Yea, my Dad kept smoking after treatment for throat cancer. Even after radiation and chemo he still continued. I wanted to kick his ass, but he said he was 77 and what was the point of stopping now. I bailed on my objections and decided to let the old man be. Never a smoker myself, so I don't know the level of addiction it causes, but it must be immense.

How hard can it be to quit smoking? I know someone who's done it 20 times.

cygnus - OK, how about we tell thin people who never exercise or eat an unhealthy diet the same thing. (It is quite possible to be thin and unhealthy.) Or how about someone who gets cancer because of the carcinogens they were exposed to in their inorganic diet? or their cosmetics? Or women who get breast cancer because of exposure to BPA in canned goods? Should we tell them the same thing? Where do you draw the line? Only on issues that YOU find offensive?

Cygnus,

Ya and while were at it let's not pay for people who break bones from riding their bikes or people who suffer injuries in car crashes from driving or people who get hurt falling down the stairs. All of these could be prevented.

I firmly believe the government shouldn't be making decisions for people, but then I come across someone like you and it makes me second-guess myself.

Moron.

It all depends on your age and what you have to lose.

I know a couple that one of the primary social activities that kept their marriage going was walking down to the corner store once a day, regardless of weather, to get their smokes. He was diagnosed with cancer at 73 and was dead within a year...died slowly and badly, but that was besides the point.

I knew another guy who was a three pack a day since Korea. He was one of the most sincere, hard working, and honest men I knew. Sort of a mentor to me at the age of 16.

He had terrible respiratory problems, cough, caught colds easily. He was 74 and looked like he was 60 though. Great genes and his attitude was one of few worries in the face of hardship. Korea made him this way. In the end he died in his sleep of a heart attack shortly after a coughing fit. This is truly the best way to go.

As long as you do not saddle me down with your health care costs (if you smoke at any time within a period of 6-10 years you should be waived from coverage regardless of cost. Not even if you are required to pay a huge premium. You should not be able to get it nor be covered after the fact for ANY ailment under state or Obama Care. No coverage for any treatment. Period. ) Feel free to do whatever you like but do not pass it on to me, my country,and family.

Glen - there is all KINDS of risky behavior that people engage in that can result in costly medical care. Athletes who get paralyzed, drinkers who get cirrhosis, thin people who don't exercise & eat a crappy diet, people who drive recklessly, etc. etc. etc. Should we tell all THOSE people that we won't cover them either? Or do you just want to deny coverage for behavior that offends YOU personally?

Absolutely. Exclude them. Lets look at another form of insurance: Life Insurance. Read your life insurance policy. If you fly in a private plane, ride a jet ski or ATV or snowmobile, your policy is void. If you commit suicide, your policy is void. This has nothing to do what is if personally offensive to ME my friend, it the the world we live in.

BTW I use an ATV and a jet ski fully knowing this. My wife does not like the fact that it could hurt our family...but I am not selfish on many things..periodically indulging with extreme caution and a lot less than I would like to do because of my obligations top others..knowing full well I bear the burden is one of them. What say you to this behavior, grilledcheese?

Crickets...

Geez, Glen. You give the guy 13 mins to respond before making a smartass remark. Perhaps he has a job?

Yes, Glen, some of us, you know, work for a living.

Glen? Here's a little tip for you. Life insurance doesn't work the same way as health care coverage, not even because you think it should. So you had absolutely no point whatsoever.

And Glen - I am thinking that if you got hurt riding that ATV or jet ski, you would expect to use your heathcare coverage. Don't even TRY and tell me you wouldn't - because you would be a big fat liar if you did.

It sounds like somebody bought a crappy life insurance policy.

Yes I work and I work my butt off for my own company after getting laid off.

So for busting my hump 70+ hours a week one benefit is I can do what I want when I want.

One thing you will never catch me in is a lie.

Yes I would use my heath care, but if by contract they excluded me from it because of the accident and it lowered health care costs for everyone, I would be aware of that ahead of time and adjust my behavior accordingly. I would even sign up for such an agreement and not do these things so everyone can afford. Understand?

My chip if you want to call it that, is I am sick and tired of people not assuming responsibility for their actions.

BTW their function is different but all insurance works the same way as basic operation: Cost of premium and revenue brought in versus duration and probability of payout. It is unemotional and all business. Ugly and callous.

Now I must bid you farewell.. for a bit... since I must do some work, because everything sinks and swims on my shoulders and no one elses. Whew. Off my soapbox.

Honestly, take care everyone, count your blessings, and do your best plan ahead every day.

But THE POINT GLEN - is that YOU specifically stated that we should NOT insure people who smoke and get sick as a result. You NEVER said a single word about excluding ANY other risky behavior until you got challenged on it. You are a total hypocrite.

Geez... don't you people know how much smokers pay in cigarette taxes especially in Washington State? We definately pay more in taxes than non-smokers and clearly have paid into the system more than we'll ever take out especially if we die before getting put in the nursing homes paid for by taxpayers. We are actually saving you money.

Tell the smokers that neither insurance or the govt will pay their treatment bills, and that they'll be in debt the rest of their lives, if they keep smoking. Same with fat people with diabetes, heart, other obesity related illnesses.

Yes, because then the insurance companies would NEVER raise premiums. They'd be delighted to give up their enormous profits, if only Americans would be healthier.

People who come up with this line don't care about health. It's all about what their insurance costs them, and they're stupid enough to buy the insurance companies' lies about why their premiums are so high.

What about the airheads that ride motorcycles without a helmet ! They think it makes hem look cool !

While we are at it let's just outlaw everything that has any risk, Glen. No more fried foods, no more soda, no more alcohol, no porn sites, no bikes, no skiing, hiking trails, motorcycles and of course, absolutely no sex!

It is a horrible selfish habit and "enjoying" smoking has got to be an oxymoron ... the operative part being "moron"... quit it please.

MM - I am a rider and I don't think of myself as an airhead or cool. I hate the idea of someone telling me what I should be doing with my own life. I don't care what you or anyone else thinks. You and your kind should do whatever it takes to be a sheep. Not me!!! Everyone is brainwashed to think the govt is helping us out. What a crock of sh##$%t. All we need are more laws and regulations to protect us from ourselves. You are a typical person that follows someone off a bridge without questions. Helmets are for everyone right. I SHOULD BE THE ONE TO MAKE THAT DECISION!! Not you or anyone else.

the word is "bigot"

Wow! What judgement! I am a 50 year old smoker and pay my health insurance premiums. I'm sick maybe once a year and am not on any daily medications, unlike many of my non smoking co workers who are on meds for an array of health issues such high blood pressure, high cholesterol, etc. Many health issues are related to personal behavior and I am so tired of society harping on smoking. Just stop it!

Remember, you only get cancer from smoking. You don't get it from chemicals in drinking water, you don't get it from chemicals in your food, you don't get it from pre-processed foods, just smoking. Get a life, don't see me preaching to your big fat @ss to get off your coach and run 2 miles, so get off your soapbox and don't tell me how to live my life. To each their own. Besides I smoke just to pass it off as second hand smoke to non-smokers, SO THERE :P

It is her business what she does with her own body--not yours and definately not the Authors'. She has the liberty to do what she wants with her body---it is hers, not yours!

Also please take into consideration all the crap you eat---ya know the prepackaged and processed, or those who prefer vegan foods yet lack too much protein so much take SUPPLIMENTS.

BTW: I quit smoking by choice not by patch or pill either---instead I just quit one day. Another I may start again----but such is MY CHOICE NOT YOURS!

Okay, so let's go with grilledcheese here and use the American Lung Association's numbers.

Since 90% of lung cancer is caused by active smokers let's have smokers pay 90% of the medical costs in this country, then the other 10% can be paid by those horrible people get it from radon and another 9% to 15% can be paid by those jerks who get it from occupational hazards. Wait..... you mean 90 plus 10 plus 9 to 15 doesn't equal 100%? Hrm, I wonder where they might be padding numbers....

Steve-205... Used to smoke 2.5 - 3packs a day in 1999, quit cold turkey with no known health issues relating to smoking. Twelve years latter I still occasionally think about taking it up again. If smokes were as cheap now as then I might be really tempted. No doubt in my mind that smoking is addicting.

article should be titled, "most say they don't smoke actually do"...fools sicken themselves and others, then try to start fires throwing lit cancer sticks everywhere...when caught they should be forced to clean up cig buts especially at stop lights with their lips,and then pay $1. each or swallow.

Getting out of bed in the morning is risky behavior.

Maggieann: Your dad was, in a sense, correct. Stopping smoking would not at all alter his cancer risk over the short term.

If you crack your melon riding a motorcycle without a helmet that should also qualify as a self-insuring event. Right up there with smoking. Darwin anyone?

yikes they all look like FREAKS - no pity from me - this is why prepaid funerals have become popular

MEDICAID and MEDICARE patients should have their INSURANCE REVOKED if they continue to smoke...

Their ADDICTIONS should not be SUPPORTED on OUR TAX DOLLAR$!!!!!!!

I think the comments on here indicate to me exactly why we do not have HEALTH CARE in america, but SICK CARE.

no one actually gives a crap about taking care of their health.

hell, I ended up with migraines for 3 months straight, while doctors just kept trying to give me meds to mask the pain...and I ultimately figured out on my own by eliminating and reintroducing foods that I just learned I was allergic to (thanks to my demand for a blood test)...and it ended up being peanuts.

So according to all of you...I can go back to smashing peanuts, and just burden the health care system with expensive migraine meds?

wow, if I knew i could be this lazy and just hit the easy button and make insurance pay for all my self-induced problems, id have hit the easy button YEARS AGO

oh how I miss reeses peanut butter cups.

hell, might as well binge and hit you guys up for gastric bypass surgery while im at it.

you guys are awesome, who needs personal responsiblity when you have INSURANCE!

Same hold trues for OBESE DIABETICS who keep eating JUNK!!!

NO MEDICARE or MEDICAID GIVEN on my TAX DOLLAR$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

key, so how do you know they aren't using someone else's medicare that died before using their own

I'm a smoker and believe you have to "want to quit", but I decided to answere the ignorant people who talk about Medicare and other healt insurances. I believe my medicare was paid for by me when they took medicare taxes out of my checks. The same goes for any other health insurance, paid for by the individual, not by you!

Ummm Glen - I just read my life insurance policies (again...), and there are no such exclusions for riding in a private plane, on an ATV or snowmobile, and the exclusion for suicide is for only one year. I sure am glad I didn't buy crappy policies like you did. Me thinks you had better read your own policy for more fine print that could exclude the insurance company from paying up.

why do people feel the need to control what other people do with their own life? no one has any right to my decisions.

Swagganaut: The question here isn't about controlling someones life or their right to your decisions, the issue is who should pay for poor ones. When there are clear, bright line, known risks, like riding a motorcycle without a helmet, and smoking to name two, why should society pay the price, particularly when we're going broke as a nation.

Want to ride without your helmet and crack your noggin? Why should society pay. Got lung cancer from smoking? Why should society pay. There are other issues to be sure, but few people should have a problem with these two, at least.

So, do what you want but be prepared to pay for logical consequences with your own dime, not mine.

I heard a doctor say that if one is near 60 and has been a smoker, there is no point to quit. The damage has already been done, or at least set in motion and there's no stopping it. That, or the smoker will suffer no ill effects.

Johnny Carson had quit smoking for years and appeared healthy as a horse. Yet, years later he developed emphysema and died from it. Quitting did not make a stitch of difference. And George Burns, of course, smoked most of his life and lived to be over a hundred. The same with Eubie Blake.

But the final point is, no matter what people do to keep themselves healthy (by not smoking, drinking, over-eating, always exercising, etc.), they're still going to get sick and die. Studies show that the ones who maintain a healthy lifestyle actually end up costing more in health care. People who slug away, are overweight, smoke like chimneys, usually get diseases that kill them quickly and younger. Those who avoid what we're told to avoid quite often contract dementia-related diseases when they're older and languish for years in expensive nursing care. My dad, who smoked and was overweight (but still managed to live into his eighties) went into the hospital; three days later he was dead. My mom, who never smoked so much as a fish, was skinny, and lifted sofas to vacuum, contracted dementia and took up residence in a nursing facility for years that drained all she had (and a great deal of what I had) as well as a good chunk of taxpayers' dollars. She died at the age of ninety, after spending ten days in a coma with no nutrition or hydration (per her living will).

I think we're beating up on the wrong people

Just a few facts for all of you finger pointers.

The manufacturer of a pack of cigarettes get $0.95 for every pack sold. All additional are taxes. How are smokers not paying their fair share of their taxes that should be allocated to health care? If people didn't smoke your states would have no money for anything. There was recently(last few years) a state (Believe it was Mich) who fell short on their budget because their truth about tobacco campaigns worked too well and too many people quit. So get of your high horses about paying smokers medical costs. Everything has carcinogens. And while were on it, I think people who have a genetic predisposition for diseases should be excluded as the irresponsible parents knew they we predisposed but decided to reproduce anyway.(sarcasm)

@Glen who is purposely obtuse, When you're out on your family outings and you barbecue your meat, I say any female you feed be excluded from having health insurance, because Barbecuing raises a woman's chance of getting breast cancer by 45%. Think before you speak, educate before you think.

I am in no way advocating smoking but just because it is now socially unacceptable naysayers think they have a right to make people who smoke feel like lepers. Mind your own business.You are no longer subjected to other peoples habits, at least in the state I live in. And I never subjected anyone else to it out of personal courtesy.

@jac, I was pretty sure my life insurance only excluded benefits for suicide for a year too but wasn't sure so decided not include that. I think he's speaking of exclusions for extracurricular accidents which some health insurance does exclude....sounds as if he's mixing up his facts to me.

Of course they keep smoking after diagnosis because "YOU CAN'T FIX STUPID".................

And we need to stop insuring people who chose to drive cars then too. Since your car puts out more toxic exhaust in a year than all the cigarettes that you could smoke in a life time. And stop flying planes too as they put out tons of exhaust every day that will cause cancer and death if you breath it too......l

How about we stop having babies as birth is the leading cause of death, 100 percent of live birth's results in death..........

Qweenofhearts

Just a few facts for all of you finger pointers.

The manufacturer of a pack of cigarettes get $0.95 for every pack sold. All additional are taxes. How are smokers not paying their fair share of their taxes that should be allocated to health care? If people didn't smoke your states would have no money for anything.

How so very true. Smokers have long paid for their health care through hyper-taxes. Is it their fault that politicians take that money and line their own pockets? Why aren't anti-smokers up in arms about that? Looks like their anti-smoking hysteria is all up in smoke.

@Glen

Crickets.....Barbequed?

blondeness032??? Who said anything about outlaw? You should be free to do whatever you want and reap 100% of the rewards if it works out as well as absorb 100% of the consequences if it does not work out. Ride a motorcycle without a helmet, but do not expect life star to get called for your head injury. Smoke all you want, but do not come to the health care system for subsidized help. Drink all you want, but don't kill others on the road or expect help beyond the AA clinic or for liver disease. Sleep with 100 partners a year, if you catch a deadly disease and spread it?? do not ask your fellow man for sympathy. Skydive, race cars, do what you want, so long as it does not adversely impact others or burden them. If it does not burden another, it should be legal, so long as you absorb 100% of the burden.

Explain to all us non smokers and non alcohol users, why are policies and insurance premiums should pay for your lung transplants, your heart transplants, your liver transplants and all the medication, doctors fees etc?

There should be assigned risk insurance plans and medicare plans for people who smoke(d), drink and engage in certain health risks. Then you can all pay through the nose and us non smokers, non drinkers and those who fall in the least risky groups pay less insurance.

It works that way in car insurance. My car policy is probably less than 1/2 of what you pay. No tickets, no accidents, medium sized car, took defensive car class, have anti theft devices installed, etc.

Why should I pay for your selfish disease causing behavior?

Hmmm...someone at MSNBC doesn't want to pay for national health care. Two articles in one day (this one, and the "Meth fills hospitals with burn patients" article) that elicit the "Social Burden" argument.

Once it's gone that far, what's the difference.

I was hooked badly and quit nearly fifteen years ago. I don't usually preach but I'll tell you right-to-smokers who insist you're gonna die someday anyhow - you won't die just once; you'll die a thousand times in a heart/lung spiral in your last three years. I've seen it too many times.

wilsonaide

Explain to all us non smokers and non alcohol users, why are policies and insurance premiums should pay for your lung transplants, your heart transplants, your liver transplants and all the medication, doctors fees etc?

Why should policies and insurance premiums, as well as our taxed dollars, pay for someone who lived a "healthy" life who now spends years in a nursing facility with dementia, drooling, not knowing where they are or who they are and having tapioca spooned into their mouths? Most smokers and drinkers don't get lung or heart transplants, or even long-term medication or doctors' fees. They get sick quickly and die quickly. "Healthy" people end up costing all of us a lot more.

Sure charge smokers a premium for Medicare or Medicaid. Just remove the huge tax on each pack for smoker healthcare that the states steal to use for anything but smoker healthcare. Of course states will have to raise your taxes to make up for that loss, so it's probably all a wash anyway.

Smokers live in a world all their own, unfortunately though the fantasy stops when I have to breathe, smell the nasty sh*t and of course see the butts tossed wherever they want regardless of how these actions affect anyone else. Parents that smoke with their kids in the car or home for that matter are guilty of child abuse. The kids don't have a choice yet they get sick, asthma, and a host of other disorders. You smokers are not just hurting yourselves. I suppose if that were true no one would really care except for those that love you. But you are hurting everyone else around you when you indulge in this behavior and I for one don't want your chemically enhanced smoke from the cigarette or that coming out of your lungs in my face, or even the slightest bit of it in the air I breathe or my wife, kids or anyone else I care about. idiots... just quit smoking for yourself and those around you, it's the right thing to do... quit being so selfish.

Smokers are entitled to the same rights as non smokers. They pay extra tax money that is used for everything except the cost of uninsured smokers; much like the taxes that is on alcohol is used for everything except alcohol abuse and victims of drunk drivers. Many states do not allow smoking indoors in businesses, but non smokers walk past people smoking outside, waving their hands and doing their little fake coughs. My sister who was very, very allergic to smoke never acted as silly as some nonsmokers, if she saw someone smoking she would not go around them.

People who try to blame smokers causing health issues, should ask themselves,"Why do non smokers who do not associate with smokers get the same illnesses?" Health professionals like to blame all ills on smoking, INSTEAD of looking for the real causes. Since only 25% of adults smoke, I am willing to bet most families of kids with asthma; have pets, have carpeting, and use toxic chemicals to clean with. Stop and think the next time you go outside to go walking or running, about all the car exhaust you are breathing in, then think about all the air pollution you breathe in everyday, along with things like carpeting, pet dander and cleaning products, before you blame everything the smokers.

Yeah, this story doesn't really surprise me. It's very tough to quit smoking. Between the mental addiction, physical addiction and force of habit it's a tough row to hoe.

DLW: Well done on quitting.

Having quit 4 years ago, I am finding I have become a miserable SOB, nothing tastes good anymore, (still trying to find a decent coffee!), my breathing is no better than it was, & I have lost an "edge" that I used to have.

I was around smokers while I quit, & it is tough, however, I will now stand "downwind" of a smoker to get a smell of fresh smoke, on the other hand the smell of smoke on a smokers closes is awful.

I am waiting to see how all these sanctimonious non smokers handle having to take nicotine to stop the onset of Alzheimer's.

I've quit two times - the last time in 2007. I still get the urge every once in a while. Can't explain it and I don't act on it, but I still want it -- particularly if I smell it. Unfortunately, unlike some former smokers, the smell does NOT make me sick.

I quit, for good, nine years ago. It was one of the most difficult thing I have ever done. You can use every stop-smnoking aid in the world, but none will MAKE you quit, until your will says you will quit. I stopped, cold turkey, in December 2002, had (part of) one in July 2003, thought I would cough my lungs out and have not had one since. Before that, I 'quit' many times, using nicorette, the patch, etc. but nothing worked until my mind was set on quitting.

Magmaryj, you say it is unfortunate the smell does not make you sick. IMO, you are lucky in that. Cigarette smoke nauseates me and is extremely irritating to my nose/sinuses to the point I can barely endure to walk (quickly) through a casino, for example. If you can stand being around the stench, without succumbing to the desire for a smoke, your freedom of movement/action is greater. Our company smoking area is adjacent to my workstation, and the addicts frequently 'forget' to close the door into my space. Despite this, I still want a smoke now and then. So far I have successfully resisted.

I quit 20 years ago. I had tried many times before. It was one of the hardest things I've ever done. I know the cigarette companies try to make the tobacco addictive. And that they target young people. Studies conducted by the tobacco companies reveal that once a person reaches their early twenties the chance of them starting a smoking habit drops considerably. The highest average age group to start a smoking habit is between 14 - 17. Tobacco has absolutely no positive attributes, only negative. So why don't we just legalize heroin?

quit christmas 2005. easiest thing I ever did.

all the times I "tried" to quit before that, not so much.

The only difference - christmas 2005, I actually WANTED to quit smoking...it was that little key piece to the whole equation that made the difference, and why I dont believe in "addiction"...

I swore up and down I was addicted before christmas 2005, and that I couldnt quit "because I was addicted" and "you dont know how hard this is" and I become a miserable SOB, not becuase of quitting, but becuase I was pissed that I was quitting so I took it out on everyone around me.

own up to who you are, how you are and why you are...it's not the cigarrettes, ITS YOU.

if you want to quit - not because you think you should, but because you REALLY DONT WANT TO SMOKE ANYMORE, you can and will.

It's good you quit. I believe the brain is stronger than addiction. But make no mistake cigarettes are addictive. Science has proven this.

lol science has proven nothing!!!! addiction is 100% mental, your body has adapted to the chemical but has no addiction to it, only takes 3-4 days for the body to adjust to anything. our brains control the body, not the other way around so when you crave a cig, thats is your mind, when your taste buds are crap, thats your brain. stop with the control, no one has any right to tell someone else what they can and cant do with their own life.

high insurance premiums (as a whole) do not come from smokers or people who legitimately use medical services. they rise due to fraud and waste, gov interference, people with frequent visits for colds, etc. and mainly politics. anyways all insurances are scams (discriminatory and manipulative) and the government makes it worse, not better.

@ Swagganaut -

I have trouble with your first paragraph. Cigarettes are addictive. When you take in nicotine, your brain makes more nicotine receptors. That's the major problem with quitting.

high insurance premiums (as a whole) do not come from smokers or people who legitimately use medical services. they rise due to fraud and waste, gov interference, people with frequent visits for colds, etc. and mainly politics. anyways all insurances are scams (discriminatory and manipulative) and the government makes it worse, not better.

I can however, agree with your last sentence. It's not the sick that make costs rise, it's the abuse and ridiculous payouts for law suits that cost all the money. Government interference in the system hasn't helped in the past, isn't helping now and will never help.

lol science has proven nothing!!!! addiction is 100% mental, your body has adapted to the chemical but has no addiction to it, only takes 3-4 days for the body to adjust to anything. our brains control the body

Exactly. Your Brain (and nervous system) is how you become addicted. The same as most addictive drugs. Nicotine goes straight to the brain. It crosses the blood brain barrier in tact. Kind of like free basing cocaine. This causes dopamine to be released. It is addictive and has been proven. You contradicted yourself in your statement.

http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/tobacco-addiction/nicotine-addictive

http://www.lung.ca/protect-protegez/tobacco-tabagisme/facts-faits/addicted-dependant_e.php

http://www.dirkhanson.org/neuroaddiction.html

Some people truly amaze me at times.

Explain to all us non smokers and non alcohol users, why are policies and insurance premiums should pay for your lung transplants, your heart transplants, your liver transplants and all the medication, doctors fees etc?

There should be assigned risk insurance plans and medicare plans for people who smoke(d), drink and engage in certain health risks. Then you can all pay through the nose and us non smokers, non drinkers and those who fall in the least risky groups pay less insurance.

It works that way in car insurance. My car policy is probably less than 1/2 of what you pay. No tickets, no accidents, medium sized car, took defensive car class, have anti theft devices installed, etc.

Why should I pay for your selfish disease causing behavior?

Exactly. I quit smoking twenty years ago. I now eat a healthy diet, exercise and run three miles a day. I ride a bike to work most days and rarely drive. Statistics show that close to 50 million are injured in car accidents. And since I ride a bike to work only traveling a little over 1/2 mile on roads the rest on bike path, I shouldn't have to pay as much insurance as those who eat unhealthy diets and drive extra miles. Why should I pay for those who eat fast food, when I eat a healthy diet? I have made sure that my diet is clean, I exercise daily, I sleep eight hours a day, and have reduced my stress factor. I have regular checkups and have been given a clean bill of health every 6 months. I have changed my lifestyle to be healthy. Why should I pay the same amount for insurance as those who don't care?

Right, just like guns don't kill

tobacco is as addictive at hang-gliding or boating or eating fast-food or candy or watching porn or anything else people do repetitively without forward thought.

I've tried that approach with a sibling and two friends to no avail. I finally came to the conclusion that no one is going to quit until they make the decision to do so themselves.

One way I tried to help motivate them was to help them realize what kind of people they're doing business with, that is the tobacco companies. I would tell them these companies are selling you a product that they know can kill you and that don't care. All that matters to them is lining their pockets and their stock holders with your cash. I tell them about my good friend and neighbor who died of lung cancer from smoking. How his eleven year old son got to watch his father lie in a hospital bed and rot from the inside out. Guess how many tobacco farmers or cigarette companies paid their condolences or apologized to the kid for selling something to his dad that would kill him?

Sadly, nicotine is extremely addictive for some people.

@ HS321 -

I finally came to the conclusion that no one is going to quit until they make the decision to do so themselves.

That is precisely the case. It's actually that way with any addiction really. Unless you lock them away where they simply can't get the product until the cravings go away - you'll need their help. I've known people who quit smoking and craved cigarettes for over 2 years afterward. None of them who craved it that badly quit in the end. They always went back to it.

I quit smoking after 9 years. I used a combination of lozenges and an electric cigarette for the first week to replace the coffee-cigarette routine. Two weeks in I'm running short distances (getting longer every day) and loving it. P.S. I don't know how I didn't cut someone in half though, the withdraws were terrible. Thanks to my spouse, probably...

David walker - I was a long term smoker and regardlessm of anything I read or anything anyone said the decision to stop for the last 12 years was mine alone. Other friends who are long term ex-smokers agree, no one convinced them to stop other than themselves. And yes, there are times that I am tempted to start again.

hs321,

The folly of smoking after a cancer diagnosis is no different than someone who continues to drive after a terrible car wreck. They are both behaviors that have risks and one is no worse than the other.

While true that no tobacco farmers were apologizing at the man's funeral, there would have been no car dealers apologiging if he had died in a car wreck either.

Genetics have more to do with someones predisposition to get cancer than anything else does, otherwize how do we explain the 15% who have never smoked in their lives being diagnosed with lung cancer ? And don't try and blame the lie of second hand smoke causing it, it does not.

Quote from the article : "The American Lung Association estimates that active smoking is responsible for close to 90 percent of lung cancer cases; radon causes 10 percent, and occupational exposures to carcinogens account for approximately 9 to 15 percent." Take another look at those numbers, smoking causes 90%, radon causes 10%, and occupational exposure causes 9 to 15%. That adds up to 109 or 115% depending on which occupational figure you use. Something wrong there. They say that smoking causes 90% of lung cancer yet we have no way of knowing how many of those 90% would have come down with lung cancer if they had never smoked. If a person admits to have ever smoked, even one cigarette in their life their cancer is blamed on smoking whether true or not. There are many people who smoke all their lives and do not get cancer but we never hear about that because that goes against the agenda of villifying smoking and smokers.

smoking is 100% a mental addiction like anything else we humans get ourselves addicted too. there is no physical addiction and any perceived physical addiction is actually the brain doing it to the body. the body is a hull, it adjust the w/e we put in it and w/e we take out, people are different so the brain/body will will handle things differently. some people can stop from becoming addicted while others have a weaker mind, some people will have physical reaction due to the mental stress of the lack of nicotine, while others will have no reactions, some can quit cold turkey while others have no hope.

no one has the right to tell someone else how to live their life!!!

Explain to all us non smokers and non alcohol users, why are policies and insurance premiums should pay for your lung transplants, your heart transplants, your liver transplants and all the medication, doctors fees etc?

There should be assigned risk insurance plans and medicare plans for people who smoke(d), drink and engage in certain health risks. Then you can all pay through the nose and us non smokers, non drinkers and those who fall in the least risky groups pay less insurance.

It works that way in car insurance. My car policy is probably less than 1/2 of what you pay. No tickets, no accidents, medium sized car, took defensive car class, have anti theft devices installed, etc.

Why should I pay for your selfish disease causing behavior?

Soilder'sDad

Clearly the numbers don't add up, someone made a mistake in the article, but everyone knows smoking cigarettes increases chances of lung cancer and that the majority of lung cancer is caused by cigarette smoking. There is no debating that fact, as the statistics clearly bare that out.

Trying to compare driving to smoking cigarettes is patently absurd. That is so far beyond trying to compare apples to oranges...let's just say it's necessarily illogical.

Yes, genetics to do play a part, but how do you know if you have the genes that will prevent you from getting lung cancer or not? So let me throw out an analogy. That's like saying since 15% of the people who jumped off the Golden Gate bridge survived, I'm going to do it. Let me know how your landing goes.

I will never give the tobacco farmers or companies any slack. The scum deserve none. They all know they are selling a product that is addictive and has the potential to kill. Only an immoral, unethical person would do such a thing. They have the right to do it, but that is not the same thing as being right in doing it. Seriously, you're growing something that is addictive and kills people when you could be growing food for starving children.

hs321,

You can easily compare smoking and driving. Both are choices made by the individual by their own free will. You get in a car by your own choice and take your chances. You get your first cigarette out of a pack with a written warning that it may cause cancer and you take your chances, both by your own free will.

With your opinion of the tobacco industry, which you have every right to, the best you can do to hurt them is just what you're doing which is not buying their products. I have absolutely no problem with someone such as yoursel who is an non smoker. What I do have a problem with are people who would dictate to me and others how we will live our lives. We are all entitled to make our own choices whether anyone agrees with us or not and that is what I try to uphold, the fact that we all are free to make our own choices.

congratulations on making the decision.

I quit immediately after finding out i was pregnant too. Figured it wasn't my decision to make for my fetus. Plus the pregnancy books and complications scarred the holy sh!t outta me. But made the mistake when she was 7 months old, to go to a party and have just one LOLOLOL: Was back at it the next day. But My child has never been exposed to second hand smoke.

And some over weight people and diabetics continue to have unhealthy eating habits although they know the dangers, some people have a couple of drinks at a function and drive afterwards and some women do not take calcium supplements although they know they should and some people do not have a mammogram or colonoscopy at the suggested appropriate age and the list goes on and on. Unless you live a perfect healthy life I suggest you get off the "smokers are so stupid" band wagon.

living life causes death, none of us are going to come out of this alive.

Agreed. And I am sorry for your loss. But smoking, just like drinking and a number of other things (seems like they find 10 a day) contribute to the formation of many other cancers too. My mother died of transitional cell renal carcinoma. She was diagnosed in July (no signs before the swelling caused by the tumor cutting off the blood flow to her vena cava), the kidney was removed in August and she died in Sept. Do I think the smoking caused it, no, not directly but I am sure it didn't help her body fight it. Since her mother, father, and two of my aunts have all had different forms of cancer I believe that it is mostly genetics. Just sayin....

jwaters - I'm sorry for your loss :(

Thank you~ ICU-RN

Jwaters, it's sad to hear of your loss. Quitting for your children was an honorable thing to do. With regards to your chances of getting lung cancer, yes, it matters. An active smoker is 25 times more likely to get lung cancer than a non-smoker. After a smoker quits, at the ten year mark, he is only twice as likely to get it. So, 25 times more likely, versus 2 times more likely...

I'm very sorry for your loss, jwaters. My Mom died from lung cancer in 2008. As you know, it's a horrible disease and I firmly believe it is one of the absolute worse cancers.

Like you, I was a smoker. I quit about 12 years ago and I pray every day that it was soon enough.

jwaters, I am 39 and a former smoker too so i know how hard it was for you to quit. Like you I started around the age of 14. I quit in 2001 for my own health and because I didn't really want my children growing up around it like I had. I am sure we will always be at higher risk, but I guess all we can do is live healthy now and forgive ourselves for not bieng wiser earlier in life. Sorry about your dad.

My father died of lung cancer in 1987 at the age of 56. He had quit smoking cold turkey a few years earlier, but he had been a two pack a day smoker for many years, and the cancer treatment back then was not what is is today. No one survived lung cancer back then.

Back then you could smoke in the hospital in smoking areas. I remember all of the other cancer patients smoking and wondering how they could do it. It had to be painful.

Jwaters - my condolences. Human nature says that when we are young we are invincible and that as we grow older, that we can quit at any time or that we are like the many who die of old age without developing cancer. Been smoke free for 12 years, but the temptation still comes up time to time.

If you never smoke, you never get addicted. There are numerous pleasure centers in the brain that the human body naturally pleases by sending out natural chemicals. When addictive substances like nicotine are added to the body, the body stops producing the natural chemicals that were used to please those pleasure centers and nicotine took over. When you stop using nicotine, the body takes time to start producing those natural chemicals. A person feels the withdrawal symptoms and has the "ache" to smoke again. They can use fortitude to resist the ache or use aids, patches, gum etc or just take up smoking again. There are different pleasure centers for different chemicals and drugs, such as marijuana, opium, cocaine, meth etc.

Both of my children have graduated from high school and one from college. I plan on having many more years to share with them but just like you I have no way of knowing when I will die or what will cause my death. If I am ever diagnosed with lung cancer do think I will need to explain my diagnosis? My addiction to smoking is not a secret and I have had many open discussions with my children over the years about the addiction.

Unfortunately, my sister who has lived a very healthy life has been battling stage 4 breast cancer since 2006. Somehow what you are saying sounds like it will be sadder or more okay when she dies because it wasn't her fault? If I die of a smoking related disease people should be angry with me and I should feel guilty? Wow!

When I was a small kid, the city allowed home owners to burn leaves in the street. I loved the smell of burning leaves. It always excited me.

One day, my father's store had a huge fire. The furnace exploded. I was about 8-9 and as I walked through the ruins, I can still smell the smoke and later the sadness in my family and how heart breaking it was to walk on the burned ruins and smell the smoke and change my smokey clothes.

So today, on smelling smoke, I remember disaster, it overshadowed the good memories of burning leaves.

Go to a teaching hospital and ask to sit in a gallery that new doctors can sit in and watch a lung operation and take some binoculars and watch the color of the lung being taken out. It is not a pink healthy color, it is dark red, ashen or brown. You will hear all the conversation. That should make you think twice about continuing to smoke.

@Muffin Liquor - somebody can be a smoker and be exposed to radon and occupational carcinogens all at the same time. Since the causes are not mutually exclusive the percentages can add up to more than 100.

True, there can be multiple exposures and if that's the case how can the blame be placed on any one of them ? If you are speeding, passing in a no passing zone while running a red light and get in a wreck it can't be blamed on either single cause since all factors contributed to the wreck and it is possible you wouldn't have had the wreck if you had not been doing any one of those actions, but because of the combined actions the wreck cannot be blamed on speed or passing in a no passing zone or running the red light. I know in the real world it would be blamed on reckless driving, but in the cancer example someone who smokes, is exposed to radon at home, and occupational exposures at work it can all be blamed on smoking... how convenient.

@Soldiers' Dad - you're right, if you have multiple exposures you can't necessarily "blame" a single one, but you can "blame" all of them. And that's exactly what's happening here. If you have multiple exposures you're going to be counted in each bucket, not just the smoking one.

I was thinking along the same lines.

@TimB17954 - it appears you didn't understand what the numbers meant. 38% of the lung cancer victims were smokers at the time of the diagnosis. That does not mean that the remaining 62% had never smoked. In fact, the article suggests that smoking is responsible for almost 90% of all lung cancer cases. Also, as an aside, the article is about cancer. However, cancer is far from the only smoking related illness.

And smoking is FAR from the only cause of cancer as well. Frankly, if someone smoked for 5 years and quit 30 years before being diagnosed, the fact is there is no definite way to determine just what exactly caused the cancer. Was it from smoking? It's possible, yes. But it's also possible that there are many, many factors that have an effect, things that either we haven't identified or that aren't being disclosed. That being said, I'm pretty sure a diagnosis of cancer would be more than sufficient to motivate me to quit personally!

So 62% of the lung cancer patients were not smokers at the time of diagnosis and 85% of the colorectal cancer patients were not smokers at the time of diagnosis...... Hmmmm. However, if any of them had ever smoked, knew someone who smoked, ever been in a room with someone who smoked, touched a cigarette, or saw a cigarette ad, the cause of their cancer was smoking.

We have recently been told by a study that the very first cigarette does IRREPARABLE damage, so with that knowledge it is only fair to surmize that if one smokes for 20, 30, 40 years that all those cigarettes have done IRREPARABLE damage and therefore what is the point of quitting, you're already doomed. Now if people insist that quitting once diagnosed is of any benefit somebody's information is wrong.

@Logic-it also didn't state that the remaining 62% DID smoke before. You also didn't catch that in the article there were 2 completely different stated statistics by 2 different sources. The 90% that you quote is from one source, the other states something different.... According to the Lung Cancer Foundation of America, 60 percent of new lung cancer diagnoses happen to non-smokers, 15 percent of whom have never smoked a day in their life (the rest are former smokers who quit 10, 20 or even 30 years prior to diagnosis). The American Lung Association estimates that active smoking is responsible for close to 90 percent of lung cancer cases; radon causes 10 percent, and occupational exposures to carcinogens account for approximately 9 to 15 percent.

Math was never my strong suite but I don't see how 10% radon exposure and 9 to 15% other exposure can leave 90% for smokers. Of course we all know smoking is awful for us as many things are. I just get tired of seeing these numbers that don't even add up.

@Logic-it also didn't state that the remaining 62% DID smoke before. You also didn't catch that in the article there were 2 completely different stated statistics by 2 different sources. The 90% that you quote is from one source, the other states something different.... According to the Lung Cancer Foundation of America, 60 percent of new lung cancer diagnoses happen to non-smokers, 15 percent of whom have never smoked a day in their life (the rest are former smokers who quit 10, 20 or even 30 years prior to diagnosis). The American Lung Association estimates that active smoking is responsible for close to 90 percent of lung cancer cases; radon causes 10 percent, and occupational exposures to carcinogens account for approximately 9 to 15 percent.

Math was never my strong suite but I don't see how 10% radon exposure and 9 to 15% other exposure can leave 90% for smokers. Of course we all know smoking is awful for us as many things are. I just get tired of seeing these numbers that don't even add up.

@pinzina - actually I did catch that the different statistics came from multiple sources. All I'm pointing out is that they are not necessarily in conflict as you and others appear to believe. And they at least suggest that a substantial fraction of the 62% "non-smokers" are in fact former smokers, although the article does not state this explicitly as you point out. See 12.1 for how and why the percentages that trouble you can plausibly add up to more than 100.

@Logic-sorry...didn't think you did catch that since you didn't mention it. I don't really care about the numbers so much, just tired of being hounded by media and people who claim to live perfect healthy lives.

We got the hint you hate smokers from your first post. Once is enough.

Michael

Thank god you don't have any bad habits.

No, Dan, I do not hate smokers - I hate cigarettes. That pretty lady in my picture smokes, and I love her dearly - but I've seen way too much death and destruction caused by cigarettes. I wonder every day if she is next - and she has a nine year old son. If she dies, her son goes to his father, spends the rest of his life without a mother, and I'll be utterly alone in this world - and it will be all because of cigarettes. If you smoke, and you care about those you love, you'll quit for them.

Listen to yourself. You're making statements that are exactly why Smokers have been degraded, discriminated against, belittled into thinking they're some sub-class of people and not showing any proof or facts. This study, though not as extensive as a nationwide study would be, shows that the Majority of people with these cancers Don't Smoke! But immediately the general consensus is all about the evils of Smokers! Again, when is it going to stop! People have been dying of cancers from other exposures forever, but every time a cancer report comes out it is immediately blamed on smoking. That's the "Smoke Screen" I've been talking about. It amazes me how people have so readily forgotten about all of the "Above Ground Nuclear Testing" done right here in the United States upwind of the prevailing winds for the most populated section of the country, the East Coast!

Let's also talk about exposures from Air Fresheners, Plastics and Chemicals placed in Processed Foods!. Where do the Digestive tract cancers come from? Gee, I wonder. Also, Radon! The average home in some studies had radon levels that were the equivalent of smoking three to four packs of cigarettes a day without even lighting one up! But that never gave anyone cancer. Let's get real!

The bottom line is that society needs to ease up a bit and realize, restaurants are all smoke free, school zones are smoke free, work places are smoke free, hospitals are smoke free and smokers have all been "extinguished" to smoking in their homes and cars and there is actually talk of doing away with these. Where Does It Stop?!

Last, but not least, the statement of "That's all They" care about". C'mon! Really? How shallow. I'm just glad I don't work for someone like yourself or I'd be looking for a real job somewhere else.

TimB, keep telling yourself all those lies. They'll be little comfort to you or those who love you when you find out you have cancer, and a few months to live. Just like addicts of other drugs, you are in denial, and are spinning justifications. Get real. Look around you. How many smokers have you seen drop dead in their 40s and 50s. I've seen several. The deaths from all other causes of cancer combined aren't a drop in the bucket next to the deaths cigarettes cause - 450,000 a year in the U. S. alone!

You are in denial. I hope you wake up before you have to tell those you love that you have six months to live, and that you have no one to blame but yourself.

Gee Michael,

Staying with a smoker, you're putting yourself at a high risk for lung cancer from all that second-hand smoke <eyeroll> or worse-- did you never hear the story about the man who had cancer on his penis? He smacked his wife and yelled at her: "I told you to quit smoking!"

Charle7834, I am aware of the dangers. I do not allow her to smoke in the house, or in my presence. If she were to refuse those rules, I would leave her in a heartbeat.

Michael1601 You have to quit smoking for yourself first. Your loved one can help but cannot be the reason. You have to want to quit.

Wow, Michael, hostile much? It's clear you really don't care for smokers. That's fine, we get it. My suggeston would be then not to hang around them. If you are THAT opposed to it, staying with a smoker then makes you a hypocrit. I can't imagine the misery you put her through about it!

My Mom quit smoking at age 83. She is now 87. My dad quit smoking at age 50 and was killed in a plane crash at age 52, sitting in the non smoking section of the plane. There were at least 3 survivors in the smoking section. I'm just saying. None of us know when or how we are going.

Michael- You're a total A$$, an idiot and a bigot. I would leave your a$$ by the side of the road, just for being crazy. I can't believe a woman would stay with you let alone a smoker. To Michaels wife, you can get out, they have shelters honey. Leave this guy he's a controlling abuser. And BTW, I don't smoke inside my home becuase I don't want to expose my loved ones, not because my loved ones don't love me and threaten to leave me.

Sorry MSN, someone had to say something. :)

It's not. Once you have lung cancer the death rate is extremely high. Why be even more miserable by quitting smoking. I think it's easy for us to say how stupid they are, but if you were in their shoes you would see the grim reality and how difficult it would be to get motivated to quit smoking.

It is EXTREMELY difficult to quit smoking when you lack the motivation to do so.

Treatment for lung cancer pretty much just delays the inevitable. With few exceptions, people with the diagnosis of lung cancer (especially small cell lung cancer) will not have long to live. Quitting smoking for them is like closing the barn door after the horses have gotten out. My stepfather died of lung cancer and continued to smoke after his diagnosis. It was his choice. Even his doctor agreed that quitting smoking would not add to his lifespan. I'm amazed at how judgmental some people are on this thread. Let he who is without sin (not just smoking) cast the first stone.

Geesh, you must be pretty young if you think 60 is old. I'm 63 and feel that I have many good years left.

I remember about 20 years ago a friend was telling me of his grandfather. The old man was in his 70's and had been diagnosed with cancer. His prognosis was grim at best. From the day of diagnosis until he passed he would spend an hour each evening sitting in a chair watching the lake and smoking a cigar. I couldn't and still can't think of a single reason why he shouldn't have - especially considering the treatment options of that time.

You are so right! I have quit smoking, but smoked like a chimney all through chemo and radiation. Though my physicians encouraged me to quit, they also told me not to take on too much at once. I felt foolish smoking, but could not kick it until after treatment. It was one of the few things I enjoyed. God knows I did not want to eat or drink.

Many get hooked as teenagers. They start as an act of rebellion, thinking they are ten feet tall and bullet proof - then they can't quit.

Try a cigarette sometime Warhammer-- then you'll understand why some people smoke.

In regard to the 30 somethings: the greatest human flaw " It ain't gonna happen to me!"

Thought the older boys would think I looked cool. Case closed.

*Oh wait, I forgot, it gave me a little buzz too*

Charle7834

Try a cigarette sometime Warhammer-- then you'll understand why some people smoke

Well, that's just it, Charle: I never tried one, even though they were readily available in my house. All the education I had about how bad and addictive they were made me realize that I should not try them. And now, that information is even greater and more prevalent than when I was a kid, with all the advertising against it and laws against it and taxes on it. With that in mind, why do I see folks younger than me smoking? Why did the anti-smoking campaign work onme and not them? I'm really looking for some under 30 smokers to tell why they picked up the habit in the first place. I know why my nephew started: to cover up the smell of pot. He knew he'd get in less trouble for smoking cigarettes that he would for smoking dope. He quit the Mary Jane. He can't kick the tobacco.

~sigh~

@Qweenofhearts

Thought the older boys would think I looked cool. Case closed.

Thanks for the insight, but do you think there would have been anything that would have persuaded you otherwise?

Not really. I was too young to make such decisions. And everyone around me smoked, and I mean EVERYONE. Sigh. Same reason I got tatoos. Hindsight is twenty-twenty.

My father-in-law was diagnosed on January 13th 2000 he was told he had 9 months to live, he quit smoking that day. He was so determined to outlive the diagnoses he wanted to see his grandson grow up. He died exactly 9 months to the day, he quit to late. The only thing that was good was his brother went to be tested the week after he was diagnosed and found out that he had the early stages of lung cancer he stop smoking and has been cancer free for the past 12 years not sure if the stop smoking did it but at least its gone.

You're more likely to get it, just like you're more likely to get any cancer if it turns up in your family - but think about this: How many of those "non-smokers" live or lived with smokers? If your parents died of smoking related cancer, how much of their smoke did you breathe in? That has lifelong effects.

Your chance of getting cancer is increased, whether you smoke or not, if you live with someone who smokes or you work in a smoky environment.

@hwilson - and how many of those "non-smokers" are actually former smokers? In fact, the article suggests the vast majority.

I grew up in a haze of smoke. I have considered that I was addicted, before I ever started actually smoking.

Why would you want to die such a horribly painful death?

Personally, I think cigarettes need to be banned. People can rail all day about 'free choice' but the fact is, if someone is smoking near anyone else they're violating their right NOT to smoke! My aunt died a horrible, painful death from a form of leukemia caused by secondhand smoke exposure all because my uncle loved his cigarettes more than he loved her; my cousin's son has asthma partly because of the smoke in her clothes that he was exposed to as a baby; my husband and I have turned down fabulous homes because the previous owners left them reeking of cigarette smoke. It's a disgusting, deadly habit that harms everyone; when will people wise up?!?

Sometimes, if you leave your car long enough with a parking ticket on it, you get towed!

They will try to discredit the finding that MJ increases testicular cancer risc.

Agreed. No body should be made to endure my second hand smoke. But answer me this. My state has had an indoor clean air act almost as long as California, so why in the he!! when smokers are out at the edge of a parking lot hunkered down like the lepers they are made to feel like, do non-smokers go out of the way to walk through it and make nasty comments or give glaring looks? I actually had a woman tell me that I should not have the right to smoke in my vehicle (by myself as I've stated I do not smoke with others in the car) because at a stop light it would effect her if her windows were down. Just because we have legislation banning it from public doesn't mean you never have to smell it again. Also had a neighbor complain because I would smoke outside my home (duplex) on my porch(atleast 100 ft from her door) and she had to smell it when she came out into our shared garage to start her car and leave it running inside. Her complaint was in direct result to my complaint of carbon monoxide filling my home and potentially killing my family. BTW, I asked her well over ten times if it was bothering her, and her answer was no. Not many considerate smokers out there, but I am one of them. And the guy that made the comments about people throwing them out, I agree it's dumb. But have you test driven a new car? They don't even offer ashtrays anymore. I have a plastic bottle with water in it that I dispose of them into, but have no choice but to ash out the window. I guess I could buy one of those cup holder ashtrays but I really don't think looking away from the road to find a little hole in the center console is the answer.