ECO - Electronic Cigarette Organization

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am ready, and good with ATA or OAT. i think those are the best 2 so far. I have plenty of hosting space and bandwidth, as well as plenty of experience with drupal CMS. I just happen to have been laid off at work for a time so I am willing to put in some development time. Can also easily set up immediate donation and auto-renews if needed.
 

dragonpuff

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Laying down, trying to sleep, but my mind is racing. I keep thinking, what can we do, besides writing letters to our congressmen and whatnot, for the benefit of the ECO/whatever-the-new-name-is and current and future vapers in general?

And it hit me: the single biggest obstacle we face is public ignorance. So how do we combat that?

Instead of just advocating and defending vaping, we should make it a point to educate people on the potential for harm reduction using nicotine replacement without cessation and the reasons behind it, i.e. "quit or die" dooms those who cannot quit nicotine. We need to separate the wheat from the chaff, the nicotine from the smoke, and make it clear that in normal doses, nicotine is not much more dangerous than coffee, and that it's only the smoke that people should be afraid of.

Of course, in order to do this we need to create a database of articles and research from credible doctors to support this position, and it should be easily accessible by anyone who visits the site (in a sidebar on the home page, perhaps). I've seen quite a few links on this forum that would be great (my personal favorite is tobaccoharmreduction.org).

This also means we show support for other non-smoke forms of nicotine, ones that have already been heavily researched like snus. Unfortunately this also means big pharma nicotine products, as they are supplements that replace nicotine and are currently the most comparable FDA-approved products to vaporizers (though obviously to us, less effective ;)). Giving positive mention to these other products will have a two-fold effect:
1) It shows that we're in this for the public good, and we're not just suppliers doing this for the money (well, they'd be less likely to think that), and
2) It gets the public closer to seeing vaporizers in the same category as these much healthier products and further from associating them with cancerous cigarettes.

I may be stepping out of bounds a little of the original ECO concept, but we can get such a strong support base by educating and providing people with honest information. Vapers are a little-known minority right now, so we're going to need support from many newly-educated nonvapers to make this work.

Just my two cents (or $200, whatever :p). I'm going to bed now so i won't see any replies til tomorrow. Goodnight all :D
 

malyden

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Dec 31, 2008
1,267
686
OH
I am ready, and good with ATA or OAT. i think those are the best 2 so far. I have plenty of hosting space and bandwidth, as well as plenty of experience with drupal CMS. I just happen to have been laid off at work for a time so I am willing to put in some development time. Can also easily set up immediate donation and auto-renews if needed.
I also think ATA or OAT are good. Will help with what I can.
 

RobertY

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Stumbling blocks as I see them.

The words cigarette/s AND Tobacco. IMHO both of those need to be avoided in the name.

Areas of concern.

* We can not claim in any way shape or form that the PV is safer than analogs. I know it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out the chemicals in a PV vrs the chemicals in an analog. BUT, until it is PROVEN to be safer then no claims in that direction should be made on the site. We must avoid that because that is one of the items under attack currently.

* To back the above there does need to be a push to get the PV's tested along with the juice, carts, etc... That does cost much money, BUT, if the above can be proven then a lot of the battle is won.

* Take a firm stance on NOT marketing to minors. Publicly frown on any company that does market to minors. Be pro active in setting the minimum age to at least 18 to be able to buy/sell PV's and accessories including the juice.

* This kind of goes with the above. Flavors must be presented in a better light. Right now as it stands the general public frowns on flavors and sees them as an attempt to get minors hooked. That one makes me scratch my head because I am an adult and I LOVE different flavors. My sweet tooth kicks my hiney so I love the sweet flavors also. So somehow flavors needs to be brought into a better light. Maybe tell the general public that they are only allowed no flavor ice cream and sweets? LOL!

*Another thing is the smoking cessation claims. Well... I know that I laid down analogs from day one with the help of my PV. BUT, once again here is something unproven. It needs to be proven and recognized. Until then, no smoking cessation claims on the new web site.

Thats just my quarters worth. (inflation ya know)
 

SLDS181

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Aug 11, 2009
1,325
1
Western NJ
* We can not claim in any way shape or form that the PV is safer than analogs. I know it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out the chemicals in a PV vrs the chemicals in an analog. BUT, until it is PROVEN to be safer then no claims in that direction should be made on the site. We must avoid that because that is one of the items under attack currently.

I debate that wholeheartedly. There is no single chemical within a mixture, PG, VG, nicotine, flavoring, which will kill you (except, obviously, in large doses). The onus is on others to make the claim that its harmful. PG has been studied, VG has been studied, nicotine has been studied. I still don't believe anyone has shown any real evidence of anything more, equally, or even remotely close to the harm of smoking cigarettes.

The rest I agree with. To me, its not a cessation device. Its an alternative thats safer and provides me with more control of what I put in my body.
 

yvilla

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Nov 18, 2008
2,063
575
Rochester, NY
I agree wholeheartedly with SLDS181. There is absolutely no problem with shouting from the rooftops that vaping is safer than smoking! As one of the many harm reduction experts who endorse vaping said when discussing just how obvious it is to anyone with an elementary understanding of science that it is safer than smoking, and that the harm in smoking comes from combustion, (David Sweanor, I think): "It's the smoke, stupid!"

It is only specific health claims and smoking cessation claims that must be avoided.
 
Last edited:

dragonpuff

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
* We can not claim in any way shape or form that the PV is safer than analogs. I know it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out the chemicals in a PV vrs the chemicals in an analog. BUT, until it is PROVEN to be safer then no claims in that direction should be made on the site. We must avoid that because that is one of the items under attack currently.

First of all, i want to say that i agree with everything you said... except this one part.

Two reasons:
1) Why are we using these? Isn't that the main reason almost everyone here started vaping? If we don't claim them to be safer than smoking, then what are we fighting so hard for?
2) They HAVE been proven to be safer, at least tentatively. The study that the FDA did made that crystal clear, they identified all the ingredients and their amounts. Obviously more testing needs to be done, and we should never claim that it is "safe" (without the r), but we at least have enough to claim that vaping is safer than smoking.

Another two cents in the pot :thumb:
 

madman3237

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
May 20, 2009
94
0
Laurel, DE USA
First of all, i want to say that i agree with everything you said... except this one part.

Two reasons:
1) Why are we using these? Isn't that the main reason almost everyone here started vaping? If we don't claim them to be safer than smoking, then what are we fighting so hard for?
2) They HAVE been proven to be safer, at least tentatively. The study that the FDA did made that crystal clear, they identified all the ingredients and their amounts. Obviously more testing needs to be done, and we should never claim that it is "safe" (without the r), but we at least have enough to claim that vaping is safer than smoking.

Another two cents in the pot :thumb:

A big ditto to all that, could not put it better.
 

grimmer255

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Jul 5, 2009
3,271
12
somewhere out there......
wow I am so glad to see a more positive approach to this. I wish I had more time. Im back in college so I'll do my part by vaping in the smoking section b/c my college is 90% smoke free. So once you get to a certain point you cant smoke anymore. basically you have to smoke in designated areas and its far from any buildings at least 400-500ft from the buildings. Just let me know what you want me to do and say. Oh if you have bumper or waterproof window stickers send them my way. there are at least 12,000 students at my community college. I'm sure several hundred will see my car.
 
Last edited:

Webby

Resting In Peace
ECF Veteran
Mar 31, 2009
796
15
USA
Webby, you need to host videos? I can get a second copy of PhpMotion online in about an hour on my server. I got an ungodly amount of bandwidth and space just sitting there doing nothing each month. I thought Pittube would be popular, but it's lightly used, so I can donate the space and bandwidth. Let me know.

Big Jim,

Absolutely! I have three Windows Media Servers in dedicated racks at Level 3 and Southern Light, but you can count on a DOS attack from ASH before too long. Mirrored servers will be a must.

I'll PM you so we can start building out the network - Any other MCSE's or SysAdmins out there? PM me and let's pool resources. No one ISP owner or network engineer needs to carry the load (even if they have the servers or bandwidth) load balancing and mirrored site resources will stop anyone from shutting down a single IP range. Hell, we can easily build our own ARPANET.
 
Last edited:

Webby

Resting In Peace
ECF Veteran
Mar 31, 2009
796
15
USA
How about Tobacco Alternatives Group "TAG" or Tobacco Alternatives Organization "TAO"

I've got to admit, I've never cared much for the term "personal vaporizor" either and anything with the word "cigarette" seems counterproductive to convincing the general public that these ARE NOT cigarettes. "Alternative" seems to be a good word and leaves scalability for including other (future?) products.

like both ATA and TAG. My only concern with the former would be that if (pardon me, when) we start grabbing national headlines, the ATA is commonly known as the Air Transportation Association and may be misconstrued as having something to do with the airline industry. Granted, the same argument can be used for just about any acronym, but the ATA does get a lot of press and I think we'd want to really stand out.


That said, it's a common joke in the marketing industry that most startups spend 80% of their time focusing on a catchy name and tweaking their business cards rather than focusing on their core product. Some very good points have been brought up and good names suggested. Whatever name we choose, let's do it fairly quickly and start concentrating on a charter and NPO status.

Time is of the essence my friends, how about someone posting a poll so we can select a name to rally around and move onto bigger issues?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread