Smoking: Kicking the Habit

I smoked a pack a day when I quit 9 years ago. The Allen Car book helped me, mainly by driving home the point:

You are not missing out on anything, if you quit. This is ESSENTIAL as Electric_E already mentioned. If you have convinced yourself of this point, quitting is easy after the first few days.

Other points:

  • Forget about nicotine replacement. The smoking addiction is primarily mental.
  • You stop all at once, tapering off does not make sense.
  • Stop smoking in a time when you are not in a period of extreme stress.

I dip with some regularity and it doesn’t affect my lifting, try switching to that before quitting.

Electric E’s on point.
I quit back in November. Sudden cut off. Realized it was time for me to quit.

It’s easier if you stop buying the packs. Then all you have to do is suffer.

FFS it is cigs not heroin. Most people will only be physically addicted to cigs for 2-4 days after their last cig. The problem is, as others have stated, that it is all mental. Cigs are used to pass time, help you relax, etc. Quit treating it like a hobby and get a real one.

Think of it like a diet. Sure those brownies or whatever look great but after eating clean for 2 weeks do you really crave them anymore unless you have a taste? Uhh…not sure if that helped just know that cigs are 99.999% mental.

Most pathetic thing I’ve seen in my life was grown ass men crying because their hidden stash of cigs was found at field training for AFROTC. “Nooooo…i needs them sob please let me just have one.” My mouth was probably so far open in shock that I could of put on a donkey show.

[quote]Ghost22 wrote:
I dip with some regularity and it doesn’t affect my lifting, try switching to that before quitting.[/quote]

Would you say you dip a can a day? I went through that much…it definitely affected my lifting…I couldn’t do more than 5 reps without sucking wind. I would dip rather than eat. I would skip workouts to dip, cut workouts short to dip. Maybe you can handle it better than me…my personality is very addictive, but the differnces I’ve noticed since I quit are significant.

[quote]GhorigTheBeefy wrote:
FFS it is cigs not heroin. quote]

Nocotene is more addictive than heroin though, but I agree with your point he has only been smoking 2 years it should not be too hard

To beat it psychologically I started using the nicotine lozenges. Nicotine lozenges dissolve completely just like a mint, so unlike the gum you know when the drug is gone. This is a big advantage as far as the drug delivery is actually quite similar to a cigarette, unlike a patch or a gum.

I used the lozenges heavily for a few days and enjoyed the mild buzz at work. Here’s the interesting part though, when it came down to buying another box of mediocre tasting mints for 75$ or just giving up the drug the decision was easy. After not having smoked for a month and LOVING the physical benefits it becomes really hard to justify buying either the cigarettes or mints.

It became and economic decision. I could no longer run or breathe well so I wanted to quit, and I could no longer justify paying so much for crappy mints for a buzz.

BTW, I smoked in high school and then quit for years, then I went to Japan and smoked and drank the whole time (when in Rome) when I got home that is how I quit.

[quote]GhorigTheBeefy wrote:
FFS it is cigs not heroin. Most people will only be physically addicted to cigs for 2-4 days after their last cig. The problem is, as others have stated, that it is all mental. Cigs are used to pass time, help you relax, etc. Quit treating it like a hobby and get a real one.

Think of it like a diet. Sure those brownies or whatever look great but after eating clean for 2 weeks do you really crave them anymore unless you have a taste? Uhh…not sure if that helped just know that cigs are 99.999% mental.

Most pathetic thing I’ve seen in my life was grown ass men crying because their hidden stash of cigs was found at field training for AFROTC. “Nooooo…i needs them sob please let me just have one.” My mouth was probably so far open in shock that I could of put on a donkey show.[/quote]

So true, it’s mainly mental. We are creatures of habit like all animals. You fall into a routine and it’s hard to break it. I remember working factory type jobs in the past with ten hour shifts. At break time two hours into the shift nearly everyone looked so forward to hitting the break area to light up their smokes. That cigarette was something to look forward to while toiling away in a dismal factory setting. You brain locks into the habit and you then believe you have to have it.

It requires a strong desire to change, to change the habit, and start doing things differently and replacing bad habits. For me a lot of it was the thought that bad habits that the body withstood to a degree in youth would start to catch up with me more quickly once I was into my thirties and beyond. And thinking I would have to deal with the health consequences and ramifications into my forties and fifties.

At that point a decision had to be made in regard to how I wanted the quality of my life to be through middle age and into old age. I decided at that point I wanted to do as much as possible to make it as good as it can possibly be barring anything that is out of my control.

There really is no good reason to smoke and I hope anyone who wants to is successful in their decision to stop.

D

[quote]sen say wrote:
Ghost22 wrote:
I dip with some regularity and it doesn’t affect my lifting, try switching to that before quitting.

Would you say you dip a can a day? I went through that much…it definitely affected my lifting…I couldn’t do more than 5 reps without sucking wind. I would dip rather than eat. I would skip workouts to dip, cut workouts short to dip. Maybe you can handle it better than me…my personality is very addictive, but the differnces I’ve noticed since I quit are significant.[/quote]

No where near a can a day. It’s not a constant thing during the day for me, but like after classes or after work kinda thing.

Moderation is king, if you can’t do it a little then it’s probably better not to do it at all.

I notice no adverse effects from light/moderate use.

[quote]Electric_E wrote:

Nocotene is more addictive than heroin though, but I agree with your point he has only been smoking 2 years it should not be too hard

[/quote]

Huh? Where did you hear that garbage? A lot of FBI guys go to my dad’s church and a few of them were undercover for drug crimes. Two of them have done heroin when they were undercover. The way they explained it was that with heroin after your first injection you are hooked for the rest of your life. You will wake up and you will either think of it or your body will hurt for it which will make you think of it. One of them even said, “Right now as I talk to you all I want to do is go down town and get some smack.” Supposedly these guys didn’t even have addictive personalities and they’ve been clean for almost 20 years and they still get the shakes. Now that is a fucking drug.

Oh and for all of you smokers it is going to be harder to get a job for you. A lot of employers are starting to not hire smokers due to rising medical costs and it is kind of hard to cover up your scratchy voice and yellow hands.

[quote]GhorigTheBeefy wrote:
Electric_E wrote:

Nocotene is more addictive than heroin though, but I agree with your point he has only been smoking 2 years it should not be too hard

Huh? Where did you hear that garbage? A lot of FBI guys go to my dad’s church and a few of them were undercover for drug crimes. Two of them have done heroin when they were undercover. The way they explained it was that with heroin after your first injection you are hooked for the rest of your life. You will wake up and you will either think of it or your body will hurt for it which will make you think of it. One of them even said, “Right now as I talk to you all I want to do is go down town and get some smack.” Supposedly these guys didn’t even have addictive personalities and they’ve been clean for almost 20 years and they still get the shakes. Now that is a fucking drug.

Oh and for all of you smokers it is going to be harder to get a job for you. A lot of employers are starting to not hire smokers due to rising medical costs and it is kind of hard to cover up your scratchy voice and yellow hands.[/quote]

Cops taking heroin as part of being under cover? Any illegal activity by the police while under cover would make the operation null and void, that sounds like a big heap of shit too me, I also cannot see someone taking heroin for what at the end of the day is just a well paid job.

Nicotine, cocaine, heroin, and alcohol all meet criteria as addictive or dependence producing drugs, though none of these drugs causes addiction in all who are exposed (cf., APA, APA, WHO, Sur. Gen., FDA, NIDA, etc.). The risk of addiction following any use, the prevalence of frequent use among current users, and the occurance of APA, DSM-defined dependence among current users ranges from about 2 to 10 times greater for cigarettes than for these other drugs (Anthony et al. 1994, Exp.Clin. Psychopharm.; NIDA’s Monitoring the Future Survey, FDA in Fed Register, Aug. 11, 1995; Surg. Gen. 1988). Thus, Dole’ s comment, in which he specifically challenged the conclusion that nicotine is appropriately considered an addictive drug, is even more applicable to cocaine, heroin, and alcohol; yet it would generally be considered ludicrous to not consider these drugs appropriately categorized as addicting. In fact, Bob Dole has made many statements over the past few weeks, repeatedly challenging the general categorization of nicotine as an addictive drug, and whether there is adequate consensus among experts to warrant such categorization. He has not backed off that contention though given several opportunities. If the Director of NIDA (or even Bob Dole) used the data summarized above to imply that we wasn’t sure NIDA should take youth access to cocaine and heroin so seriously because these drugs weren’t addictive for everybody he would be out of his position very quickly.

The criteria for categorizing drugs as addictive has never required that all individuals exposed become addicted but if you were going to challenge the appropriateness of categorization of drugs as addictive or dependence producing based on the relative risk of becoming addicted, cigarettes would be the last on the list to go. Pharmacologists subscribing to the Dole system for drug classification would have to give up categories such as “psychomotor stimulants,” “CNS depressants,” “hallucinogens,” “antidepressants,” “anxiolytics,” etc., because the drugs so categorized do not always produce the effects implied by their categorization. We know that the risk of developing dependence to dependence producing drugs, in humans, as well as laboratory animals, depends on a wide range of factors including form of administration, availability and cost (Henningfield et al., 1991, Brit. J. Add.). There is presently active study of the factors that affect the risk of developing addiction to addictive drugs as well as how to best translate such findings into public policy. This is a legitimate and very important area of study for both its basic science and public health implications. But does anyone think Bob Dole understands these issues or is prepared to go to the public saying that what he said is also true, only more so, for cocaine and heroin and that perhaps we should not be as concerned about access to these drugs by youth?

Many medical studies have equated the addictive nature of nicotene to heroin, there are some reports that go as far as saying it is more addictive.

Geez Electric_E I’m just not sure where to start because you are so blatantly wrong on so many levels. Just as a reminder I mentioned FBI which means America not England. In the US undercover cops and federal investigators are granted the right to break some laws. This doesn’t mean murder but most minor felonies like drug use, breaking and entering and possibly assault. This is carefully monitored by both their supervisors and the prosecution.

How else would they be able to infiltrate gangs hmmm? Gangleader “initiation time go beat the shit out of this guy” Undercover “sorry I can’t I’m a cop”. Or how about this classic �??Are you a cop?�?? Undercover cops can just reply, �??Ah dang you got me.�??

Another big deal that undercovers can do is lie about anything. Don’t have to read rights or any of that garbage unless they are making an arrest.

Forget any urban myths you may have heard to the contrary: narcs are entitled to smoke/snort/swallow/inject controlled substances. Similarly, vice officers investigating prostitution are allowed to get naked and receive �??massage.�??

Now I hope I’ve finally convinced you that cops are allowed extra rights due to the nature of their job. Lets get down to your bogus Nicotine claims.

FFS man cutting and pasting 2 extremely large hard to read paragraphs doesn’t prove your point. You are giving me a really crappy uncited lazy attempt to prove me wrong. Then at the end

[quote]Electric_E wrote:
Many medical studies have equated the addictive nature of nicotene to heroin, there are some reports that go as far as saying it is more addictive.
[/quote]

Sorry but your opinion doesn’t mean or add anything to your argument. Here I’ll cancel that out…many medical studies have not equated that addictive nature of nicotine to heroin. Damn that was easy.

I presented my information from personal experiences of professionals…also known as an interview. Interviews are the number one source of facts due to the hands of nature of the person being interviewed.

Finally with all the bullshit set aside I have one question for anyone to answer. Do you know anyone who has ever broken out in sweats, shakes or experienced extreme mental or physical anguish due to cigs they stopped taking years ago?

If you come back with more pissy bullshit about nicotine that even remotely proves your point it is the chemical nicotine and not the amount found in cigs. So make sure to shoot up that nicotine cause it is just so readily available.

Ghorig, you may want to look up ‘entrapment’ laws. I’m not saying you’re wrong… I’m saying that what the ‘FBI’ agents did wasn’t kosher, and they’re department more likely turned a blind eye than condoned it.

I’ve also heard numerous times that nicotine is more addictive than heroin. I think this has more to do with the speed chemical dependancy is created than with any specific withdrawal symptoms or psychological reactions.

About your two FBI agents, the counterpoint would simply be- do you know anyone who injected a similar amount of nicotine? the amount in cigarettes is TRACE compared to the volume of smack in a needle.

[quote]GhorigTheBeefy wrote:
Geez Electric_E I’m just not sure where to start because you are so blatantly wrong on so many levels. Just as a reminder I mentioned FBI which means America not England. In the US undercover cops and federal investigators are granted the right to break some laws. This doesn’t mean murder but most minor felonies like drug use, breaking and entering and possibly assault. This is carefully monitored by both their supervisors and the prosecution.
[/quote]

Wrong answer pal. There are a bunch of ex FBI guys who fish at the same lake I do and they told me they are allowed to murder people if it helps to solve a case.

Seriously Ghorig, no law enforcement officer is allowed to use drugs even when undercover. And even if it happens from time to time in some police narcotics units it damn sure would never happen with the clean cut FBI. They don’t even handle drug cases. You are thinking of the DEA and I’m sure it doesn’t happen there either.

D

What is ‘dipping’?

it comes in cans?

I am way out of the loop here.

[quote]GhorigTheBeefy wrote:

Sorry but your opinion doesn’t mean or add anything to your argument. Here I’ll cancel that out…many medical studies have not equated that addictive nature of nicotine to heroin. Damn that was easy.

[/quote]

I get how this works! so… many medical studies have not found YOU to be hetrosexual.

[quote]Otep wrote:
Ghorig, you may want to look up ‘entrapment’ laws. I’m not saying you’re wrong… I’m saying that what the ‘FBI’ agents did wasn’t kosher, and they’re department more likely turned a blind eye than condoned it.

I’ve also heard numerous times that nicotine is more addictive than heroin. I think this has more to do with the speed chemical dependancy is created than with any specific withdrawal symptoms or psychological reactions.

About your two FBI agents, the counterpoint would simply be- do you know anyone who injected a similar amount of nicotine? the amount in cigarettes is TRACE compared to the volume of smack in a needle.
[/quote]

I am not sure but it would probably kill you , Blag flag was nicotine , I am sure there are cops that will do anything they need to solve cases. The 60’s and 70’s had a lot of cops like that

Okay, I guess I need to explain the situation better. A cop can’t go up to you and ask you if you want to buy drugs and arrest you if you say, “yes”. That would be a text book example of entrapment. That’s why on TV you see them arrest the person after the sale. This isn’t entrapment…I don’t know why but that is just the way it is.

Now entrapment isn’t illegal it just boosts the likelihood that the case will be thrown out. However, it is very hard to prove and they almost always believe what the officers say.

Now onto my specific situation of the mentioned FBI agents. They were not doing drug related offenses specifically. They were doing gang infiltration. To keep their cover they had to use a variety of drugs from time to time.

I’ve got a link to some info for you guys since my word from first hand sources isn’t enough for you. Found the following at Erowid Freedom Vaults : Do Undercover Police Have to Identify Themselves? which was the first website at the top of the list on google. Look at the bottom of the webpage for where I cut and pasted and check out all the fucking references. Do you fucking believe me yet?

BEGINNING OF COPY AND PASTE!!!

Are Police Allowed to Break The Law?
Police officers working undercover have exceptions from certain criminal laws. For instance, law enforcement officers directly engaged in the enforcement of controlled substance laws are exempt from laws surrounding the purchase, possession, sales or use of illegal substances.7

This means that there’s no way to identify an undercover officer based on their willingness or refusal to use an illegal drug. Reverse stings are common in the enforcement of controlled substance laws. In a reverse sting operation, a police officer sells drugs that have previously been confiscated and then arrest the buyer.

END OF COPY AND PASTE!!!

Now as far as the nicotine being more addictive than heroin I’m being fairly close minded. If you can show me some valid sources then I’ll accept defeat.

Now you need to realize that what you are specifically saying is that the chemical Nic. is more addictive than Heroin. Compared to cigs no, but where the hell are you going to get just pure Nic.? I’ve never heard of anyone using just straight Nic.

Also, we need to define addiction/addictive. Personally, I only contribute the quantifiable physical withdraw to addiction/addictive.

I won’t accept that Nic. in its chemical form is more addictive because it just isn’t used. I’m sure scientists could make up some synthetic cocktail that is more addictive but unless people use it we don’t have a working substance for the addiction.

[quote]Dedicated wrote:
Wrong answer pal. There are a bunch of ex FBI guys who fish at the same lake I do and they told me they are allowed to murder people if it helps to solve a case.
[/quote]

Only on the weekends. Seriously though, FBI can shoot people even without a huge perceived threat. However, they have to justify it later. Example: Regular cops have to have a gun or knife presented at them and give warnings unless directly fired upon first. FBI could just fire at the suspect if they thought they were going for a weapon. So they are given a little more freedom but better be able to back it up in court.

Pitbull:
Never head of Blag flag I’ll look into it later.

[quote]Electric_E wrote:
I get how this works! so… many medical studies have not found YOU to be hetrosexual.
[/quote]

Good now you are getting it. Might want to avoid reducing your arguments to name calling though or you’ll end up like this guy http://www.T-Nation.com/tmagnum/myTNation.do?id=199496

I was able to quit pretty quickly (having smoked about a pack a day for three years) using the following method:

I stopped buying cigs (duh)and bought a handful of cheap cigars. Every time I had a strong craving I would light up one of those suckers and inahle the shit out of until it basically made me sick (that would only take about a minute or two).

The craving would completely disappear, and within about a week my desire to smoke cigarettes pretty much vanished and was replaced by a newfound disgust for the smell of cigarette smoke. I’ve never heard of anyone else doing this but it worked like a charm. I’m serious - give it a shot and let us know how it goes.

[quote]GhorigTheBeefy wrote:
Good now you are getting it. Might want to avoid reducing your arguments to name calling though or you’ll end up like this guy http://www.T-Nation.com/tmagnum/myTNation.do?id=199496
[/quote]

That’s how I reply to people I cannot be bothered with, you bore me with your bullshit