Free nicotine cessation tips! (yes, really.. ;-) )

http://www.msnusers.com/FreedomFromT...0&all_topics=1

Please keep in mind that this is 100% cold turkey support group. All
materials are free for anyone to read and use. If you want to join there are
2 conditions. You are nicotine free (you did not use nicotine in any form
for the past 72 hours) and have recently quit (less than 30 days ago). This
includes quitting NRT, wich is considdered to be your real quit date from
nicotine addiction. But even if you aren't a member, you have access to all
material, you just aren't allowed to post.

If you don't want to go there, let me just share this one bit of very
important information. (totally free!! :P )

The Law of Addiction - The law of addiction states, "administration of a
drug to an addict will cause re-establishment of chemical dependence upon
the addictive substance." Yes, just one powerful puff, dip or chew and
you'll be faced with again enduring up to 72 hours of nicotine detox, by far
the most challenging period of recovery. We are simply not that strong. Full
adherence to the following simple restatement of the law of addiction
provides a 100% guarantee of success to all: no nicotine just one day at a
time ... "Never Take Another Puff, Dip or Chew."

Inky,

Free since 22/06/07. One month, one week, four days, 4 hours, 45 minutes and
38 seconds. 1235 stinkers not smoked, saving ? 131,01. Life saved: 4 days, 6
hours, 55 minutes.

hi there Inky,

the issue of some other stop smoking sites has been a sensitive topic in as3
and there are groups out there who draw a very hard line as to what is
expected of the would-be quitter. i believe there's one group out there
who, if a member has a relapse, ex-communicates them from the group! some
groups insist that their members go 'cold turkey' as the only acceptable
method (to them) of quitting. some people swear by these groups and others
swear at them, I'm not sure if the one you mention is one on these!

i find this 'law of addiction' an interesting *** i don't know what word to
use, in what sense is it a law? i don't think there is such a thing! also
the 'law' as stated does not make much sense.

1. if a person is an addict they already are dependent on the drug (what's
this re-establishment?)

2. one puff and it will take 72 hours to get it all out of the system again?
and be faced with 'nicotine detox? i don't know about the 72 hours bit but
someone who hasn't smoked for a while will not have to go through the same
detox as someone who's just stopped smoking 60 cigs a day!

3. "we are simply not that strong"! well plenty of people are that strong.
a number of folks on this site have had a relapse of one or two cigs and
then quit again!

4. 100% guarantee of success! LMAO there's no guarantee with any method
other than not smoking another cig and what kind of law is that? it's a fact
that if you don't smoke any more cigs you will have successfully quit
smoking not a law! i think the word is tautology.

i hate it when people try to entice others by using 'science' or quoting
'laws' etc. I'm not saying that they don't have a point, or two but
sometimes the language used is misleading and unnecessary. on top of this,
those trying to quit smoking are vulnerable and more likely to be open to
such language that promises results.

i love as3 for saying ..................whatever works for
you..................... we can help everyone regardless of how they try to
quit as long as they keep trying and not everyone can quit cold turkey!

best wishes

richard





"Inky" <inky_meNOSPAM@zonnet.nl> wrote in message
news:46b1a7ee$0$16661$bf4948fe@news.tele2.nl...
> http://www.msnusers.com/FreedomFromT...0&all_topics=1
>
> Please keep in mind that this is 100% cold turkey support group. All
> materials are free for anyone to read and use. If you want to join there
> are 2 conditions. You are nicotine free (you did not use nicotine in any
> form for the past 72 hours) and have recently quit (less than 30 days
> ago). This includes quitting NRT, wich is considdered to be your real quit
> date from nicotine addiction. But even if you aren't a member, you have
> access to all material, you just aren't allowed to post.
>
> If you don't want to go there, let me just share this one bit of very
> important information. (totally free!! :P )
>
> The Law of Addiction - The law of addiction states, "administration of a
> drug to an addict will cause re-establishment of chemical dependence upon
> the addictive substance." Yes, just one powerful puff, dip or chew and
> you'll be faced with again enduring up to 72 hours of nicotine detox, by
> far the most challenging period of recovery. We are simply not that
> strong. Full adherence to the following simple restatement of the law of
> addiction provides a 100% guarantee of success to all: no nicotine just
> one day at a time ... "Never Take Another Puff, Dip or Chew."
>
> Inky,
>
> Free since 22/06/07. One month, one week, four days, 4 hours, 45 minutes
> and 38 seconds. 1235 stinkers not smoked, saving ? 131,01. Life saved: 4
> days, 6 hours, 55 minutes.
>
>

hi there Inky,

the issue of some other stop smoking sites has been a sensitive topic in as3
and there are groups out there who draw a very hard line as to what is
expected of the would-be quitter. i believe there's one group out there
who, if a member has a relapse, ex-communicates them from the group! some
groups insist that their members go 'cold turkey' as the only acceptable
method (to them) of quitting. some people swear by these groups and others
swear at them, I'm not sure if the one you mention is one on these!

i find this 'law of addiction' an interesting *** i don't know what word to
use, in what sense is it a law? i don't think there is such a thing! also
the 'law' as stated does not make much sense.

1. if a person is an addict they already are dependent on the drug (what's
this re-establishment?)

2. one puff and it will take 72 hours to get it all out of the system again?
and be faced with 'nicotine detox? i don't know about the 72 hours bit but
someone who hasn't smoked for a while will not have to go through the same
detox as someone who's just stopped smoking 60 cigs a day!

3. "we are simply not that strong"! well plenty of people are that strong.
a number of folks on this site have had a relapse of one or two cigs and
then quit again!

4. 100% guarantee of success! LMAO there's no guarantee with any method
other than not smoking another cig and what kind of law is that? it's a fact
that if you don't smoke any more cigs you will have successfully quit
smoking not a law! i think the word is tautology.

i hate it when people try to entice others by using 'science' or quoting
'laws' etc. I'm not saying that they don't have a point, or two but
sometimes the language used is misleading and unnecessary. on top of this,
those trying to quit smoking are vulnerable and more likely to be open to
such language that promises results.

i love as3 for saying ..................whatever works for
you..................... we can help everyone regardless of how they try to
quit as long as they keep trying and not everyone can quit cold turkey!

best wishes

richard





"Inky" <inky_meNOSPAM@zonnet.nl> wrote in message
news:46b1a7ee$0$16661$bf4948fe@news.tele2.nl...
> http://www.msnusers.com/FreedomFromT...0&all_topics=1
>
> Please keep in mind that this is 100% cold turkey support group. All
> materials are free for anyone to read and use. If you want to join there
> are 2 conditions. You are nicotine free (you did not use nicotine in any
> form for the past 72 hours) and have recently quit (less than 30 days
> ago). This includes quitting NRT, wich is considdered to be your real quit
> date from nicotine addiction. But even if you aren't a member, you have
> access to all material, you just aren't allowed to post.
>
> If you don't want to go there, let me just share this one bit of very
> important information. (totally free!! :P )
>
> The Law of Addiction - The law of addiction states, "administration of a
> drug to an addict will cause re-establishment of chemical dependence upon
> the addictive substance." Yes, just one powerful puff, dip or chew and
> you'll be faced with again enduring up to 72 hours of nicotine detox, by
> far the most challenging period of recovery. We are simply not that
> strong. Full adherence to the following simple restatement of the law of
> addiction provides a 100% guarantee of success to all: no nicotine just
> one day at a time ... "Never Take Another Puff, Dip or Chew."
>
> Inky,
>
> Free since 22/06/07. One month, one week, four days, 4 hours, 45 minutes
> and 38 seconds. 1235 stinkers not smoked, saving ? 131,01. Life saved: 4
> days, 6 hours, 55 minutes.
>
>

I'm hardly the poster boy for quit smoking methods, but I used the
material I got from the FreedomFromTobacco board and have been
successfully quit for over 1.5+ years. I still read the info there on
occasion, but it gets less and less over time.

Granted, its not for everyone and is a rather tough-love group. But,
it is a supportive group in its own way. Not quite the friendly, agape
type love you'll find here, but it does work if you are of the right
mindset. I wouldn't recommend it for everyone, but for some folks it
works.

BTW, when you refer to the "cold turkey" only group and the one that
kicks you out if you relapse, this is the same group that Inky is
talking about. I don't make excuses or reasons for their philosophy,
just stating it factually as a member of that board.

--spiff
---
Insanity takes its toll. Please have exact change.
1Y 7M 1D, 11576 not smoked, $2,025.66 saved.

On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 21:16:32 GMT, "Richard" <rvardy@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>hi there Inky,
>
>the issue of some other stop smoking sites has been a sensitive topic in as3
>and there are groups out there who draw a very hard line as to what is
>expected of the would-be quitter. i believe there's one group out there
>who, if a member has a relapse, ex-communicates them from the group! some
>groups insist that their members go 'cold turkey' as the only acceptable
>method (to them) of quitting. some people swear by these groups and others
>swear at them, I'm not sure if the one you mention is one on these!
>
>i find this 'law of addiction' an interesting *** i don't know what word to
>use, in what sense is it a law? i don't think there is such a thing! also
>the 'law' as stated does not make much sense.
>
>1. if a person is an addict they already are dependent on the drug (what's
>this re-establishment?)
>
>2. one puff and it will take 72 hours to get it all out of the system again?
>and be faced with 'nicotine detox? i don't know about the 72 hours bit but
>someone who hasn't smoked for a while will not have to go through the same
>detox as someone who's just stopped smoking 60 cigs a day!
>
>3. "we are simply not that strong"! well plenty of people are that strong.
>a number of folks on this site have had a relapse of one or two cigs and
>then quit again!
>
>4. 100% guarantee of success! LMAO there's no guarantee with any method
>other than not smoking another cig and what kind of law is that? it's a fact
>that if you don't smoke any more cigs you will have successfully quit
>smoking not a law! i think the word is tautology.
>
>i hate it when people try to entice others by using 'science' or quoting
>'laws' etc. I'm not saying that they don't have a point, or two but
>sometimes the language used is misleading and unnecessary. on top of this,
>those trying to quit smoking are vulnerable and more likely to be open to
>such language that promises results.
>
>i love as3 for saying ..................whatever works for
>you..................... we can help everyone regardless of how they try to
>quit as long as they keep trying and not everyone can quit cold turkey!
>
>best wishes
>
>richard
>
>
>
>
>
>"Inky" <inky_meNOSPAM@zonnet.nl> wrote in message
>news:46b1a7ee$0$16661$bf4948fe@news.tele2.nl...
>> http://www.msnusers.com/FreedomFromT...0&all_topics=1
>>
>> Please keep in mind that this is 100% cold turkey support group. All
>> materials are free for anyone to read and use. If you want to join there
>> are 2 conditions. You are nicotine free (you did not use nicotine in any
>> form for the past 72 hours) and have recently quit (less than 30 days
>> ago). This includes quitting NRT, wich is considdered to be your real quit
>> date from nicotine addiction. But even if you aren't a member, you have
>> access to all material, you just aren't allowed to post.
>>
>> If you don't want to go there, let me just share this one bit of very
>> important information. (totally free!! :P )
>>
>> The Law of Addiction - The law of addiction states, "administration of a
>> drug to an addict will cause re-establishment of chemical dependence upon
>> the addictive substance." Yes, just one powerful puff, dip or chew and
>> you'll be faced with again enduring up to 72 hours of nicotine detox, by
>> far the most challenging period of recovery. We are simply not that
>> strong. Full adherence to the following simple restatement of the law of
>> addiction provides a 100% guarantee of success to all: no nicotine just
>> one day at a time ... "Never Take Another Puff, Dip or Chew."
>>
>> Inky,
>>
>> Free since 22/06/07. One month, one week, four days, 4 hours, 45 minutes
>> and 38 seconds. 1235 stinkers not smoked, saving ? 131,01. Life saved: 4
>> days, 6 hours, 55 minutes.
>>
>>
>

I'm hardly the poster boy for quit smoking methods, but I used the
material I got from the FreedomFromTobacco board and have been
successfully quit for over 1.5+ years. I still read the info there on
occasion, but it gets less and less over time.

Granted, its not for everyone and is a rather tough-love group. But,
it is a supportive group in its own way. Not quite the friendly, agape
type love you'll find here, but it does work if you are of the right
mindset. I wouldn't recommend it for everyone, but for some folks it
works.

BTW, when you refer to the "cold turkey" only group and the one that
kicks you out if you relapse, this is the same group that Inky is
talking about. I don't make excuses or reasons for their philosophy,
just stating it factually as a member of that board.

--spiff
---
Insanity takes its toll. Please have exact change.
1Y 7M 1D, 11576 not smoked, $2,025.66 saved.

On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 21:16:32 GMT, "Richard" <rvardy@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>hi there Inky,
>
>the issue of some other stop smoking sites has been a sensitive topic in as3
>and there are groups out there who draw a very hard line as to what is
>expected of the would-be quitter. i believe there's one group out there
>who, if a member has a relapse, ex-communicates them from the group! some
>groups insist that their members go 'cold turkey' as the only acceptable
>method (to them) of quitting. some people swear by these groups and others
>swear at them, I'm not sure if the one you mention is one on these!
>
>i find this 'law of addiction' an interesting *** i don't know what word to
>use, in what sense is it a law? i don't think there is such a thing! also
>the 'law' as stated does not make much sense.
>
>1. if a person is an addict they already are dependent on the drug (what's
>this re-establishment?)
>
>2. one puff and it will take 72 hours to get it all out of the system again?
>and be faced with 'nicotine detox? i don't know about the 72 hours bit but
>someone who hasn't smoked for a while will not have to go through the same
>detox as someone who's just stopped smoking 60 cigs a day!
>
>3. "we are simply not that strong"! well plenty of people are that strong.
>a number of folks on this site have had a relapse of one or two cigs and
>then quit again!
>
>4. 100% guarantee of success! LMAO there's no guarantee with any method
>other than not smoking another cig and what kind of law is that? it's a fact
>that if you don't smoke any more cigs you will have successfully quit
>smoking not a law! i think the word is tautology.
>
>i hate it when people try to entice others by using 'science' or quoting
>'laws' etc. I'm not saying that they don't have a point, or two but
>sometimes the language used is misleading and unnecessary. on top of this,
>those trying to quit smoking are vulnerable and more likely to be open to
>such language that promises results.
>
>i love as3 for saying ..................whatever works for
>you..................... we can help everyone regardless of how they try to
>quit as long as they keep trying and not everyone can quit cold turkey!
>
>best wishes
>
>richard
>
>
>
>
>
>"Inky" <inky_meNOSPAM@zonnet.nl> wrote in message
>news:46b1a7ee$0$16661$bf4948fe@news.tele2.nl...
>> http://www.msnusers.com/FreedomFromT...0&all_topics=1
>>
>> Please keep in mind that this is 100% cold turkey support group. All
>> materials are free for anyone to read and use. If you want to join there
>> are 2 conditions. You are nicotine free (you did not use nicotine in any
>> form for the past 72 hours) and have recently quit (less than 30 days
>> ago). This includes quitting NRT, wich is considdered to be your real quit
>> date from nicotine addiction. But even if you aren't a member, you have
>> access to all material, you just aren't allowed to post.
>>
>> If you don't want to go there, let me just share this one bit of very
>> important information. (totally free!! :P )
>>
>> The Law of Addiction - The law of addiction states, "administration of a
>> drug to an addict will cause re-establishment of chemical dependence upon
>> the addictive substance." Yes, just one powerful puff, dip or chew and
>> you'll be faced with again enduring up to 72 hours of nicotine detox, by
>> far the most challenging period of recovery. We are simply not that
>> strong. Full adherence to the following simple restatement of the law of
>> addiction provides a 100% guarantee of success to all: no nicotine just
>> one day at a time ... "Never Take Another Puff, Dip or Chew."
>>
>> Inky,
>>
>> Free since 22/06/07. One month, one week, four days, 4 hours, 45 minutes
>> and 38 seconds. 1235 stinkers not smoked, saving ? 131,01. Life saved: 4
>> days, 6 hours, 55 minutes.
>>
>>
>

Well said.

Had I not stumbled upon WhyQuit in June of 2005, I'd probably still be
smoking. It was there that I found my own "Ah Ha" moment and well, the rest
is history.

Every person that posts and lurks on AS3 has their own story of what worked,
or in some cases, what didn't work in their quest for being nicotine free.

WhyQuit certainly isn't for everyone, but for *some* of us - it provides
the incentive, motivation, support, and education that we weren't able to
get with hypnotherapy, books, lasers, gums, patches, zyban, courses, and
acupuncture.

~Echo, a proud Spitzerite


BTW, I found this place *after* I quit via the teachings of WhyQuit. I
really don't know if A3S alone would have been enough knowing my history of
serial quitting.





"CyberSpiff" <cyberspiff@nospam.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:g5p4b3ha8c1cvb0o2410reg4sc3hc6el9e@4ax.com...
> I'm hardly the poster boy for quit smoking methods, but I used the
> material I got from the FreedomFromTobacco board and have been
> successfully quit for over 1.5+ years. I still read the info there on
> occasion, but it gets less and less over time.
>
> Granted, its not for everyone and is a rather tough-love group. But,
> it is a supportive group in its own way. Not quite the friendly, agape
> type love you'll find here, but it does work if you are of the right
> mindset. I wouldn't recommend it for everyone, but for some folks it
> works.
>
> BTW, when you refer to the "cold turkey" only group and the one that
> kicks you out if you relapse, this is the same group that Inky is
> talking about. I don't make excuses or reasons for their philosophy,
> just stating it factually as a member of that board.
>
> --spiff
> ---
> Insanity takes its toll. Please have exact change.
> 1Y 7M 1D, 11576 not smoked, $2,025.66 saved.
>
> On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 21:16:32 GMT, "Richard" <rvardy@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>hi there Inky,
>>
>>the issue of some other stop smoking sites has been a sensitive topic in
>>as3
>>and there are groups out there who draw a very hard line as to what is
>>expected of the would-be quitter. i believe there's one group out there
>>who, if a member has a relapse, ex-communicates them from the group! some
>>groups insist that their members go 'cold turkey' as the only acceptable
>>method (to them) of quitting. some people swear by these groups and
>>others
>>swear at them, I'm not sure if the one you mention is one on these!
>>
>>i find this 'law of addiction' an interesting *** i don't know what word
>>to
>>use, in what sense is it a law? i don't think there is such a thing! also
>>the 'law' as stated does not make much sense.
>>
>>1. if a person is an addict they already are dependent on the drug (what's
>>this re-establishment?)
>>
>>2. one puff and it will take 72 hours to get it all out of the system
>>again?
>>and be faced with 'nicotine detox? i don't know about the 72 hours bit but
>>someone who hasn't smoked for a while will not have to go through the same
>>detox as someone who's just stopped smoking 60 cigs a day!
>>
>>3. "we are simply not that strong"! well plenty of people are that
>>strong.
>>a number of folks on this site have had a relapse of one or two cigs and
>>then quit again!
>>
>>4. 100% guarantee of success! LMAO there's no guarantee with any method
>>other than not smoking another cig and what kind of law is that? it's a
>>fact
>>that if you don't smoke any more cigs you will have successfully quit
>>smoking not a law! i think the word is tautology.
>>
>>i hate it when people try to entice others by using 'science' or quoting
>>'laws' etc. I'm not saying that they don't have a point, or two but
>>sometimes the language used is misleading and unnecessary. on top of this,
>>those trying to quit smoking are vulnerable and more likely to be open to
>>such language that promises results.
>>
>>i love as3 for saying ..................whatever works for
>>you..................... we can help everyone regardless of how they try
>>to
>>quit as long as they keep trying and not everyone can quit cold turkey!
>>
>>best wishes
>>
>>richard
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>"Inky" <inky_meNOSPAM@zonnet.nl> wrote in message
>>news:46b1a7ee$0$16661$bf4948fe@news.tele2.nl.. .
>>> http://www.msnusers.com/FreedomFromT...0&all_topics=1
>>>
>>> Please keep in mind that this is 100% cold turkey support group. All
>>> materials are free for anyone to read and use. If you want to join there
>>> are 2 conditions. You are nicotine free (you did not use nicotine in any
>>> form for the past 72 hours) and have recently quit (less than 30 days
>>> ago). This includes quitting NRT, wich is considdered to be your real
>>> quit
>>> date from nicotine addiction. But even if you aren't a member, you have
>>> access to all material, you just aren't allowed to post.
>>>
>>> If you don't want to go there, let me just share this one bit of very
>>> important information. (totally free!! :P )
>>>
>>> The Law of Addiction - The law of addiction states, "administration of a
>>> drug to an addict will cause re-establishment of chemical dependence
>>> upon
>>> the addictive substance." Yes, just one powerful puff, dip or chew and
>>> you'll be faced with again enduring up to 72 hours of nicotine detox, by
>>> far the most challenging period of recovery. We are simply not that
>>> strong. Full adherence to the following simple restatement of the law of
>>> addiction provides a 100% guarantee of success to all: no nicotine just
>>> one day at a time ... "Never Take Another Puff, Dip or Chew."
>>>
>>> Inky,
>>>
>>> Free since 22/06/07. One month, one week, four days, 4 hours, 45 minutes
>>> and 38 seconds. 1235 stinkers not smoked, saving ? 131,01. Life saved: 4
>>> days, 6 hours, 55 minutes.
>>>
>>>
>>

Well said.

Had I not stumbled upon WhyQuit in June of 2005, I'd probably still be
smoking. It was there that I found my own "Ah Ha" moment and well, the rest
is history.

Every person that posts and lurks on AS3 has their own story of what worked,
or in some cases, what didn't work in their quest for being nicotine free.

WhyQuit certainly isn't for everyone, but for *some* of us - it provides
the incentive, motivation, support, and education that we weren't able to
get with hypnotherapy, books, lasers, gums, patches, zyban, courses, and
acupuncture.

~Echo, a proud Spitzerite


BTW, I found this place *after* I quit via the teachings of WhyQuit. I
really don't know if A3S alone would have been enough knowing my history of
serial quitting.





"CyberSpiff" <cyberspiff@nospam.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:g5p4b3ha8c1cvb0o2410reg4sc3hc6el9e@4ax.com...
> I'm hardly the poster boy for quit smoking methods, but I used the
> material I got from the FreedomFromTobacco board and have been
> successfully quit for over 1.5+ years. I still read the info there on
> occasion, but it gets less and less over time.
>
> Granted, its not for everyone and is a rather tough-love group. But,
> it is a supportive group in its own way. Not quite the friendly, agape
> type love you'll find here, but it does work if you are of the right
> mindset. I wouldn't recommend it for everyone, but for some folks it
> works.
>
> BTW, when you refer to the "cold turkey" only group and the one that
> kicks you out if you relapse, this is the same group that Inky is
> talking about. I don't make excuses or reasons for their philosophy,
> just stating it factually as a member of that board.
>
> --spiff
> ---
> Insanity takes its toll. Please have exact change.
> 1Y 7M 1D, 11576 not smoked, $2,025.66 saved.
>
> On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 21:16:32 GMT, "Richard" <rvardy@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>hi there Inky,
>>
>>the issue of some other stop smoking sites has been a sensitive topic in
>>as3
>>and there are groups out there who draw a very hard line as to what is
>>expected of the would-be quitter. i believe there's one group out there
>>who, if a member has a relapse, ex-communicates them from the group! some
>>groups insist that their members go 'cold turkey' as the only acceptable
>>method (to them) of quitting. some people swear by these groups and
>>others
>>swear at them, I'm not sure if the one you mention is one on these!
>>
>>i find this 'law of addiction' an interesting *** i don't know what word
>>to
>>use, in what sense is it a law? i don't think there is such a thing! also
>>the 'law' as stated does not make much sense.
>>
>>1. if a person is an addict they already are dependent on the drug (what's
>>this re-establishment?)
>>
>>2. one puff and it will take 72 hours to get it all out of the system
>>again?
>>and be faced with 'nicotine detox? i don't know about the 72 hours bit but
>>someone who hasn't smoked for a while will not have to go through the same
>>detox as someone who's just stopped smoking 60 cigs a day!
>>
>>3. "we are simply not that strong"! well plenty of people are that
>>strong.
>>a number of folks on this site have had a relapse of one or two cigs and
>>then quit again!
>>
>>4. 100% guarantee of success! LMAO there's no guarantee with any method
>>other than not smoking another cig and what kind of law is that? it's a
>>fact
>>that if you don't smoke any more cigs you will have successfully quit
>>smoking not a law! i think the word is tautology.
>>
>>i hate it when people try to entice others by using 'science' or quoting
>>'laws' etc. I'm not saying that they don't have a point, or two but
>>sometimes the language used is misleading and unnecessary. on top of this,
>>those trying to quit smoking are vulnerable and more likely to be open to
>>such language that promises results.
>>
>>i love as3 for saying ..................whatever works for
>>you..................... we can help everyone regardless of how they try
>>to
>>quit as long as they keep trying and not everyone can quit cold turkey!
>>
>>best wishes
>>
>>richard
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>"Inky" <inky_meNOSPAM@zonnet.nl> wrote in message
>>news:46b1a7ee$0$16661$bf4948fe@news.tele2.nl.. .
>>> http://www.msnusers.com/FreedomFromT...0&all_topics=1
>>>
>>> Please keep in mind that this is 100% cold turkey support group. All
>>> materials are free for anyone to read and use. If you want to join there
>>> are 2 conditions. You are nicotine free (you did not use nicotine in any
>>> form for the past 72 hours) and have recently quit (less than 30 days
>>> ago). This includes quitting NRT, wich is considdered to be your real
>>> quit
>>> date from nicotine addiction. But even if you aren't a member, you have
>>> access to all material, you just aren't allowed to post.
>>>
>>> If you don't want to go there, let me just share this one bit of very
>>> important information. (totally free!! :P )
>>>
>>> The Law of Addiction - The law of addiction states, "administration of a
>>> drug to an addict will cause re-establishment of chemical dependence
>>> upon
>>> the addictive substance." Yes, just one powerful puff, dip or chew and
>>> you'll be faced with again enduring up to 72 hours of nicotine detox, by
>>> far the most challenging period of recovery. We are simply not that
>>> strong. Full adherence to the following simple restatement of the law of
>>> addiction provides a 100% guarantee of success to all: no nicotine just
>>> one day at a time ... "Never Take Another Puff, Dip or Chew."
>>>
>>> Inky,
>>>
>>> Free since 22/06/07. One month, one week, four days, 4 hours, 45 minutes
>>> and 38 seconds. 1235 stinkers not smoked, saving ? 131,01. Life saved: 4
>>> days, 6 hours, 55 minutes.
>>>
>>>
>>

hi there,

i came across whyquit when i first stopped smoking at about the same time as
i found as3. i found their site very powerful in it's 'philosophy' to
quitting but after reading all their stuff i found as3 and got pulled in by
the friendliness of it's members and never really went back to Whyquit . i
might mention here that i went cold turkey, never relapsed and thought it
was the only way for me to quit and it worked, so i could be a good ad for
whyquit! i might also mention that I'd quit a couple of times in the past
(CT) and my reason for quitting CT this time had nothing to do with Whyquit.

a little while after joining as3 i mentioned Whyquit in a thread and found
myself in the middle of a very heated argument due to some folks being very
anti Whyquit from their personal experience with them. i can't remember what
their issues were now but one or two were spitting fire!

i feel that there should always be concern with regards to any group or
organisation using extreme methods to achieve particular aims when something
less extreme would have done the job. i don't know enough about Whyquit to
comment on them specifically and never set out to do so but i got the
impression that their 'tough love' was tougher than necessary and some
people were very upset about it from the posts in as3! my impression might
have been wrong.

my original comments were regarding their 'law of addiction' (without
realising it was by them) as quoted by Inky. i do get upset when i feel
people are misrepresenting information or facts or using words and ideas
incorrectly in order to impress or influence others. i especially don't like
'science' or 'scientific method' or some allusion to a 'higher' authority
being used to make something seem more than it is. why use the term 'LAW'
(law of addiction) in order to put across a message that could be perfectly
expressed without using the term? we know that people who have been
addicted to a drug are likely to relapse if they sample that drug again (you
might say that to sample that drug again means that they have already
relapsed) but many people have been tempted and had one or two cigs but then
quit again and not smoked any more so it's not a law it's just not a good
idea and although it might be 'playing with fire' some have even found that
having that slight relapse gave them the extra 'kick up the arse' they
needed to make their quit work!

>>> The Law of Addiction - The law of addiction states, "administration of a
>>> drug to an addict will cause re-establishment of chemical dependence
>>> upon
>>> the addictive substance." Yes, just one powerful puff, dip or chew and
>>> you'll be faced with again enduring up to 72 hours of nicotine detox, by
>>> far the most challenging period of recovery. We are simply not that
>>> strong. Full adherence to the following simple restatement of the law of
>>> addiction provides a 100% guarantee of success to all: no nicotine just
>>> one day at a time ... "Never Take Another Puff, Dip or Chew."
>>>

the thing is that it seems to me, if you read it quickly it makes sense but
the more you look at it and break it down the less sense it makes to have
written it that way! it ends up looking like someone wanted to legitimise
(or create a grander impression in) what they were saying by using the word
LAW and the concept of THE LAW OF ADDICTION and that makes me feel uneasy.

it was believed that prayers needed to be made before dawn in order for the
sun to rise and every morning prayers were made and the sun came up. we now
know that it would come up anyway but I'm sure it made sense at the time and
i also suspect whoever was authorised to say the prayers was happy to keep
it that way! Whyquit might work for some people but i suspect (based on
this 'law of addiction') that it would work just as well without some of
it's terminology. i totally agree that for some people the hard line tough
love system works and I'm sure that for some, going to and signing on to
Whyquit worked and they quit smoking.

all i think is that we should read everything carefully and try to
understand exactly what is being said and why it is being said in the way it
is. my comments were based on that. i think it can be dangerous to pass
questionable information on and so i questioned Inky's posting in as3 of a
'law of addiction' that has come from another site. for many people, seeing
the word LAW gives what is being said the stamp of approval (it must be
right because it's a law) and i just wanted people to look at it more
closely.

best regards
richard











"CyberSpiff" <cyberspiff@nospam.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:g5p4b3ha8c1cvb0o2410reg4sc3hc6el9e@4ax.com...
> I'm hardly the poster boy for quit smoking methods, but I used the
> material I got from the FreedomFromTobacco board and have been
> successfully quit for over 1.5+ years. I still read the info there on
> occasion, but it gets less and less over time.
>
> Granted, its not for everyone and is a rather tough-love group. But,
> it is a supportive group in its own way. Not quite the friendly, agape
> type love you'll find here, but it does work if you are of the right
> mindset. I wouldn't recommend it for everyone, but for some folks it
> works.
>
> BTW, when you refer to the "cold turkey" only group and the one that
> kicks you out if you relapse, this is the same group that Inky is
> talking about. I don't make excuses or reasons for their philosophy,
> just stating it factually as a member of that board.
>
> --spiff
> ---
> Insanity takes its toll. Please have exact change.
> 1Y 7M 1D, 11576 not smoked, $2,025.66 saved.
>
> On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 21:16:32 GMT, "Richard" <rvardy@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>hi there Inky,
>>
>>the issue of some other stop smoking sites has been a sensitive topic in
>>as3
>>and there are groups out there who draw a very hard line as to what is
>>expected of the would-be quitter. i believe there's one group out there
>>who, if a member has a relapse, ex-communicates them from the group! some
>>groups insist that their members go 'cold turkey' as the only acceptable
>>method (to them) of quitting. some people swear by these groups and
>>others
>>swear at them, I'm not sure if the one you mention is one on these!
>>
>>i find this 'law of addiction' an interesting *** i don't know what word
>>to
>>use, in what sense is it a law? i don't think there is such a thing! also
>>the 'law' as stated does not make much sense.
>>
>>1. if a person is an addict they already are dependent on the drug (what's
>>this re-establishment?)
>>
>>2. one puff and it will take 72 hours to get it all out of the system
>>again?
>>and be faced with 'nicotine detox? i don't know about the 72 hours bit but
>>someone who hasn't smoked for a while will not have to go through the same
>>detox as someone who's just stopped smoking 60 cigs a day!
>>
>>3. "we are simply not that strong"! well plenty of people are that
>>strong.
>>a number of folks on this site have had a relapse of one or two cigs and
>>then quit again!
>>
>>4. 100% guarantee of success! LMAO there's no guarantee with any method
>>other than not smoking another cig and what kind of law is that? it's a
>>fact
>>that if you don't smoke any more cigs you will have successfully quit
>>smoking not a law! i think the word is tautology.
>>
>>i hate it when people try to entice others by using 'science' or quoting
>>'laws' etc. I'm not saying that they don't have a point, or two but
>>sometimes the language used is misleading and unnecessary. on top of this,
>>those trying to quit smoking are vulnerable and more likely to be open to
>>such language that promises results.
>>
>>i love as3 for saying ..................whatever works for
>>you..................... we can help everyone regardless of how they try
>>to
>>quit as long as they keep trying and not everyone can quit cold turkey!
>>
>>best wishes
>>
>>richard
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>"Inky" <inky_meNOSPAM@zonnet.nl> wrote in message
>>news:46b1a7ee$0$16661$bf4948fe@news.tele2.nl.. .
>>> http://www.msnusers.com/FreedomFromT...0&all_topics=1
>>>
>>> Please keep in mind that this is 100% cold turkey support group. All
>>> materials are free for anyone to read and use. If you want to join there
>>> are 2 conditions. You are nicotine free (you did not use nicotine in any
>>> form for the past 72 hours) and have recently quit (less than 30 days
>>> ago). This includes quitting NRT, wich is considdered to be your real
>>> quit
>>> date from nicotine addiction. But even if you aren't a member, you have
>>> access to all material, you just aren't allowed to post.
>>>
>>> If you don't want to go there, let me just share this one bit of very
>>> important information. (totally free!! :P )
>>>
>>> The Law of Addiction - The law of addiction states, "administration of a
>>> drug to an addict will cause re-establishment of chemical dependence
>>> upon
>>> the addictive substance." Yes, just one powerful puff, dip or chew and
>>> you'll be faced with again enduring up to 72 hours of nicotine detox, by
>>> far the most challenging period of recovery. We are simply not that
>>> strong. Full adherence to the following simple restatement of the law of
>>> addiction provides a 100% guarantee of success to all: no nicotine just
>>> one day at a time ... "Never Take Another Puff, Dip or Chew."
>>>
>>> Inky,
>>>
>>> Free since 22/06/07. One month, one week, four days, 4 hours, 45 minutes
>>> and 38 seconds. 1235 stinkers not smoked, saving ? 131,01. Life saved: 4
>>> days, 6 hours, 55 minutes.
>>>
>>>
>>

hi there,

i came across whyquit when i first stopped smoking at about the same time as
i found as3. i found their site very powerful in it's 'philosophy' to
quitting but after reading all their stuff i found as3 and got pulled in by
the friendliness of it's members and never really went back to Whyquit . i
might mention here that i went cold turkey, never relapsed and thought it
was the only way for me to quit and it worked, so i could be a good ad for
whyquit! i might also mention that I'd quit a couple of times in the past
(CT) and my reason for quitting CT this time had nothing to do with Whyquit.

a little while after joining as3 i mentioned Whyquit in a thread and found
myself in the middle of a very heated argument due to some folks being very
anti Whyquit from their personal experience with them. i can't remember what
their issues were now but one or two were spitting fire!

i feel that there should always be concern with regards to any group or
organisation using extreme methods to achieve particular aims when something
less extreme would have done the job. i don't know enough about Whyquit to
comment on them specifically and never set out to do so but i got the
impression that their 'tough love' was tougher than necessary and some
people were very upset about it from the posts in as3! my impression might
have been wrong.

my original comments were regarding their 'law of addiction' (without
realising it was by them) as quoted by Inky. i do get upset when i feel
people are misrepresenting information or facts or using words and ideas
incorrectly in order to impress or influence others. i especially don't like
'science' or 'scientific method' or some allusion to a 'higher' authority
being used to make something seem more than it is. why use the term 'LAW'
(law of addiction) in order to put across a message that could be perfectly
expressed without using the term? we know that people who have been
addicted to a drug are likely to relapse if they sample that drug again (you
might say that to sample that drug again means that they have already
relapsed) but many people have been tempted and had one or two cigs but then
quit again and not smoked any more so it's not a law it's just not a good
idea and although it might be 'playing with fire' some have even found that
having that slight relapse gave them the extra 'kick up the arse' they
needed to make their quit work!

>>> The Law of Addiction - The law of addiction states, "administration of a
>>> drug to an addict will cause re-establishment of chemical dependence
>>> upon
>>> the addictive substance." Yes, just one powerful puff, dip or chew and
>>> you'll be faced with again enduring up to 72 hours of nicotine detox, by
>>> far the most challenging period of recovery. We are simply not that
>>> strong. Full adherence to the following simple restatement of the law of
>>> addiction provides a 100% guarantee of success to all: no nicotine just
>>> one day at a time ... "Never Take Another Puff, Dip or Chew."
>>>

the thing is that it seems to me, if you read it quickly it makes sense but
the more you look at it and break it down the less sense it makes to have
written it that way! it ends up looking like someone wanted to legitimise
(or create a grander impression in) what they were saying by using the word
LAW and the concept of THE LAW OF ADDICTION and that makes me feel uneasy.

it was believed that prayers needed to be made before dawn in order for the
sun to rise and every morning prayers were made and the sun came up. we now
know that it would come up anyway but I'm sure it made sense at the time and
i also suspect whoever was authorised to say the prayers was happy to keep
it that way! Whyquit might work for some people but i suspect (based on
this 'law of addiction') that it would work just as well without some of
it's terminology. i totally agree that for some people the hard line tough
love system works and I'm sure that for some, going to and signing on to
Whyquit worked and they quit smoking.

all i think is that we should read everything carefully and try to
understand exactly what is being said and why it is being said in the way it
is. my comments were based on that. i think it can be dangerous to pass
questionable information on and so i questioned Inky's posting in as3 of a
'law of addiction' that has come from another site. for many people, seeing
the word LAW gives what is being said the stamp of approval (it must be
right because it's a law) and i just wanted people to look at it more
closely.

best regards
richard











"CyberSpiff" <cyberspiff@nospam.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:g5p4b3ha8c1cvb0o2410reg4sc3hc6el9e@4ax.com...
> I'm hardly the poster boy for quit smoking methods, but I used the
> material I got from the FreedomFromTobacco board and have been
> successfully quit for over 1.5+ years. I still read the info there on
> occasion, but it gets less and less over time.
>
> Granted, its not for everyone and is a rather tough-love group. But,
> it is a supportive group in its own way. Not quite the friendly, agape
> type love you'll find here, but it does work if you are of the right
> mindset. I wouldn't recommend it for everyone, but for some folks it
> works.
>
> BTW, when you refer to the "cold turkey" only group and the one that
> kicks you out if you relapse, this is the same group that Inky is
> talking about. I don't make excuses or reasons for their philosophy,
> just stating it factually as a member of that board.
>
> --spiff
> ---
> Insanity takes its toll. Please have exact change.
> 1Y 7M 1D, 11576 not smoked, $2,025.66 saved.
>
> On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 21:16:32 GMT, "Richard" <rvardy@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>hi there Inky,
>>
>>the issue of some other stop smoking sites has been a sensitive topic in
>>as3
>>and there are groups out there who draw a very hard line as to what is
>>expected of the would-be quitter. i believe there's one group out there
>>who, if a member has a relapse, ex-communicates them from the group! some
>>groups insist that their members go 'cold turkey' as the only acceptable
>>method (to them) of quitting. some people swear by these groups and
>>others
>>swear at them, I'm not sure if the one you mention is one on these!
>>
>>i find this 'law of addiction' an interesting *** i don't know what word
>>to
>>use, in what sense is it a law? i don't think there is such a thing! also
>>the 'law' as stated does not make much sense.
>>
>>1. if a person is an addict they already are dependent on the drug (what's
>>this re-establishment?)
>>
>>2. one puff and it will take 72 hours to get it all out of the system
>>again?
>>and be faced with 'nicotine detox? i don't know about the 72 hours bit but
>>someone who hasn't smoked for a while will not have to go through the same
>>detox as someone who's just stopped smoking 60 cigs a day!
>>
>>3. "we are simply not that strong"! well plenty of people are that
>>strong.
>>a number of folks on this site have had a relapse of one or two cigs and
>>then quit again!
>>
>>4. 100% guarantee of success! LMAO there's no guarantee with any method
>>other than not smoking another cig and what kind of law is that? it's a
>>fact
>>that if you don't smoke any more cigs you will have successfully quit
>>smoking not a law! i think the word is tautology.
>>
>>i hate it when people try to entice others by using 'science' or quoting
>>'laws' etc. I'm not saying that they don't have a point, or two but
>>sometimes the language used is misleading and unnecessary. on top of this,
>>those trying to quit smoking are vulnerable and more likely to be open to
>>such language that promises results.
>>
>>i love as3 for saying ..................whatever works for
>>you..................... we can help everyone regardless of how they try
>>to
>>quit as long as they keep trying and not everyone can quit cold turkey!
>>
>>best wishes
>>
>>richard
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>"Inky" <inky_meNOSPAM@zonnet.nl> wrote in message
>>news:46b1a7ee$0$16661$bf4948fe@news.tele2.nl.. .
>>> http://www.msnusers.com/FreedomFromT...0&all_topics=1
>>>
>>> Please keep in mind that this is 100% cold turkey support group. All
>>> materials are free for anyone to read and use. If you want to join there
>>> are 2 conditions. You are nicotine free (you did not use nicotine in any
>>> form for the past 72 hours) and have recently quit (less than 30 days
>>> ago). This includes quitting NRT, wich is considdered to be your real
>>> quit
>>> date from nicotine addiction. But even if you aren't a member, you have
>>> access to all material, you just aren't allowed to post.
>>>
>>> If you don't want to go there, let me just share this one bit of very
>>> important information. (totally free!! :P )
>>>
>>> The Law of Addiction - The law of addiction states, "administration of a
>>> drug to an addict will cause re-establishment of chemical dependence
>>> upon
>>> the addictive substance." Yes, just one powerful puff, dip or chew and
>>> you'll be faced with again enduring up to 72 hours of nicotine detox, by
>>> far the most challenging period of recovery. We are simply not that
>>> strong. Full adherence to the following simple restatement of the law of
>>> addiction provides a 100% guarantee of success to all: no nicotine just
>>> one day at a time ... "Never Take Another Puff, Dip or Chew."
>>>
>>> Inky,
>>>
>>> Free since 22/06/07. One month, one week, four days, 4 hours, 45 minutes
>>> and 38 seconds. 1235 stinkers not smoked, saving ? 131,01. Life saved: 4
>>> days, 6 hours, 55 minutes.
>>>
>>>
>>

I understand your concerns, Richard, but I am also aware that this site has
saved lives and may be a life saver for others too. I am not forcing anyone
to go there, I have no connections to them, other than being a member.

As for this law of addiction, would you tell a herion addict to get "just
one fix to get through the rough spots"? No, because he will instantly
relapse. What a lot of people fail to see is that it is a true addiction and
not just a nasty habit. An addiction should be treated as an addiction.

Their tough love approach is because, in their experience, another person's
"excuses" for relapse and reactions that people understood, fed others to
relapse as well, thinking it was ok and get even more support. Especially
the people who just joined, after 72 hours detox, were very vulnerable to
this.

"Richard" <rvardy@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:QQrsi.41924$%v3.17805@fe3.news.blueyonder.co. uk...

> 1. if a person is an addict they already are dependent on the drug (what's
> this re-establishment?)

The brain will instantly expect the regular 30 minute-ly fixes again. Even
after years of being a recovering addict.

> 2. one puff and it will take 72 hours to get it all out of the system
> again? and be faced with 'nicotine detox? i don't know about the 72 hours
> bit but someone who hasn't smoked for a while will not have to go through
> the same detox as someone who's just stopped smoking 60 cigs a day!

72 hours is what it takes to completely remove nicotine out of your blood.
Nicotine has a very short half live so it doesn't matter whether you smoked
1 or 1000. It will still need 72 hours again to be cleansed out of your
system. And, since we already are addicts, the physical withdrawl symptoms
will return since our brain has been perfectly modified to accomodate 20 -
30 minute feedings.

> 3. "we are simply not that strong"! well plenty of people are that
> strong. a number of folks on this site have had a relapse of one or two
> cigs and then quit again!

Read what you just wrote.. "have had a relapse of one or two cigs and
then quit again!"

Indeed, they had to quit AGAIN. I been there too. I had "just one" too. And
I quit again right after. But I'm sure it wouldn't have happened if I knew
then what I know now. How many "agains" will it take? Will there ever be
another "again"?

> 4. 100% guarantee of success! LMAO there's no guarantee with any method
> other than not smoking another cig and what kind of law is that? it's a
> fact that if you don't smoke any more cigs you will have successfully quit
> smoking not a law! i think the word is tautology.

That is exactly what he is saying. Addiction is a prison, you go to
prison when you break the law, back to the prison of addiction. There is no
"get out of jail for free" card here.

> i hate it when people try to entice others by using 'science' or quoting
> 'laws' etc. I'm not saying that they don't have a point, or two but
> sometimes the language used is misleading and unnecessary. on top of this,
> those trying to quit smoking are vulnerable and more likely to be open to
> such language that promises results.

BTW, the law of addiction is used by detox centers for hard drugs.. It is
not something Joel came up with or has invented. It is a rule used to help
drug addicts detox from heroin, cocaine, crack cocaine. He simply applied
this law to nicotine addicion too. Nicotine is proven to be the most
addictive substance known on earth. Why treat it any different than illegal
drugs? It is not a program, it is education and support. Yes, they promise
success for as long as you never take another puff.

> i love as3 for saying ..................whatever works for
> you..................... we can help everyone regardless of how they try
> to quit as long as they keep trying and not everyone can quit cold turkey!

It is not my intention, and never has been, to diminish people's success who
did use other means. But, sadly, most crutches only make it harder..
Whatever means you use, you will still have to face 72 hours of detox
eventually.

People can do with this information whatever they wish. In some way, AS3
does uphold the law of addiction, because everyone here knows THERE IS NEVER
"JUST ONE". 1 is too many, 1000 is not enough.

I understand your concerns, Richard, but I am also aware that this site has
saved lives and may be a life saver for others too. I am not forcing anyone
to go there, I have no connections to them, other than being a member.

As for this law of addiction, would you tell a herion addict to get "just
one fix to get through the rough spots"? No, because he will instantly
relapse. What a lot of people fail to see is that it is a true addiction and
not just a nasty habit. An addiction should be treated as an addiction.

Their tough love approach is because, in their experience, another person's
"excuses" for relapse and reactions that people understood, fed others to
relapse as well, thinking it was ok and get even more support. Especially
the people who just joined, after 72 hours detox, were very vulnerable to
this.

"Richard" <rvardy@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:QQrsi.41924$%v3.17805@fe3.news.blueyonder.co. uk...

> 1. if a person is an addict they already are dependent on the drug (what's
> this re-establishment?)

The brain will instantly expect the regular 30 minute-ly fixes again. Even
after years of being a recovering addict.

> 2. one puff and it will take 72 hours to get it all out of the system
> again? and be faced with 'nicotine detox? i don't know about the 72 hours
> bit but someone who hasn't smoked for a while will not have to go through
> the same detox as someone who's just stopped smoking 60 cigs a day!

72 hours is what it takes to completely remove nicotine out of your blood.
Nicotine has a very short half live so it doesn't matter whether you smoked
1 or 1000. It will still need 72 hours again to be cleansed out of your
system. And, since we already are addicts, the physical withdrawl symptoms
will return since our brain has been perfectly modified to accomodate 20 -
30 minute feedings.

> 3. "we are simply not that strong"! well plenty of people are that
> strong. a number of folks on this site have had a relapse of one or two
> cigs and then quit again!

Read what you just wrote.. "have had a relapse of one or two cigs and
then quit again!"

Indeed, they had to quit AGAIN. I been there too. I had "just one" too. And
I quit again right after. But I'm sure it wouldn't have happened if I knew
then what I know now. How many "agains" will it take? Will there ever be
another "again"?

> 4. 100% guarantee of success! LMAO there's no guarantee with any method
> other than not smoking another cig and what kind of law is that? it's a
> fact that if you don't smoke any more cigs you will have successfully quit
> smoking not a law! i think the word is tautology.

That is exactly what he is saying. Addiction is a prison, you go to
prison when you break the law, back to the prison of addiction. There is no
"get out of jail for free" card here.

> i hate it when people try to entice others by using 'science' or quoting
> 'laws' etc. I'm not saying that they don't have a point, or two but
> sometimes the language used is misleading and unnecessary. on top of this,
> those trying to quit smoking are vulnerable and more likely to be open to
> such language that promises results.

BTW, the law of addiction is used by detox centers for hard drugs.. It is
not something Joel came up with or has invented. It is a rule used to help
drug addicts detox from heroin, cocaine, crack cocaine. He simply applied
this law to nicotine addicion too. Nicotine is proven to be the most
addictive substance known on earth. Why treat it any different than illegal
drugs? It is not a program, it is education and support. Yes, they promise
success for as long as you never take another puff.

> i love as3 for saying ..................whatever works for
> you..................... we can help everyone regardless of how they try
> to quit as long as they keep trying and not everyone can quit cold turkey!

It is not my intention, and never has been, to diminish people's success who
did use other means. But, sadly, most crutches only make it harder..
Whatever means you use, you will still have to face 72 hours of detox
eventually.

People can do with this information whatever they wish. In some way, AS3
does uphold the law of addiction, because everyone here knows THERE IS NEVER
"JUST ONE". 1 is too many, 1000 is not enough.

"Inky" <inky_meNOSPAM@zonnet.nl> wrote in message
news:46b313d4$0$4908$bf4948fe@news.tele2.nl...
>I understand your concerns, Richard, but I am also aware that this site has
>saved lives and may be a life saver for others too. <<

I'm not saying that Whyquit has not saved lives nor that it might be a life
saver although i think it's a bold statement for you to make on their
behalf! if it has saved lives i really don't think you can say that those
lives might not have been saved in some other way!



>>I am not forcing anyone
> to go there, I have no connections to them, other than being a member.
>

i never said you were forcing anyone to go there! i would have thought
being a member was quite a strong connection though?


> As for this law of addiction, would you tell a herion addict to get "just
> one fix to get through the rough spots"? No, because he will instantly
> relapse. <<

you don't seem to get my point ...........it's not a law!!!!!!! you also
seem to be trying to play with words. no i wouldn't tell a heroin addict
(when exactly did we start talking about Heroin addicts???) to get "just one
fix to get through the rough spots"? and i don't know why you are making
this personal!

>>No, because he will instantly relapse. << do you not understand the
>>words you are using? surely a good definition of relapse would be to once
>>again take the drug that one had stopped taking!!! of course to take the
>>drug again would be to instantly relapse by definition!! this was not the
>>point i was making which was that some people out there (some as3 members)
>>have had a brief relapse of one or two cigs but then stopped again and
>>kept their quit.




>>What a lot of people fail to see is that it is a true addiction and not
>>just a nasty habit. An addiction should be treated as an addiction.<<

of course addiction should be treated as addiction. these 'people' who don't
understand that are likely to find it very hard to quit which is why a good
support group will have information informing people of these matters.

>
> Their tough love approach is because, in their experience, another
> person's "excuses" for relapse and reactions that people understood, fed
> others to relapse as well, thinking it was ok and get even more support.
> Especially the people who just joined, after 72 hours detox, were very
> vulnerable to this.
>
i really don't understand why you are saying this? i have already said that
i understand the 'tough love' approach and that it works for some people!

> "Richard" <rvardy@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
> news:QQrsi.41924$%v3.17805@fe3.news.blueyonder.co. uk...
>
>> 1. if a person is an addict they already are dependent on the drug
>> (what's this re-establishment?)
>
> The brain will instantly expect the regular 30 minute-ly fixes again. Even
> after years of being a recovering addict.
>

i would really like to see your evidence for that statement. you also seem
to be saying that even after years of non use a person is still recovering
from their addiction. at what point has someone completely recovered and how
is such a thing proven? you also don't seem to have got my point which was
that if someone is an addict there is nothing to re establish, it's just a
continuation of their habit.


>> 2. one puff and it will take 72 hours to get it all out of the system
>> again? and be faced with 'nicotine detox? i don't know about the 72 hours
>> bit but someone who hasn't smoked for a while will not have to go through
>> the same detox as someone who's just stopped smoking 60 cigs a day!
>
> 72 hours is what it takes to completely remove nicotine out of your blood.
> Nicotine has a very short half live so it doesn't matter whether you
> smoked 1 or 1000. It will still need 72 hours again to be cleansed out of
> your system. And, since we already are addicts, the physical withdrawl
> symptoms will return since our brain has been perfectly modified to
> accomodate 20 - 30 minute feedings.
>
given that it takes 72 hours to remove nicotine from our system (which i
wasn't arguing) i don't understand the rest of your argument which makes no
sense to me. what is this about our brains being 'perfectly modified'? i
don't know where your argument is going but i don't believe that someone
"who hasn't smoked for a while" will go through the same detox after one
puff as someone that has just stopped smoking 60 cigs a day! which was what
i wrote!

>> 3. "we are simply not that strong"! well plenty of people are that
>> strong. a number of folks on this site have had a relapse of one or two
>> cigs and then quit again!
>
> Read what you just wrote.. "have had a relapse of one or two cigs and
> then quit again!"
>
> Indeed, they had to quit AGAIN. I been there too. I had "just one" too.
> And I quit again right after. But I'm sure it wouldn't have happened if I
> knew then what I know now. How many "agains" will it take? Will there ever
> be another "again"?

you might want to read the 'law of addiction again!
>
>> 4. 100% guarantee of success! LMAO there's no guarantee with any
>> method other than not smoking another cig and what kind of law is that?
>> it's a fact that if you don't smoke any more cigs you will have
>> successfully quit smoking not a law! i think the word is tautology.
>
> That is exactly what he is saying. Addiction is a prison, you go to
> prison when you break the law, back to the prison of addiction. There is
> no "get out of jail for free" card here.

IT'S A FACT BY DEFINITION NOT A LAW.
>
>> i hate it when people try to entice others by using 'science' or quoting
>> 'laws' etc. I'm not saying that they don't have a point, or two but
>> sometimes the language used is misleading and unnecessary. on top of
>> this, those trying to quit smoking are vulnerable and more likely to be
>> open to such language that promises results.
>
> BTW, the law of addiction is used by detox centers for hard drugs.. It is
> not something Joel came up with or has invented. It is a rule used to help
> drug addicts detox from heroin, cocaine, crack cocaine. He simply applied
> this law to nicotine addiction too. Nicotine is proven to be the most
> addictive substance known on earth. Why treat it any different than
> illegal drugs? It is not a program, it is education and support. Yes, they
> promise success for as long as you never take another puff.

so it's a law ................ no , it's a rule. it's an aid to help drug
addicts! no, it's a law that he applied. well we're back again to this
'they promise success for as long as the person doesn't take another puff'.
ISN'T THAT SELF EVIDENT. i promise you that you won't die as long as you
stay alive!
>
>> i love as3 for saying ..................whatever works for
>> you..................... we can help everyone regardless of how they try
>> to quit as long as they keep trying and not everyone can quit cold
>> turkey!
>
> It is not my intention, and never has been, to diminish people's success
> who did use other means. But, sadly, most crutches only make it harder..
> Whatever means you use, you will still have to face 72 hours of detox
> eventually.
>

i would have thought that crutches were there to help people and many folks
here will swear by the crutches they used to quit smoking and tell you that
without them they could not have stopped.

not too sure the 72 hours detox is true any more with new drugs coming on to
the market.

> People can do with this information whatever they wish. In some way, AS3
> does uphold the law of addiction, because everyone here knows THERE IS
> NEVER "JUST ONE". 1 is too many, 1000 is not enough.
>

once again, it's not a law it's just the way it is for most people. a law
has to be complete with no exceptions, it has to apply in all circumstances
and there can not be one case that proves otherwise.

"Inky" <inky_meNOSPAM@zonnet.nl> wrote in message
news:46b313d4$0$4908$bf4948fe@news.tele2.nl...
>I understand your concerns, Richard, but I am also aware that this site has
>saved lives and may be a life saver for others too. <<

I'm not saying that Whyquit has not saved lives nor that it might be a life
saver although i think it's a bold statement for you to make on their
behalf! if it has saved lives i really don't think you can say that those
lives might not have been saved in some other way!



>>I am not forcing anyone
> to go there, I have no connections to them, other than being a member.
>

i never said you were forcing anyone to go there! i would have thought
being a member was quite a strong connection though?


> As for this law of addiction, would you tell a herion addict to get "just
> one fix to get through the rough spots"? No, because he will instantly
> relapse. <<

you don't seem to get my point ...........it's not a law!!!!!!! you also
seem to be trying to play with words. no i wouldn't tell a heroin addict
(when exactly did we start talking about Heroin addicts???) to get "just one
fix to get through the rough spots"? and i don't know why you are making
this personal!

>>No, because he will instantly relapse. << do you not understand the
>>words you are using? surely a good definition of relapse would be to once
>>again take the drug that one had stopped taking!!! of course to take the
>>drug again would be to instantly relapse by definition!! this was not the
>>point i was making which was that some people out there (some as3 members)
>>have had a brief relapse of one or two cigs but then stopped again and
>>kept their quit.




>>What a lot of people fail to see is that it is a true addiction and not
>>just a nasty habit. An addiction should be treated as an addiction.<<

of course addiction should be treated as addiction. these 'people' who don't
understand that are likely to find it very hard to quit which is why a good
support group will have information informing people of these matters.

>
> Their tough love approach is because, in their experience, another
> person's "excuses" for relapse and reactions that people understood, fed
> others to relapse as well, thinking it was ok and get even more support.
> Especially the people who just joined, after 72 hours detox, were very
> vulnerable to this.
>
i really don't understand why you are saying this? i have already said that
i understand the 'tough love' approach and that it works for some people!

> "Richard" <rvardy@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
> news:QQrsi.41924$%v3.17805@fe3.news.blueyonder.co. uk...
>
>> 1. if a person is an addict they already are dependent on the drug
>> (what's this re-establishment?)
>
> The brain will instantly expect the regular 30 minute-ly fixes again. Even
> after years of being a recovering addict.
>

i would really like to see your evidence for that statement. you also seem
to be saying that even after years of non use a person is still recovering
from their addiction. at what point has someone completely recovered and how
is such a thing proven? you also don't seem to have got my point which was
that if someone is an addict there is nothing to re establish, it's just a
continuation of their habit.


>> 2. one puff and it will take 72 hours to get it all out of the system
>> again? and be faced with 'nicotine detox? i don't know about the 72 hours
>> bit but someone who hasn't smoked for a while will not have to go through
>> the same detox as someone who's just stopped smoking 60 cigs a day!
>
> 72 hours is what it takes to completely remove nicotine out of your blood.
> Nicotine has a very short half live so it doesn't matter whether you
> smoked 1 or 1000. It will still need 72 hours again to be cleansed out of
> your system. And, since we already are addicts, the physical withdrawl
> symptoms will return since our brain has been perfectly modified to
> accomodate 20 - 30 minute feedings.
>
given that it takes 72 hours to remove nicotine from our system (which i
wasn't arguing) i don't understand the rest of your argument which makes no
sense to me. what is this about our brains being 'perfectly modified'? i
don't know where your argument is going but i don't believe that someone
"who hasn't smoked for a while" will go through the same detox after one
puff as someone that has just stopped smoking 60 cigs a day! which was what
i wrote!

>> 3. "we are simply not that strong"! well plenty of people are that
>> strong. a number of folks on this site have had a relapse of one or two
>> cigs and then quit again!
>
> Read what you just wrote.. "have had a relapse of one or two cigs and
> then quit again!"
>
> Indeed, they had to quit AGAIN. I been there too. I had "just one" too.
> And I quit again right after. But I'm sure it wouldn't have happened if I
> knew then what I know now. How many "agains" will it take? Will there ever
> be another "again"?

you might want to read the 'law of addiction again!
>
>> 4. 100% guarantee of success! LMAO there's no guarantee with any
>> method other than not smoking another cig and what kind of law is that?
>> it's a fact that if you don't smoke any more cigs you will have
>> successfully quit smoking not a law! i think the word is tautology.
>
> That is exactly what he is saying. Addiction is a prison, you go to
> prison when you break the law, back to the prison of addiction. There is
> no "get out of jail for free" card here.

IT'S A FACT BY DEFINITION NOT A LAW.
>
>> i hate it when people try to entice others by using 'science' or quoting
>> 'laws' etc. I'm not saying that they don't have a point, or two but
>> sometimes the language used is misleading and unnecessary. on top of
>> this, those trying to quit smoking are vulnerable and more likely to be
>> open to such language that promises results.
>
> BTW, the law of addiction is used by detox centers for hard drugs.. It is
> not something Joel came up with or has invented. It is a rule used to help
> drug addicts detox from heroin, cocaine, crack cocaine. He simply applied
> this law to nicotine addiction too. Nicotine is proven to be the most
> addictive substance known on earth. Why treat it any different than
> illegal drugs? It is not a program, it is education and support. Yes, they
> promise success for as long as you never take another puff.

so it's a law ................ no , it's a rule. it's an aid to help drug
addicts! no, it's a law that he applied. well we're back again to this
'they promise success for as long as the person doesn't take another puff'.
ISN'T THAT SELF EVIDENT. i promise you that you won't die as long as you
stay alive!
>
>> i love as3 for saying ..................whatever works for
>> you..................... we can help everyone regardless of how they try
>> to quit as long as th