How to Quit Smoking: Are Irrational Beliefs Getting in Your Way?

| |

White Gold - This Element Will Power Every Home In America

cigarette butts shallow dof

Over ten thousand people worldwide stop smoking every day.

How?

By dying from it.

****

This article is not about the fact that an average of 5 million people die from tobacco use every year.

It is not about the fact that smokers die, on average, 10 years earlier than non-smokers.

Smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the US, but this article isn’t about that.

Cigarettes and their smoke contain 7,000+ dangerous chemicals and toxins – but this article isn’t about that either.

It is also not about the myriad serious and debilitating health problems tobacco use causes.

After all, most – if not all – of us know that smoking is terribly damaging to health and kills a lot of people.

****

This article is about why people become addicted to smoking and how to release yourself from the grip of tobacco.

Are you are one of the 70% of smokers who want to break the habit, or do you want to help someone you care about quit?

If so, continue reading…

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).


Contributed by Jake’s Health Solutions of Jake’s Health Solutions.

Wake The Flock Up! Please Share With Sheeple Far & Wide:
  • doucyet

    Forget about tobacco! Let’s get those evil guns………….

  • RandyJ/ProudSurvivor

    The abolitionist mindset is always the same. Identify a “problem”-even if it is a right-and discover new ways to show how it’s practice is “harmful”, even to those not practicing it. Then pull out all stops in attempting to eradicate it’s practice. The exact same formula being used against the 2nd Amendment.

    • http://privacy.com MARCUS

      smoking isn’t a “right”, and with all the additional crap they put in commercial tobacco, there’s no question its hazardous.
      You are correct though, its exactly the direction they are going with guns: attempt to make them socially distasteful and then argue they are a public health threat, eventually making them prohibitively expensive via taxes and mandatory health and liability insurance.

      • RandyJ/ProudSurvivor

        I never meant to imply smoking is a right-I was referring-albeit clumsily-to the 2nd Amendment.

        • http://privacy.com MARCUS

          my bad… sorry I get oversensitive when I see the word “right”. You are completely correct on the 2nd Ammendment

          • RandyJ/ProudSurvivor

            No worries-my post was a bit vague.

        • http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/political_reading_room/ disqus_3BrONUAJno

          The second amendment was poorly written because the writers were fighting british agents and domestic enemies for every word. I like the the wording and location of the equivalent section in article 1, in the front of the Wyoming constitution much better:

          Text of Section 24:

          Right to Bear Arms

          The right of citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and of the state shall not be denied.

          • RandyJ/ProudSurvivor

            Agreed-the Wyoming wording is more clear and concise. I’ve always thought the 2nd Amendment was a bit clumsy in it’s wording. Despite that, it isn’t tremendously difficult to divine the Founders intent-unless you’re the sort of person who naturally and unnecessarily complicates otherwise simple things.

          • http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/political_reading_room/ disqus_3BrONUAJno

            Since the second amendment only tells Congress not to infringe what they have long infringed, and the Wyoming section is not an amendment and applicable to the entire state government, and is still denied by people like Senator Hank Coe, it boils down to a gross ignorance of the people.
            Due to my extraordinary diligence in researching the meaning of “natural born citizen” in the Constitution, I can only find large number of people who are both ignorant of the meaning of words that were in the vocabulary of grade school children in the late 18th century and are totally unskilled in legal research, and so, won’t believe what I say, even when it is simply what the STOTUS said in Minor v Happersett. Until that ignorance is dispelled, all of our freedoms are in peril.

      • Reverend Draco

        It most certainly is a right.

        Who the fuck are you to tell someone that you don’t own what they can or cannot ingest? Who died and made you god?

        • http://privacy.com MARCUS

          You can go and ingest rat poison for all I care, your ability to do it does not make it a right

          • Reverend Draco

            It certainly does.

            As a self-owned human. . . it is my irrevocable right to ingest whatever I please.

            If you can show that you hold my title. . . then – and only then – does your opinion mean more than fuck-all.

            Let’s see the pink slip, shitferbrains.

      • http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/political_reading_room/ disqus_3BrONUAJno

        Getting out of bed in the morning is as hazardous to your health as smoking a cigarette, if the statistics about the time and place of the occurrence of myocardial infarctions is any indication. Smoking is nowhere near as hazardous to tyrants as gun ownership is, but control is still the issue, as long as health care is mandatory.

  • Reverend Draco

    Most of the “facts” in this article are actually not fact at all, but propaganda.

    Nobody knows how much earlier (or later) smokers die than anyone else – because there has never been a controlled study. How can a controlled study be performed when nobody knows how long a given person is going to live in the first fucking place?

    More than “over ten thousand” non-smokers die every year, too – so it looks like non-smoking is the real culprit.

    5 million is a long way from “over ten thousand.” Granted, 5 million is actually over ten thousand. . . the term “over ten thousand” is disingenuous – it suggests that the number could be as low as eleven thousand – a long way from 5 million.

    Medical mistakes are the leading cause of preventable death in the US.

    After all, most – if not all – of us know that masturbation causes blindness – with the exact same amount of proof.

    Japan: 1,841 cigarettes per adult per year. Average life expectancy: 85 years

    Hungary:1,518 cigarettes per adult per year. Average life expectancy: 75 years.

    United States: 1,028 cigarettes per person per year. Average life expectancy 78 years

    Stick that in your pipe and smoke it

    • http://www.smokershandbook.com Dave Thomas

      Nope. Smoking kills. Tobacco smoke causes cell mutations which is what creates cancer. 90% of lung cancer patients are/were smokers. That’s not a pipe I would smoke.
      Citing the number of cigarettes a country smokes per capita and that countries mortality rate ignores so many parameters. I don’t think you’re being serious.

      Non smoking kills more than smoking?? By that logic not Drinking poison is also a major culprit

      • Reverend Draco

        Ok, dipshit – explain this.

        Since the mid 1960s, smoking in the US has been reduced by HALF.
        In the same time, lung cancer rates in men have doubled. . . for women, they’ve tripled.

        Ergo, smoking
        ≠ lung cancer. Something else is the cause.

        Did you know that, if a person has ever smoked even 1 cigarette in their entire life – doctors are told to list “smoking” as the cause of death? Even with the zero proof that smoking has ever killed a single person, this is the requirement.

        If smoking is so horribly bad for a person – higher rates of smoking would, of necessity, lead to lower life expectancies. . . which does not happen.

        • http://www.smokershandbook.com Dave Thomas

          Wrong again. Lung cancer rates are decreasing across the board http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/lung/statistics/trends.htm

          And smoking leads to higher mortality rates http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa1211127

          You’re just making stuff without any references. I’m done here.

          • Reverend Draco

            Awww. . . poor cretin – can’t handle the heat.

            Piss off.

          • http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/political_reading_room/ disqus_3BrONUAJno

            Those statistics would be more believable if they came from a actual government agency that was actually interested in lowering mortality.

      • http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/political_reading_room/ disqus_3BrONUAJno

        Food additives kill more people who eat by the same mechanisms that kill people who smoke.

  • https://quittingiseasy.com Politics of Smoking

    How can smoking act as a sedative when you smoke to relax and a stimulant when you smoke to pick yourself up? Check out the addiction myth page on my blog. https://quittingiseasy.com/junk-science-and-the-addiction-myth/

    • http://www.smokershandbook.com Dave Thomas

      It’s not a sedative. It’s just relieving the symptoms from nicotine withdrawal. That’s why it “feels” relaxing. It actually is a stimulant though http://bit.ly/1QjQvql

  • https://quittingiseasy.com Politics of Smoking

    Using a heroin patch to break an addiction to heroin wouldn’t work. So how does using a nicotine patch to break an addiction to nicotine supposed to work? Click on my avatar and go to the junk science and the addiction myth page to read about the scheme that Big Pharma and the Gov put together to con smokers into believing they are addicted to cigarettes.

    • Lisa Egan

      The article didn’t say a thing about using patches.

  • Lisa Egan

    The article didn’t say to quit smoking. It isn’t about how bad smoking is. It’s about the excuses and rationalizations people make to continue the habit…the cognitive dissonance – which a lot of you are actually exhibiting in these comments.

    • http://www.smokershandbook.com Dave Thomas

      I don’t think many people here actually read much past the headline

      • Lisa Egan

        I kinda figured. That’s disappointing, because it’s a great article.

    • http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/political_reading_room/ disqus_3BrONUAJno

      I get more cognitive dissonance from the definitions that people give of the condition than from anything else.

      • Lisa Egan

        Well, that article is based on the research that Leon Festinger, the scientist who coined the term “cognitive dissonance”, performed. Perhaps you have your own definition, but this article is factually correct.

  • Reverend Draco

    cancer.gov: US smoking rates peaked in the early/mid 1960s at over 4,000 cigarettes per year, per capita.
    By the mid-90s, this number was around 2,500, and has continued to drop.

    WHO mortality database: Lung cancer rates in males, early/mid 1960s – 45 per 100,000 population. . . mid 1990s, 90 per 100,000.
    Lung cancer rates in females, early/mid 1960s – 7 per 100,000. . . mid 1990s, 60 per 100,000

    Something other than smoking is causing lung cancer.

    There has been a slight dip in recent years – rates are still much higher than one would reasonably expect if smoking was a major cause – but there has been a reduction.
    Interestingly, the dip corresponds to the enacting of Medical Cannabis laws in the US. . . as Cannabis exhibits anti-cancer properties.