inquiries, please contact: info@2firsts.com

 

AI Assistance Disclaimer

 

This article may have been enhanced using AI tools to improve translation and editorial efficiency. However, due to technical limitations, inaccuracies may occur. Readers are encouraged to refer to the cited sources for the most accurate information.

We welcome any corrections or feedback. Please contact us at: info@2firsts.com

FDA Sued Over Allowing Some Unauthorized Vapes and Nicotine Pouches to Stay on Market
FDA Sued Over Allowing Some Unauthorized Vapes and Nicotine Pouches to Stay on Market
Public health groups, pediatricians and parents sued the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on July 14, 2026, challenging a May enforcement guidance that they say allows unauthorized e-cigarettes and nicotine pouches to remain on the market while applications are under review.
Jul.15
As FDA Reshapes PMTA Reviews and ENDS Enforcement Priorities, CTP Acting Director Bret Koplow to Keynote NATO Event for a Retail Network of 66,000-Plus Stores
As FDA Reshapes PMTA Reviews and ENDS Enforcement Priorities, CTP Acting Director Bret Koplow to Keynote NATO Event for a Retail Network of 66,000-Plus Stores
Bret Koplow, acting director of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Center for Tobacco Products, will deliver a keynote and participate in a fireside chat at the National Association of Tobacco Outlets' Sept. 29-30 conference in Washington. His appearance comes months after the FDA moved to accelerate PMTA reviews and introduced a more differentiated enforcement policy for certain unauthorized ENDS and oral nicotine pouch products. The agency also plans a public list identifying manufacturers and products it does not currently intend to prioritize for enforcement under the May guidance. NATO says its membership includes more than 66,000 retail stores, making product-status transparency and enforcement boundaries directly relevant to the retail sector.
Aug.14
China’s Jiangsu Tobacco Monopoly Bureau and Drug Regulator Target Illegal Vape Sales Disguised as Medical Devices, Define Six Violations
China’s Jiangsu Tobacco Monopoly Bureau and Drug Regulator Target Illegal Vape Sales Disguised as Medical Devices, Define Six Violations
China’s Jiangsu Tobacco Monopoly Bureau and Jiangsu Provincial Medical Products Administration have issued a joint notice targeting illegal production and sales of vape products disguised as medical devices. The notice identifies six categories of violations, including obtaining medical licenses through false materials, misusing medical device credentials, expanding production beyond approved scopes, and using medical device-related online platforms to promote or sell vape products. The action is based on China’s tobacco and medical device regulations and aims to strengthen vape oversight and consumer protection.
Aug.04
Seita’s Julia Neumaier Says France Should Target Vape Access, Not Plain Packaging
Seita’s Julia Neumaier Says France Should Target Vape Access, Not Plain Packaging
Julia Neumaier, general manager of Seita, Imperial Brands’ French subsidiary, said France should focus vaping regulation on access control, age verification, online sales and distribution channels, rather than applying tobacco-style plain packaging to vaping products.
Jul.15
Alaska Warns 1,500 Tobacco Retailers Over Unauthorized Vapes and Nicotine Pouches
Alaska Warns 1,500 Tobacco Retailers Over Unauthorized Vapes and Nicotine Pouches
Alaska Attorney General Stephen J. Cox has sent notices to more than 1,500 tobacco retailers and distributors warning them against selling vape and nicotine pouch products that lack authorization from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). According to the Alaska Department of Law, businesses were advised to verify products against FDA authorization databases and avoid selling unauthorized nicotine products. The action highlights how state-level enforcement is increasingly extending federal product authorization requirements to retail channels.
Jul.24
Earnings Analysis | CTIHK H1 2026 Revenue Falls 26.9% as Core Businesses Diverge and New Growth Drivers Remain to Be Proven
Earnings Analysis | CTIHK H1 2026 Revenue Falls 26.9% as Core Businesses Diverge and New Growth Drivers Remain to Be Proven
China Tobacco International (HK) reported a 26.9% revenue decline in H1 2026, while gross profit fell only 9.5%, revealing sharp divergence across its businesses. Tobacco leaf imports contracted, while leaf exports and Brazil operations expanded strongly. Cigarette exports faced China duty-free market transition, and new tobacco products remained small. Meanwhile, CTIHK continues to strengthen its role as an investment and financing platform, though major external deals have yet to emerge. 2Firsts examines what these shifts mean for its next growth drivers.
Capital Markets
Aug.24