Most people who quit are somewhat older. To many, the damage has been done. Unfortunately, and it pains me to say this, but many people who quit will die or be affected from smoking related illness. It's never too late to quit smoking, but it can be too late to negate the negative effects of decades of toxic smoke inhalation.
How does an older person find the will to quit when the damage may have already been done?
One word: "Nicodemon."
If one makes quitting about the freedom from nicotine, rather than the freedom from smoking related illness, this problem of consciousness is resolved. By focusing on their freedom from nicotine addiction, one can ignore the, in my opinion, true reason to quit: not dying.
This is evidenced by the focus on being free from habit, rather than being free from illness! I was rather amazed at this personally. You see, as one who was in the field of addiction psychology, I can tell you that nicotine addiction pales in comparison to: say, ...... or (OTHER STUFF) addiction?
If cigarettes weren't so damn toxic, the habit would only be slightly worse than a caffeine habit...in other words, quite manageable.
So maybe you see now where the e-cig can present such a threat? The whole concept behind the e-cig is to deliver nicotine without the harmful effects of burnt plant matter (smoke) inhalation.
What does this mean? I think it means that the e-cig presents the reality that quitting is about health, more so than addiction. The addiction is what keeps us inhaling smoke, so clearly it is important...but ONLY because it keeps us smoking. What I mean is, I agree with "stop the addiction to stop the smoking" FAR more than "stop the addiction to stop the addiction."
The latter philosophy is clearly more prevalent in stop smoking communities. And I think the reason for this is that people do not want to think about the damage they have done, which any individual would be uncomfortably aware of IF it were about their health. Therefore, they make it about the addiction itself. Hence why nicotine is SO demonized.
So by using the e-cig, or even bringing it up, one in effect causes cognitive dissonance in these individuals. People are strongly adverse to painful thoughts, and will go to lengths to avoid them.
They claim that "we just want you to stop rubbing this alternative deliver system in our face!" The truth, in my opinion is more: "We are fearful of the damage we have done, so please stop pointing out that quitting is for health, and not addiction!"
It could also have to do with jealousy. Or more specific, people who are not really 100% over smoking.
I see the people who come to the e-cig forums to bash us as not being 100% sure of their quit. The e-cig, if not bad for you, is a threat to them. They may say they do not want to smoke, but then why come to a supportive community? I would bet that many HOPE that the e-cig is bad, so that they will feel less tempted by it. Hence why people seem to religiously claim how bad they are, without presenting any scientific evidence.
Then there is the Mt. Everest elevator complex (ha! like I didn't just make it up
)
If you had just climbed Mt. Everest, how would you feel about an elevator to the summit being discovered at base camp? Now anyone can reach the summit with a simple click of a button!
My guess, people who climbed Mt. Everest would not only dislike, but would feel threatened by the elevator, as it allows an easy way up, when one had taken the hard way. Assuming attempts to close the elevator failed, those who climbed for real would then belittle the elevator and those who use it.
I could go on. So I'll leave it at the first two points that came to mind.
But my main point is that we should in no way feel offended by this type of hostility. It is simply a case of (former?)addicts rationalizing their choices, far more so than anything to do with us.
EDIT to add that I agree that vaping cannot be completely safe. My bad, I assumed that was the agreed consensus. Didn't mean to imply that they were. Prob should have put 'comparatively most likely' before!
How does an older person find the will to quit when the damage may have already been done?
One word: "Nicodemon."
If one makes quitting about the freedom from nicotine, rather than the freedom from smoking related illness, this problem of consciousness is resolved. By focusing on their freedom from nicotine addiction, one can ignore the, in my opinion, true reason to quit: not dying.
This is evidenced by the focus on being free from habit, rather than being free from illness! I was rather amazed at this personally. You see, as one who was in the field of addiction psychology, I can tell you that nicotine addiction pales in comparison to: say, ...... or (OTHER STUFF) addiction?
If cigarettes weren't so damn toxic, the habit would only be slightly worse than a caffeine habit...in other words, quite manageable.
So maybe you see now where the e-cig can present such a threat? The whole concept behind the e-cig is to deliver nicotine without the harmful effects of burnt plant matter (smoke) inhalation.
What does this mean? I think it means that the e-cig presents the reality that quitting is about health, more so than addiction. The addiction is what keeps us inhaling smoke, so clearly it is important...but ONLY because it keeps us smoking. What I mean is, I agree with "stop the addiction to stop the smoking" FAR more than "stop the addiction to stop the addiction."
The latter philosophy is clearly more prevalent in stop smoking communities. And I think the reason for this is that people do not want to think about the damage they have done, which any individual would be uncomfortably aware of IF it were about their health. Therefore, they make it about the addiction itself. Hence why nicotine is SO demonized.
So by using the e-cig, or even bringing it up, one in effect causes cognitive dissonance in these individuals. People are strongly adverse to painful thoughts, and will go to lengths to avoid them.
They claim that "we just want you to stop rubbing this alternative deliver system in our face!" The truth, in my opinion is more: "We are fearful of the damage we have done, so please stop pointing out that quitting is for health, and not addiction!"
It could also have to do with jealousy. Or more specific, people who are not really 100% over smoking.
I see the people who come to the e-cig forums to bash us as not being 100% sure of their quit. The e-cig, if not bad for you, is a threat to them. They may say they do not want to smoke, but then why come to a supportive community? I would bet that many HOPE that the e-cig is bad, so that they will feel less tempted by it. Hence why people seem to religiously claim how bad they are, without presenting any scientific evidence.
Then there is the Mt. Everest elevator complex (ha! like I didn't just make it up
)If you had just climbed Mt. Everest, how would you feel about an elevator to the summit being discovered at base camp? Now anyone can reach the summit with a simple click of a button!
My guess, people who climbed Mt. Everest would not only dislike, but would feel threatened by the elevator, as it allows an easy way up, when one had taken the hard way. Assuming attempts to close the elevator failed, those who climbed for real would then belittle the elevator and those who use it.
I could go on. So I'll leave it at the first two points that came to mind.
But my main point is that we should in no way feel offended by this type of hostility. It is simply a case of (former?)addicts rationalizing their choices, far more so than anything to do with us.
EDIT to add that I agree that vaping cannot be completely safe. My bad, I assumed that was the agreed consensus. Didn't mean to imply that they were. Prob should have put 'comparatively most likely' before!
Last edited:
