A restriction on flavors is as pointless as it is unsupportable by science. As crazy as it makes me that so called "public health officials" try to PRETEND that they are doing something helpful by torturing people into abstinence by restricting flavored tobacco products, in some ways I really don't give a flying **** if they tried to include e-cigs in the idiotic flavor restrictions because even if it passed, there is nothing that could possibly stop me from buying liquid flavor extracts and no reasonable law could prevent me from putting it in a vaporizer or atomizer. I would of course fight against such a law because it discourages smokers from switching to a reduced harm alternative tobacco products; but other than the ethical offenses*, indoor use or flavor restrictions on smoke-free products are unenforceable and basically worthless on all counts.
If you are not lighting the product on fire and inhaling the smoke, there is little or no functional difference between any form of tobacco and the way that anything else like foods or drinks are consumed. That is to say, no matter if you chew, inhale, swallow, or touch/absorb it through your skin; there are foods or other non-tobacco products that are consumed in basically the same way...so unless you have a reason to ban a flavoring (or any other component: battery, atomizer, glycerine, etc. that might be used in foods or consumer products) or dictate where you can consume it, no one has offered a compelling reason why you would treat smokeless (and probably spitless) tobacco any different.
*For the record, "ethical offenses" is putting it much to mildly in my opinion because it disturbs me to my core that people like Banzwhole perpetuate fear, uncertainty, doubt, and guilt (to be fair, usually unconsciously but often quite misplaced) while wallowing in their own self-righteous indignation...but I figure if they want to chase their tails with this kind of garbage, maybe they won't have time to do something that actually matters.
