Abstinence not healthier than low-risk alternative

[ctruth]

Originally Posted by skinnie

Nice article. Really lays it out plain and simple. Alot of the things we do in our daily lives pose a health risk, whether its driving a car, motorcycle, or eating unhealthy foods. But they dont ban these things they offer seatbelts, helmets and non fat products to reduce the risk to our bodies! So why not just use common sense when it comes to smoking. I use to hate going to the doctor simply because " you need to quit smoking" wasn't an option for me, I KNEW that! And very few of them even suggested the patch (not that it worked for me) but i found that quit or die attitude very annoying. Thank You Vocalek.

Whenever my doctor would say "I wish you'd quit smoking"
I would always answer "I wish I'd quit smoking too"
Letting him know that my "logical" mind agreed, but my addicted body would not and could not concur.

At that time, as you say, quitting was not an option.




(When I finally told him I had quit, he quizzed me at length about e-cigarettes, sources, and what models would I recommend - he wanted to tell his other smoking patients about it).
__________________________________________________ _____________________
FDA: Well, hell, it looks like smoke. Where are the carcinogens?
E-VAPORER:Carcinogens? We ain't got no carcinogens. We don't need no
carcinogens! I don't have to show you any stinkin' carcinogens!

[Guitarslinger]

Originally Posted by weatherbug

For me, smoking almost always became a habit. That is, the act of smoking was a pacifier and gave me an opportunity to "stop and smell the roses" per se.

What I mean is that I would bet smokers find that it's the distraction, not the smoking of tobacco itself, which is a relief in our way stressed out and complicated lives. When we smoke, we allow ourselves time to step outside, feel the sun on our faces and take in the scenery for 5-10 mins. Not to mention, hang out with other people we have things in common with.

Not smoking for me meant distracting myself and burying myself in work, school, or something else (since I no longer had the urge to smoke), but I MISSED actually smoking.

I'd argue that vaping (nicotine or no nicotine) could actually be GOOD for us by relieving a bit of stress and forcing us to take a few minutes away from our complicated world. Of course the down side of vaping is that we don't actually have to step outside to do it and we're back to the same argument... ARRRGGGG

I for one, choose to step outside and vape... if for nothing else but to keep me sane.

Great article and I couldn't agree more.

+1. I've been saying this for years now-just the act of getting away from the mundane environments we are in is often more addicting than the actual nicotine, imo. Not to mention giving you some time to move around (since sitting too long in one place apparently has negative consequences as well, lol)

[the86d]

Originally Posted by lotus14

You guys are a bunch of wimps!

Quitting smoking cigarettes cold turkey is EASY.
Hell, I've done it a hundred times.

One time I quit smoking, drinking, and sex all at the same time.
Worst 15 minutes of my life!

LOL!!!

Yup!

[ferdz]

agreed.


excellent find

[DVap]

Great article.

The author pinpoints the fundamental evil in the abolitionist agenda:

-They care nothing for those who they would impose their will upon.

-They wish to force the worst case for what they wish to ban.

-Anything that would make what they wish to abolish genuinely safer or more socially beneficial is to be condemned outright, without thought, without consideration, without reason.

-They care only that what they wish to abolish is abolished, and any means to this end, no matter how disingenuous are justified.

Did I say "evil"? Yea, I said evil.

[carlvphillips]

Hi, everyone. Thanks for the good words about my article (I am a sometimes reader of this forum). Any further comments or questions are most welcome.

Just so you know, the nicely formatted html and pdf versions have now been published, and you can find them at:

www
.harmreductionjournal
.com
/content/6/1/29
(you will have to assemble the address manually or go back to a version earlier in the the thread -- the forum balks when I enter a URL)

--Carl V Phillips

[mpetva]

Originally Posted by carlvphillips

Hi, everyone. Thanks for the good words about my article (I am a sometimes reader of this forum). Any further comments or questions are most welcome.

Just so you know, the nicely formatted html and pdf versions have now been published, and you can find them at:

www
.harmreductionjournal
.com
/content/6/1/29
(you will have to assemble the address manually or go back to a version earlier in the the thread -- the forum balks when I enter a URL)

--Carl V Phillips

Welcome to our Forum!

Great article!

Here is your link:

www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/6/1/29

[LaceyUnderall]

Originally Posted by carlvphillips

Hi, everyone. Thanks for the good words about my article (I am a sometimes reader of this forum). Any further comments or questions are most welcome.

Just so you know, the nicely formatted html and pdf versions have now been published, and you can find them at:

www
.harmreductionjournal
.com
/content/6/1/29
(you will have to assemble the address manually or go back to a version earlier in the the thread -- the forum balks when I enter a URL)

--Carl V Phillips

MOST DEFINITELY a hearty welcome to you Dr. Phillips. Big fan of your work, your organization and wish you the best!

For those unfamiliar with Dr. Phillips... Tobaccoharmreduction.org

They have been spreading the Tobacco Harm Reduction word for awhile now and are solely based on public health, offering good information to smokers to make more responsible decisions, and you might remember them from the way back time machine as the group who met in a Calgary bar to try ecigs and see what they were all about! CBC features the Electronic Cigarette

[Vocalek]

I have a question for you Dr. Phillips. Could we see more research focused on those of us who are medically dependent on nicotine (as opposed to "addicted")?

Twenty years ago, after maintaining nicotine abstinence and waiting over six months for my memory and concentration to return to normal, I made a conscious decision to start smoking again.

Have you ever read "Flowers for Algernon" or watched the movie "Charlie" that was based on the story? I felt like that poor janitor. I remembered what it was like to be intelligent, and grew despondent over making stupid mistake after stupid mistake, with no sign that things were going to start improving. Charlie did not have a choice. He was doomed to continue his downward spiral. I managed to arrest and reverse most of my cognitive losses by going back to nicotine.

What about us? The nicotine abstinence position forces people like me to have to make a choice between our physical health and our cognitive and/or emotional health. That does not constitute "addiction" in my book. Nicotine does not give me a "buzz", a thrill, or feelings of euphoria. It never has.

Nicotine allows me to feel "normal", in the same way that taking ibuprophen or aspirin to get rid of a nasty headache allows me to feel "normal."

[carlvphillips]

Originally Posted by Vocalek

I have a question for you Dr. Phillips. Could we see more research focused on those of us who are medically dependent on nicotine (as opposed to "addicted")?

Vocalek,

That is a very good question, and gets to the heart of my motives and interests. One of my core messages is that many dedicated nicotine users would be much better off using a low-risk alternative than they would be smoking (high health costs) *or* abstaining (loss of important benefits). I am sometimes reminded that there are a lot of people who would rather just quit than use a product whose functionality does not appeal to them, and I am often startled by this reminder because I am really most interested in people who want nicotine so much that they will knowingly endure high costs to get it -- those (10% of the population? maybe 15%?) who are like you: Nicotine is the difference between misery, of one sort or another, and a much higher quality of life. That is what motivates me to fight those who traffic in the lie that nicotine has no benefits and that people only use it because they are too weak to go through the challenge of quitting.

Because people who get huge benefit, like you, are such an inconvenient truth for the anti-nicotine extremists who want to just make everyone abstain, and those extremists control 99% of the research, there is very little research. I suppose that there will never be much research on a phenomenon that officially does not exist. I try to do what I can, following discussions like this, doing a few focus groups, trying to find out what manufacturers know about their customers, etc.

Maybe you (and anyone else "listening") can give me some insight into what you think would be most worth researching. Nicotine users are one of the most dismissed stakeholder groups anywhere -- for most other behaviors, diseases, etc. it is taken as a given that the people being studied should have a major influence on what we study. Most of the billion dollar anti-tobacco "research" industry is not interested in your views, but I am. What do you know that we have not officially turned into scientific knowledge? What do you not know but think we ought to know?

And, do you have any thoughts about research methods and so forth? I realize that I am the expert in research methods, but I am asking seriously -- you probably have insights that would never occur to me. (FYI: I am a casual nicotine user, and get substantial benefit from it in terms of focus and alertness, especially when jet lagged, but can totally take it or leave it.)

--Carl

[Note: I am not sure if something like this should be in another thread or whatever. I do not know the local customs. If someone would like to move this to a dedicated thread and point me there, I would be happy to move. Or I can continue this here.]