Today the Topeka Capital Journal announced that it was opposing Councilwoman Deborah Swank's proposal to drag Topeka into the 21st century by banning smoking in workplaces.
They believe instead that 'the marketplace' should decide. Presumably they mean that the millions spent by the tobacco industry on lobbying to fight this type of legislation should decide. Having public health policy driven by companies whose products kill an estimated 400,000 Americans every year is less than ideal.
Just because there is a market for something doesn't mean that the market should 'decide' what is right and wrong. There is a market for crack and crystal meth, but no-one is suggesting that crack dealers should develop public drug policy. Public health for the large majority should trump an individual's 'right' to smoke.
As a reader pointed out: "So, when I get lung cancer from breathing all the second-hand smoke lingering in public places, just exactly which part of the marketplace will pay for my lost health and health care?"
Newspapers need to get with the program - smokers have. Recent research shows that over 70% want to quit. To quit smoking easily and enjoyably, visit www.theeasywaytostopsmoking.com
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Monday, August 24, 2009
Allen Carr seminars now available in Denver, Houston and Dallas
Allen Carr North America is delighted to announce the launch of our seminar program in Denver, Houston and Dallas.
The seminars are conducted by Denver-native Collene Curran, who quit smoking using Allen Carr's Easyway method in 2005.
To find out dates and locations please visit us at www.theeasywaytostopsmoking.com.
The seminars are conducted by Denver-native Collene Curran, who quit smoking using Allen Carr's Easyway method in 2005.
To find out dates and locations please visit us at www.theeasywaytostopsmoking.com.
Friday, August 21, 2009
More BS from Britain's NHS
Britain's National Health Service (NHS) has just issued a self-congratualtory press release about its quit smoking service, claiming a 40% "success rate". This is spin, laid on top of spin, with a bit of spin on the side.
Quit smoking success rates are usually measured at 6 months. The NHS's 40% "success rate" is after just four weeks. And it gets worse...as the NHS's primary recommendation is to use nictoine replacement therapy (NRT), that a large proportion of the 40% of "successful" quitters are still using nicotine!
Research shows that with smokers quitting using willpower or NRT there is significant relapse rates between 4 weeks and 6 months, so the real life success rate is likely to be closer to the 5-7% suggested by the independent, evidence-based resource Cochrane's.
In addition, the 40% success rate is of all smokers who set a quit date with the NHS service. What about those that didn't? Ah, well, we'll just forget those shall we?
And in terms of value for money the NHS service gets worse, not better, with their cost per quitter up 26% vs. 2008.
For a no-BS, drug-free, pain-free quit smoking method, visit us at www.theeasywaytostopsmoking.com
Quit smoking success rates are usually measured at 6 months. The NHS's 40% "success rate" is after just four weeks. And it gets worse...as the NHS's primary recommendation is to use nictoine replacement therapy (NRT), that a large proportion of the 40% of "successful" quitters are still using nicotine!
Research shows that with smokers quitting using willpower or NRT there is significant relapse rates between 4 weeks and 6 months, so the real life success rate is likely to be closer to the 5-7% suggested by the independent, evidence-based resource Cochrane's.
In addition, the 40% success rate is of all smokers who set a quit date with the NHS service. What about those that didn't? Ah, well, we'll just forget those shall we?
And in terms of value for money the NHS service gets worse, not better, with their cost per quitter up 26% vs. 2008.
For a no-BS, drug-free, pain-free quit smoking method, visit us at www.theeasywaytostopsmoking.com
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Talk about self-interest...
The Winston-Salem Journal actually believes that the tobacco industry should remain unregulated by the FDA. In an editorial dated October 29th, it describes the efforts to have a product that kills 450,000 Americans every year regulated like every other drug in the country as "wrongheaded government intervention".
So presumably it is also wrong to regulate other harmful (or potentially harmful) products like heroin, cars, airlines, medications and guns? These products kill far fewer than smoking but are rightly subject to regulation or prohibition because of their potential for harm.
It is morally and ethically bankrupt to put the business interests of drug dealers before the lives of their victims. I know Winston-Salem is in the heart of tobacco country but DON'T THEY GET IT? The Journal should be ashamed of itself...
If you want sense instead of nonsense, visit us at www.theeasywaytostopsmoking.com
So presumably it is also wrong to regulate other harmful (or potentially harmful) products like heroin, cars, airlines, medications and guns? These products kill far fewer than smoking but are rightly subject to regulation or prohibition because of their potential for harm.
It is morally and ethically bankrupt to put the business interests of drug dealers before the lives of their victims. I know Winston-Salem is in the heart of tobacco country but DON'T THEY GET IT? The Journal should be ashamed of itself...
If you want sense instead of nonsense, visit us at www.theeasywaytostopsmoking.com
Smoking and the recession
Quit smoking and start saving. To quit smoking with no willpower, no weight gain and no withdrawal pangs, visit www.TheEasywayToStopSmoking.com
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
If you are addicted to nicotine gum...
I'm ordinarily a really big fan of John Tierney's Science blog in the NY Times, but I have to take exception with today's entry entitled Should Obama Take Nicotine Pledge? (http://tierneylab.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/21/should-obama-quit-nicorettes/?scp=3&sq=smoking&st=cse)
Here are my concerns.
Firstly, Sen. Obama is described as using nicotine gum 'successfully', but then we are told that he is still ocasionally smoking. I struggle to characterize this as success because (i) he is still addicted to nicotine and (ii) he is still smoking. What is successful about this?
Secondly, Mr. Teirney speculates 'What if the nicotine gum strategy is so successful that Mr. Obama is capable of weaning himself from nicotine altogether? If he reaches the White House, should he give up the chemical that he relied on during his career and his campaign?'
The most obvious problem with this is that Mr. Teirney implicitly assumes that at least part of Sen. Obama's success came because he is addicted to nicotine. But where is the evidence to support this claim? Perhaps Sen. Obama's success is nothing to do with nicotine. Perhaps he is successful because he's smart, hard-working and dedicated. In fact, with the stigma associated with smoking so profound these days, we might even argue that he is successful despite being addicted to nicotine, not because of it.
In support of this theory that weaning himself off nicotine might be a bad thing for Sen. Obama and for America, Mr. Teirney (also a nicotine gum chewer) quotes his colleague Jane Brody, 'Among the...effects of nicotine are arousal, relaxation, improved mood, reduced anxiety and stress, better concentration and faster reaction time.'
It reads like an ad for nicotine gum. Who wouldn't want these things?
But let's think about this for a moment: how can a drug that creates arousal also relax you? Aren't they more or less opposites? And how does a drug that relaxes also improve reaction time? Doesn't this seem contradictory to you? And if nicotine reduces anxiety and stress, then why aren't smokers less anxious and less stressed than non-smokers? In fact, recent research published in the Journal of the American Medical Association indicates the opposite - that smokers are substantially more prone to depression, anxiety, high blood pressure and panic disorders than non-smokers. And if smoking aids concentration, then why aren't smokers smarter than non-smokers?
It gets worse. Ms. Brody goes on to explain "When deprived, smokers report withdrawal symptoms that include irritability, depression, restlessness, anxiety, difficulty concentrating, increased hunger, insomnia, a craving for tobacco, difficulty getting along with others and a feeling that life lacks pleasure."
Like most addicts, including myself when I was a smoker, Mr. Teirney appears to accept that the removal of these 'withdrawal symptoms' is a good reason to continue to consume nicotine. But we don't see the obvious: that non-smokers do not feel irritable, depressed, restless, anxious, distracted, hungry, sleepless, anti-social or dysphoric because they can't smoke. In fact, it is smokers, not non-smokers who suffer from these symptoms. So instead of giving nicotine the credit for alleviating these symptoms, perhaps we should be blaming the previous dose for creating them.
Mr. Teirney poses the question: 'Do do we really want someone in the White House going through nicotine withdrawal?' The answer, I think, is no. Mr. Teirney concludes that Sen. Obama should therefore continue to chew the gum if voted into office. However this would merely guarantee that he would continue to experience withdrawal indefinitely. People who do not smoke or chew nicotine gum do not go through nicotine withdrawal. Those who do, do. On that basis, Sen. Obama should stop chewing the gum.
Mr. Teirney's piece is a classic case of really smart people falling for illusions due to the subtlety of the drug nicotine: Smokers spend most of their time in very mild withdrawal and over time they begin to perceive this as their 'normal' state; smoking temporarily removes this feeling. In this way smokers begin to get tricked into seeing the removal of withdrawal symptoms as genuine pleasure or relief.
If a smoker sleeps for six hours at night, when they wake up they're 97% nicotine-free! Even very heavy smokers do this as a matter of routine. You are 100% nicotine-free and technically no longer an addict after just 3 days.
These 'withdrawal symptoms' - depression, anxiety, over-eating etc. are actually nothing to do with nicotine withdrawal. For a start many of them come weeks or even months after all the nicotine has left your body. They can't be anything to do with nicotine.
They are the symptoms of mental conflict experienced by people who are trying to stop using nicotine but still believe that it provided some benefit, pleasure or crutch. They want to quit, but they still want nicotine and this conflict can create all manner of symptoms. Allen Carr's Easyway removes this conflict: remove the conflict, remove the symptoms.
Here are my concerns.
Firstly, Sen. Obama is described as using nicotine gum 'successfully', but then we are told that he is still ocasionally smoking. I struggle to characterize this as success because (i) he is still addicted to nicotine and (ii) he is still smoking. What is successful about this?
Secondly, Mr. Teirney speculates 'What if the nicotine gum strategy is so successful that Mr. Obama is capable of weaning himself from nicotine altogether? If he reaches the White House, should he give up the chemical that he relied on during his career and his campaign?'
The most obvious problem with this is that Mr. Teirney implicitly assumes that at least part of Sen. Obama's success came because he is addicted to nicotine. But where is the evidence to support this claim? Perhaps Sen. Obama's success is nothing to do with nicotine. Perhaps he is successful because he's smart, hard-working and dedicated. In fact, with the stigma associated with smoking so profound these days, we might even argue that he is successful despite being addicted to nicotine, not because of it.
In support of this theory that weaning himself off nicotine might be a bad thing for Sen. Obama and for America, Mr. Teirney (also a nicotine gum chewer) quotes his colleague Jane Brody, 'Among the...effects of nicotine are arousal, relaxation, improved mood, reduced anxiety and stress, better concentration and faster reaction time.'
It reads like an ad for nicotine gum. Who wouldn't want these things?
But let's think about this for a moment: how can a drug that creates arousal also relax you? Aren't they more or less opposites? And how does a drug that relaxes also improve reaction time? Doesn't this seem contradictory to you? And if nicotine reduces anxiety and stress, then why aren't smokers less anxious and less stressed than non-smokers? In fact, recent research published in the Journal of the American Medical Association indicates the opposite - that smokers are substantially more prone to depression, anxiety, high blood pressure and panic disorders than non-smokers. And if smoking aids concentration, then why aren't smokers smarter than non-smokers?
It gets worse. Ms. Brody goes on to explain "When deprived, smokers report withdrawal symptoms that include irritability, depression, restlessness, anxiety, difficulty concentrating, increased hunger, insomnia, a craving for tobacco, difficulty getting along with others and a feeling that life lacks pleasure."
Like most addicts, including myself when I was a smoker, Mr. Teirney appears to accept that the removal of these 'withdrawal symptoms' is a good reason to continue to consume nicotine. But we don't see the obvious: that non-smokers do not feel irritable, depressed, restless, anxious, distracted, hungry, sleepless, anti-social or dysphoric because they can't smoke. In fact, it is smokers, not non-smokers who suffer from these symptoms. So instead of giving nicotine the credit for alleviating these symptoms, perhaps we should be blaming the previous dose for creating them.
Mr. Teirney poses the question: 'Do do we really want someone in the White House going through nicotine withdrawal?' The answer, I think, is no. Mr. Teirney concludes that Sen. Obama should therefore continue to chew the gum if voted into office. However this would merely guarantee that he would continue to experience withdrawal indefinitely. People who do not smoke or chew nicotine gum do not go through nicotine withdrawal. Those who do, do. On that basis, Sen. Obama should stop chewing the gum.
Mr. Teirney's piece is a classic case of really smart people falling for illusions due to the subtlety of the drug nicotine: Smokers spend most of their time in very mild withdrawal and over time they begin to perceive this as their 'normal' state; smoking temporarily removes this feeling. In this way smokers begin to get tricked into seeing the removal of withdrawal symptoms as genuine pleasure or relief.
If a smoker sleeps for six hours at night, when they wake up they're 97% nicotine-free! Even very heavy smokers do this as a matter of routine. You are 100% nicotine-free and technically no longer an addict after just 3 days.
These 'withdrawal symptoms' - depression, anxiety, over-eating etc. are actually nothing to do with nicotine withdrawal. For a start many of them come weeks or even months after all the nicotine has left your body. They can't be anything to do with nicotine.
They are the symptoms of mental conflict experienced by people who are trying to stop using nicotine but still believe that it provided some benefit, pleasure or crutch. They want to quit, but they still want nicotine and this conflict can create all manner of symptoms. Allen Carr's Easyway removes this conflict: remove the conflict, remove the symptoms.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Radio active...
Yesterday I had the great pleasure of working with Colleen Rusholme of the 97.3 EZ-Rock breakfast show in Toronto.
I met the anchor of the show, Humble Howard Glassman, four years ago, and helped him and his wife Randee, quit. Howard was a HUGE smoker and has been a massive supporter of our work ever since.
When he got his new gig on EZ-Rock, he made it his mission to get his co-host, Colleen, to quit. Colleen had never tried to quit and had a lot of trepidation, but Howard is a very persuasive guy!Eventually he persuaded her to agree to see me.
On Tuesday I was a guest on the show and met a terrified Colleen for the first time. They announced on the show that Colleen would be quitting, and I think that put a lot of additional pressure on her.
We met yesterday for a session out by Toronto airport. Colleen was absolutely awesome - smart, funny, attentive and open-minded. By the end of the session she was a happy non-smoker.
I was invited on the show again this morning to see how things went and I was thrilled to hear Colleen so happy to be smoke-free. She couldn't keep the smile off her face...
That was a good day...
To find out more about Colleen and Easyway, visit us at http://www.theeasywaytostopsmoking.com/
I met the anchor of the show, Humble Howard Glassman, four years ago, and helped him and his wife Randee, quit. Howard was a HUGE smoker and has been a massive supporter of our work ever since.
When he got his new gig on EZ-Rock, he made it his mission to get his co-host, Colleen, to quit. Colleen had never tried to quit and had a lot of trepidation, but Howard is a very persuasive guy!Eventually he persuaded her to agree to see me.
On Tuesday I was a guest on the show and met a terrified Colleen for the first time. They announced on the show that Colleen would be quitting, and I think that put a lot of additional pressure on her.
We met yesterday for a session out by Toronto airport. Colleen was absolutely awesome - smart, funny, attentive and open-minded. By the end of the session she was a happy non-smoker.
I was invited on the show again this morning to see how things went and I was thrilled to hear Colleen so happy to be smoke-free. She couldn't keep the smile off her face...
That was a good day...
To find out more about Colleen and Easyway, visit us at http://www.theeasywaytostopsmoking.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
