How to quit cigarettes
Replies
-
At least he gave a study....0
-
SierraFatToSkinny wrote: »At least he gave a study....
As opposed to the link I posted to an organisation that deals primarily with lung disease, with the quoted studies and reports listed, none of which were funded by e-cig companies?
Again, ok. Evaluate the quality of information as you see fit.
0 -
SierraFatToSkinny wrote: »At least he gave a study....
As opposed to the link I posted to an organisation that deals primarily with lung disease, with the quoted studies and reports listed, none of which were funded by e-cig companies?
Again, ok. Evaluate the quality of information as you see fit.
No, but the original studies they based their decisions on weren't exactly uncontroversial, due to the hellstorm at the time, given that tobacco companies were looking for any way to demonize electronics.
Funny how those studies stopped happening after tobacco companies bought out the early e-cig manufacturers.
Also, everything in that analysis can be individually reviewed, if you so desire. All of the sources are right there.
ETA: don't get it twisted though. I do believe that quitting altogether is likely one's best bet. However, failing that, there is absolutely no evidence that electronics are harmful when used as designed, but a buttload of evidence showing how much less harmful they are than actual tobacco products.
ETA again: I almost never see people using Gen 1s anymore. It's usually 2s (pen vapes) and 3s (RDAs and RTAs). The people who use those are usually buying their liquid separate from the devices, or in my case, mixing my own. Gives me far greater control over exactly what is in it.0 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »SierraFatToSkinny wrote: »At least he gave a study....
As opposed to the link I posted to an organisation that deals primarily with lung disease, with the quoted studies and reports listed, none of which were funded by e-cig companies?
Again, ok. Evaluate the quality of information as you see fit.
No, but the original studies they based their decisions on weren't exactly uncontroversial, due to the hellstorm at the time, given that tobacco companies were looking for any way to demonize electronics.
Funny how those studies stopped happening after tobacco companies bought out the early e-cig manufacturers.
Also, everything in that analysis can be individually reviewed, if you so desire. All of the sources are right there.
The studies and reports listed in my link are from 2014 -2016.
2014 is the year the e-cig funded systematic review you posted was published. I fail to see how the ones in my link can be considered 'early studies' by comparison.
It's certainly agreed that e-cigs are less dangerous to health than actually cigarettes but it's way too early to know the long term effects or deem them 'safe' considering how slow the trajectory of exposure to onset of disease is in lung cancers etc.
It's okay though - we nurses will look after you whatever makes you sick.
0 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »SierraFatToSkinny wrote: »At least he gave a study....
As opposed to the link I posted to an organisation that deals primarily with lung disease, with the quoted studies and reports listed, none of which were funded by e-cig companies?
Again, ok. Evaluate the quality of information as you see fit.
No, but the original studies they based their decisions on weren't exactly uncontroversial, due to the hellstorm at the time, given that tobacco companies were looking for any way to demonize electronics.
Funny how those studies stopped happening after tobacco companies bought out the early e-cig manufacturers.
Also, everything in that analysis can be individually reviewed, if you so desire. All of the sources are right there.
The studies and reports listed in my link are from 2014 -2016.
2014 is the year the e-cig funded systematic review you posted was published. I fail to see how the ones in my link can be considered 'early studies' by comparison.
It's certainly agreed that e-cigs are less dangerous to health than actually cigarettes but it's way too early to know the long term effects or deem them 'safe' considering how slow the trajectory of exposure to onset of disease is in lung cancers etc.
It's okay though - we nurses will look after you whatever makes you sick.
See my two edits. I'm personally not a supporter of prefabs, especially those made by tobacco company owned subs. I am a control freak anyway, so buying raw materials from a trusted lab and mixing my own dodges literally every problem listed in your link regarding inconsistencies and contaminants.
ETA: look into the surgeon general's decision. It was based on the 2009-2010 studies, regardless of the fact that the decision wasn't made until 2016.0 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »SierraFatToSkinny wrote: »At least he gave a study....
As opposed to the link I posted to an organisation that deals primarily with lung disease, with the quoted studies and reports listed, none of which were funded by e-cig companies?
Again, ok. Evaluate the quality of information as you see fit.
No, but the original studies they based their decisions on weren't exactly uncontroversial, due to the hellstorm at the time, given that tobacco companies were looking for any way to demonize electronics.
Funny how those studies stopped happening after tobacco companies bought out the early e-cig manufacturers.
Also, everything in that analysis can be individually reviewed, if you so desire. All of the sources are right there.
The studies and reports listed in my link are from 2014 -2016.
2014 is the year the e-cig funded systematic review you posted was published. I fail to see how the ones in my link can be considered 'early studies' by comparison.
It's certainly agreed that e-cigs are less dangerous to health than actually cigarettes but it's way too early to know the long term effects or deem them 'safe' considering how slow the trajectory of exposure to onset of disease is in lung cancers etc.
It's okay though - we nurses will look after you whatever makes you sick.
See my two edits. I'm personally not a supporter of prefabs, especially those made by tobacco company owned subs. I am a control freak anyway, so buying raw materials from a trusted lab and mixing my own dodges literally every problem listed in your link regarding inconsistencies and contaminants.
Yeah - I saw that and they probably aren't a big problem, but we really don't know and the potential is there.
Also ... I apologise! One of the studies in my link was by the same guys that wrote yours so probably WAS funded.
Conspiracy? I dunno.
I'm gonna not take up vaping but then my lungs are probably screwed from 10 years smoking and asbestos exposure as a teenager on a background of asthma. Not judging. Just don't believe there is enough evidence to call e-cigs safe. You can buy them here (Australia) but I'm not sure they are actually even approved for sale/use here at all.
0 -
Allen Carr's Easy Way To Stop Smoking
Smoked 40 a day for 10 years, gave up after reading this.
Over 60 friends have also.
0 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »SierraFatToSkinny wrote: »At least he gave a study....
As opposed to the link I posted to an organisation that deals primarily with lung disease, with the quoted studies and reports listed, none of which were funded by e-cig companies?
Again, ok. Evaluate the quality of information as you see fit.
No, but the original studies they based their decisions on weren't exactly uncontroversial, due to the hellstorm at the time, given that tobacco companies were looking for any way to demonize electronics.
Funny how those studies stopped happening after tobacco companies bought out the early e-cig manufacturers.
Also, everything in that analysis can be individually reviewed, if you so desire. All of the sources are right there.
The studies and reports listed in my link are from 2014 -2016.
2014 is the year the e-cig funded systematic review you posted was published. I fail to see how the ones in my link can be considered 'early studies' by comparison.
It's certainly agreed that e-cigs are less dangerous to health than actually cigarettes but it's way too early to know the long term effects or deem them 'safe' considering how slow the trajectory of exposure to onset of disease is in lung cancers etc.
It's okay though - we nurses will look after you whatever makes you sick.
See my two edits. I'm personally not a supporter of prefabs, especially those made by tobacco company owned subs. I am a control freak anyway, so buying raw materials from a trusted lab and mixing my own dodges literally every problem listed in your link regarding inconsistencies and contaminants.
Yeah - I saw that and they probably aren't a big problem, but we really don't know and the potential is there.
Also ... I apologise! One of the studies in my link was by the same guys that wrote yours so probably WAS funded.
Conspiracy? I dunno.
I'm gonna not take up vaping but then my lungs are probably screwed from 10 years smoking and asbestos exposure as a teenager on a background of asthma. Not judging. Just don't believe there is enough evidence to call e-cigs safe. You can buy them here (Australia) but I'm not sure they are actually even approved for sale/use here at all.
Not a conspiracy so much as people reading a study with a foregone conclusion in mind. You should be used to that on MFP, hah. Two different people reading what they want to from the same source, and drawing opposite conclusions.0 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »SierraFatToSkinny wrote: »At least he gave a study....
As opposed to the link I posted to an organisation that deals primarily with lung disease, with the quoted studies and reports listed, none of which were funded by e-cig companies?
Again, ok. Evaluate the quality of information as you see fit.
No, but the original studies they based their decisions on weren't exactly uncontroversial, due to the hellstorm at the time, given that tobacco companies were looking for any way to demonize electronics.
Funny how those studies stopped happening after tobacco companies bought out the early e-cig manufacturers.
Also, everything in that analysis can be individually reviewed, if you so desire. All of the sources are right there.
The studies and reports listed in my link are from 2014 -2016.
2014 is the year the e-cig funded systematic review you posted was published. I fail to see how the ones in my link can be considered 'early studies' by comparison.
It's certainly agreed that e-cigs are less dangerous to health than actually cigarettes but it's way too early to know the long term effects or deem them 'safe' considering how slow the trajectory of exposure to onset of disease is in lung cancers etc.
It's okay though - we nurses will look after you whatever makes you sick.
See my two edits. I'm personally not a supporter of prefabs, especially those made by tobacco company owned subs. I am a control freak anyway, so buying raw materials from a trusted lab and mixing my own dodges literally every problem listed in your link regarding inconsistencies and contaminants.
Yeah - I saw that and they probably aren't a big problem, but we really don't know and the potential is there.
Also ... I apologise! One of the studies in my link was by the same guys that wrote yours so probably WAS funded.
Conspiracy? I dunno.
I'm gonna not take up vaping but then my lungs are probably screwed from 10 years smoking and asbestos exposure as a teenager on a background of asthma. Not judging. Just don't believe there is enough evidence to call e-cigs safe. You can buy them here (Australia) but I'm not sure they are actually even approved for sale/use here at all.
Not a conspiracy so much as people reading a study with a foregone conclusion in mind. You should be used to that on MFP, hah. Two different people reading what they want to from the same source, and drawing opposite conclusions.
Indeed.
0 -
I honestly can't believe they left the dicetyl thing on the page. That was handled by the market itself a couple of years ago, when e-cig users went ballistic and started boycotting the brands fingered as containing it.
When you're already in a niche market, you can't afford to have most of your small and incredibly organized customers crapping all over you. Granted, it's gotten a lot more populated and diverse in recent years, but the majority of us still keep our ear firmly to the ground for shenanigans.0 -
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »metalmeow1 wrote: »Everyone I know who began E-Cigs accidentally quit because the desire had faded so greatly.
That's kind of what happened with me. I still use an RDA, but man, smoking a cig just tastes foul as hell after vaping. I'm honestly glad that I ignored all of the early scaremongering about it, as I already knew that nicotine wasn't what would kill you, from the smoking, and in fact has several interesting health benefits. Much like caffeine (and anything else), the dose makes the poison; it's just that all of the crap from burning a single cig (or anything) is enough to poison most. Inhaling combusted materials rarely produces anything good, compared to the negatives.
Some formal information about e cigs:
http://www.lung.org/stop-smoking/smoking-facts/e-cigarettes-and-lung-health.html
I'll do you one better: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4110871/#!po=20.5224
Basically, all of the formal stuff was based on the early scaremongering, and follow up research using slightly more realistic methods, updated devices and liquids, etc. has all but been ignored. It's the equivalent of avoiding an iPhone 7, because the early Samsungs overheated and caught on fire.
Ok.
'Conflict of interest statement: Riccardo Polosa is a Professor of Medicine and is supported by the University of Catania, Italy. He has received lecture fees and research funding from GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer, manufacturers of stop smoking medications. He has also served as a consultant for Pfizer and Arbi Group Srl (Milano, Italy), the distributor of Categoria™ e-Cigarettes. His research on electronic cigarettes is currently supported by LIAF (Lega Italiana AntiFumo).
Konstantinos Farsalinos is a researcher at Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center. He has never been funded by the pharmaceutical or the tobacco industry. For some of his studies, the institution has received financial compensation from electronic cigarette companies for the studies’ cost. His salary is currently being paid by a scholarship grant from the Hellenic Society of Cardiology'
...............
One researcher has been given research funding from and served as a consultant to an e-cig distribution company, the other has been 'financially compensated' for some of his studies.
I'm skeptical that this is an unbiased systematic review, but you can elvaluate evidence however you like.
One thing I just noticed in Walmart that reminded me of this post. You would think if GSK and Pfizer's money was influencing him, his review would end up staunchly against e-cigs. Their introduction to the market also put a hurting on nicotine gums and drug based cessation methods.
GSK: Nicorette
Pfizer: Chantix0 -
Cold turkey never worked for me. I used a ecig and started with approx the same amount of nicotine and gradually decreased. Yes, I am aware that I replaced a bad habit with arguably another bad one but it worked for me. I sometimes still use it but it has zero nicotine now. Cigarette free for 6ish years. Also- working out. I find when I love my body more, the less crap I want to put into it. Good luck!0
-
I quit cold turkey on August 17, 2000. I'd had a cervical spine issue that caused incredible pain, finally after six long weeks I received the first ob two cervical epidurals. I spent 6 weeks begging my PCP for more pain meds but he refused. My best thinking was going for a walk with a 44 magnum. I didn't know that the human body could generate or survive that much pain.
So the neurosurgeon tells me that smoking with my cervical spine issues will cause more rapid deterioration of the discs. Last cigarette I had was before the appointment, never touched another.
I wasn't brave, I was chicken!0 -
I had smoked for 26 years (from the age of 11) and was smoking around 20-30 roll ups per day - I knew enough was enough so I started using Champix and stopped smoking after 10 days, at this point I had started reading Allen Carrs Easyway to Stop Smoking. After 14 days I had to quit the Champix as I was feeling so dog sick on it but I continued with the book and the quitting. That was 2nd September 2013 and I have not smoked since, not even one puff. No-one thought I could do it but I think Champix definitely got the actual quitting started and Allen Carr (and me) have kept me on the straight and narrow. His book was as annoying as hell at times don't get me wrong but it just clicked for me. I don't crave cigarettes and I find it amazing that I did it for so long. My husband gave up on the 1st September 2013 - he opted for an e-cigarette and he also has not smoked since. He used the e-cig for exactly a year and gave that up and that was that for us. It is doable but yes you do need to really want to quit as trite as that sounds. Find what's best for you, it may be trial and error but if you have a cigarette it's not the end of the world, just try again. A bit like dieting really, just because you have a day that's way over your calories it's no excuse to give up. Get up, brush yourself off and start again.
I wish you the best of luck!
0 -
I smoked for 29 years after starting at age 12 (3 1/2 years quit now). I too read Allen Carr's book and information from Joel Spitzer http://whyquit.com/joel/ntap.pdf - Cold turkey is the way to go, and take it one day at a time. Every morning you wake up, tell yourself "today I will not smoke, I don't know about tomorrow, but just for today I won't smoke". Remember that nicotine is a drug and there's no such thing as "just one" or "just a drag". I also have anxiety and smoking just makes it worse because you are in a constant state of withdrawl until your next cigarette! Good luck, you can do this!1
-
I used the patches and have been smoke free since early December. They come in 21, 14, and 7 mg. level. The level you start at depends on how much you smoke (it'll provide the info on the label) Each level takes about 6 weeks to get through and costs a little less than a carton of smokes.
Your insurance provider might have a smoking cessation benefit where they reimburse you for the patches (or provide them free), or your state department of health might have a program.
You're looking at a good 4-5 months to wean yourself off of the nicotine and you might have some whacky dreams at first. But, you'd be better off than you would be in 4-5 months if you didn't quit.
Watch your triggers ~ a death in the family brings me to the store, also travel may or may not cause me to cheat.0 -
hippiequeenxo wrote: »I've been smoking anywhere from half a pack to a whole pack a day for about three years now and have been wanting to quit so badly. As someone with anxiety and bipolar depression quitting is extra difficult since my body treats it as an anti depressants and anti anxiety. Looking for tips and advice on how to quit? What worked for you or someone you know?
I'm trying to get healthy in all aspects of my life. Thanks in advance for all of the help! It's much appreciated.
So what is happening? Don't be afraid to say 'no go, yet' or 'tried, but', because there are many here who will support you to have another go.0 -
-
I realized I'd liked thinking of myself as a non-smoker. I liked my hair and skin to smell good. I bought some really nice products with money I would've otherwise spent on cigarettes and tried a new way to live. That was 2011 and I never smoked again. It was hard at first but I found focusing on the immediate positives (smelling great right now) helped me a lot by giving me that one day at a time scaffolding to work from. The long term health stuff was too abstract and daunting.0
-
Try to just stop buying them, don't smoke "just this one".
Focus on working out, eating right, sleep, water, life, relationships, kids, job...your mind will stay busy.
Wishing you the best.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions