# Recently quit smoking; Need advice ASAP **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [January 22, 2012, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/recently-quit-smoking-need-advice-asap/610279 "2012-01-22T04:16:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2012, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/recently-quit-smoking-need-advice-asap/610279/21 "2012-01-23T00:34:28Z")
> [@Dallas\_Jones](#): > > Recent studies have shown that the patch and nicotine gums do not work. Here is an article on the Harvard study: > > [http://www.boston.com/Boston/dailydose/2012/01/nicotine-patches-and-gum-don-work-long-term-for-smokers-harvard-study-finds/55ZXUdIxUelydpBG1U4HLP/index.html?camp=bnb](http://www.boston.com/Boston/dailydose/2012/01/nicotine-patches-and-gum-don-work-long-term-for-smokers-harvard-study-finds/55ZXUdIxUelydpBG1U4HLP/index.html?camp=bnb) That’s not a very good summation of the study. What the study found was that these things may help people quit smoking, but they don’t stop people from \*starting \*smoking again years later. And really, why would they? Seems a weird definition of “work”. Does a diet not work if, four years after losing weight on it, you start stuffing your face again and put weight back on? ---
**Author:** ![Becky2844](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Becky2844](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Becky2844)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2012, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/recently-quit-smoking-need-advice-asap/610279/22 "2012-01-23T00:56:44Z")
I like that idea of throwing ice into the shower **elbows**. Going to keep it in mind… Do something exhilarating that takes you “out of” yourself for awhile. Ride go-carts till you drop. If you’re around snow, sled down a steep hill. Go to a 3-D action movie. When you’re done you might be drained enough not to feel so agitated. Good going with the quitting! ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2012, 10:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/recently-quit-smoking-need-advice-asap/610279/23 "2012-01-23T10:14:37Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > That’s not a very good summation of the study. What the study found was that these things may help people quit smoking, but they don’t stop people from \*starting \*smoking again years later. > > And really, why would they? Seems a weird definition of “work”. Does a diet not work if, four years after losing weight on it, you start stuffing your face again and put weight back on? Actually IMHO dieting should be held to the same standard, as it is actually worse to Pogo around with your weight. Like weight loss the health benefits of quitting smoking only exist if you quit for the long term. The issue is that NRT is a harm reduction strategy more than it is a quitting strategy. A person who goes off the patch or the gum is still chemically addicted, they are far more likely to smoke than those who quit cold turkey with a similar length “quit” This is most likely why most people (80%+) who have successful long term quits did so “cold turkey”. To the OP, you can make it though, remember there are more ex-smokers than smokers now and it gets a LOT easier over the next few months. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2012, 12:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/recently-quit-smoking-need-advice-asap/610279/24 "2012-01-23T12:00:34Z")
> [@rat\_avatar](#): > > Actually IMHO dieting should be held to the same standard, as it is actually worse to Pogo around with your weight. While this is conventional wisdom, we’re now seeing [some](http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2011/12/23/Yo-yo-dieting-still-has-health-benefit/UPI-53411324666336/) [studies](http://www.ohio.edu/research/communications/yoyodiet.cfm)which suggest that so called “yo-yo dieting” is actually better healthwise than being steadily obese. Time (and more studies) will tell. But that’s besides the point. The point is that a diet plan which helps you lose weight “works.” You may regain the weight when you stop following the diet, but that’s hardly the diet plan’s fault. > [@](#): > > Like weight loss the health benefits of quitting smoking only exist if you quit for the long term. Really? Why? Why isn’t 4 years of not taking carcinogens and cardiovascular poisons into your body a good thing? Since the damage from smoking is cummulative, and we see greater health risks with greater pack years, this is a pretty extraordinary claim. > [@](#): > > A person who goes off the patch or the gum is still chemically addicted, they are far more likely to smoke than those who quit cold turkey with a similar length “quit” Again, really? The linked article doesn’t say that patches and gum are inferior, just that they are not superior, to other quitting methods: > [@](#): > > The study found that one-third of recent quitters who used nicotine replacement therapies relapsed within two years after the study began, regardless of how long they used the therapy or whether they had counseling. That was the same relapse rate as among people who used no smoking-cessation aids. > > After four years, an additional one-third resumed smoking in all the groups studied. > [@](#): > > This is most likely why most people (80%+) who have successful long term quits did so “cold turkey”. Do you have a cite for this? ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2012, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/recently-quit-smoking-need-advice-asap/610279/25 "2012-01-23T17:31:16Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > While this is conventional wisdom, we’re now seeing [some](http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2011/12/23/Yo-yo-dieting-still-has-health-benefit/UPI-53411324666336/) [studies](http://www.ohio.edu/research/communications/yoyodiet.cfm)which suggest that so called “yo-yo dieting” is actually better healthwise than being steadily obese. Time (and more studies) will tell. > > But that’s besides the point. The point is that a diet plan which helps you lose weight “works.” You may regain the weight when you stop following the diet, but that’s hardly the diet plan’s fault. From your first cite: “In fact, important improvements that likely signify decreased risk for cardiovascular disease occur even despite weight regain, as long as dieting persists,” “Switching to a healthy lifestyle is a long-term strategy that should be done moderately but persistently,” So you need to keep dieting, they are talking about the weight gain if you maintain the diet, not the quit-starve-quit way that many people diet. The long term maintenance of the heather lifestyle is what they claim helps the second study, while interesting: “The yo-yo dieters also lived about as long as a control group of mice steadily fed a low-fat diet.” Diet without life change does do little to help you, as the other life changes you need to make. e.g. increasing cardio health levels, which are impeded by obesity are the main factors in improving health > [@](#): > > Really? Why? Why isn’t 4 years of not taking carcinogens and cardiovascular poisons into your body a good thing? Since the damage from smoking is cummulative, and we see greater health risks with greater pack years, this is a pretty extraordinary claim. Which form of mortality are you talking about? [http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletters/Harvard\_Heart\_Letter/2010/November/light-and-social-smoking-carry-cardiovascular-risks](http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletters/Harvard_Heart_Letter/2010/November/light-and-social-smoking-carry-cardiovascular-risks) > [@](#): > > Again, really? The linked article doesn’t say that patches and gum are inferior, just that they are not superior, to other quitting methods: > Do you have a cite for this? [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16137834?dopt=Citation](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16137834?dopt=Citation) [http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/288/10/1260.abstract](http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/288/10/1260.abstract) [http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/12/3/310.full.pdf+html](http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/12/3/310.full.pdf+html) In survey after survey after survey, long term quitters typically quit cold turkey. Of course counseling is a HUGE help, that is part of the reason NRT was so effective as a prescribed remedy. Unless…you are talking about a clinical trial where the “cold turkey” control was someone who was given placebo and was not quitting cold turkey by choice. NRT is not a zero sum gain, but as I said it is harm reduction, analogous to methadone as a replacement for harder opiates. ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2012, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/recently-quit-smoking-need-advice-asap/610279/26 "2012-01-23T17:46:44Z")
[http://whyquit.com/NRT/studies/Hartman\_NCI\_NRT.pdf](http://whyquit.com/NRT/studies/Hartman_NCI_NRT.pdf) Here is another document that shows that past 6 months non-NRT quitters are more successful after 6 months. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/recently-quit-smoking-need-advice-asap/610279.md?page=1)