Smoking out the facts (Giving up smoking can kill you)

The Ottawa Citizen ^ | Sunday, October 28, 2007 | David Warren,

[woollyone]

Great resource addresses that topic....
http://www.msnusers.com/AskJoel/general.msnw?action=get_message&mview=0&ID_Message=608&LastModified=4675621463529832788

[woollyone]

Agree with your “addict” perspective, as that is what it is, a nicotine addiction.

http://www.whyquit.com/
smokers...read it and be free!

[DeFault User]

13 Things PMS Stands For:

I've got a 14th: Permanent Menstrual Syndrome

It was bad enough when my wife went through the well known symptoms once a month, but when she hit menopause, I found out what hell was like. ;o)

[Seruzawa]

Definition of junk science: Stuff I disagree with.

[DaGman]

"The fact that your MIL smoked at all — not that she quit “abruptly” - is almost certainly the reason she died of lung cancer. My condolences."

It is certainly true that because she smoked she developed lung cancer. But this article generates serious questions that maybe you should be "managing" cessation of smoking. For example, would it be better to quit gradually, say over 6 months or a year, than to abruptly quit in order to avoid what might be a kind of "system shock" that may trigger cancer.

And my wife quit smoking 3 months ago and I'm wondering now if that was a good idea rather than to just cut down and then gradually quit to avoid a system shock.

[Gabz]

No commercial cigarette sold in the US is simply dried tobacco leaf shredded and wrapped in paper, with a filter added.

Actually many of the Native American brands are just that. There is a huge difference in the taste and aroma of those in comparison to a standard commercial brand such as Marlboro, the taste and smell of which I find funky.

[trumandogz]

This article does not even merit the term “Junk Science.” Instead it is pure nonsense with a sample size that is so small that it would be considered anecdotal.

At least with Junk Science the authors attempt to sift through significant amounts of research and pass a peer review.

[fanfan]

This article was also being discussed on local talk radio this morning.

One fellow told the story of a bunch of men (in the US), who had worked with nitro-glycerin for years, and all died of heart attacks within 18 months of retiring. Apparently, their bodies had adapted to the exposure over the years, and when the exposure was lost, their bodies couldn’t adjust again so fast.

Has anyone else heard of this story?

[fanfan]

I wonder if giving up chocolate is equally dangerous?

Well, you can try it, and let us know. ;-)

[Gabz]

THAT is VERY funny!!!!!!!!

[fanfan]

I will remain a non-smoker (never having smoked a day in my life) for the remainder of my life, thank you...;-)

The article doesn't say you should start, just that people who quit after smoking for more than 25 years have a higher rate of cancer than those that continued smoking.

[fanfan]

Your welcome Joe.

[fanfan]

Good luck FRiend.

:-)

[RedRover]

Ping!

[fanfan]

I wonder.

Fat is good for you, really.

[fanfan]

Do you wear perfume?

Perfume always chokes me up.

[fanfan]

LOL!

Thanks for posting that.

[shield]

Interesting...

[Trailerpark Badass]

It may be that people who can finally kick the smoking habit are already sick even though they haven't been diagnosed yet, and so they're more likely to be able to resist the habit.

Certainly that's possible, except that, given the length of time my father smoked (probably closer to 50 years), it is probably statistically more probable that the disease would have become apparent while he was still smoking, not shortly thereafter. Also, my father didn't have breathing troubles or any other significant health problems. He was actually quite healthy for a 67 year-old.

[abigailsmybaby]

It’s another one of those things that makes you go “hmmmmmm”.

My husband and I quit 17 years ago. Both doing well except he has diabetes. Maybe how heavy you smoked plays a big role.