Quantcast

Forums | MacLife

You are not logged in.

  • Index
  •  » Unplugged
  •  » any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

#26 2005-05-14 6:08 am

debbiedowner
Member
From: Pennsylvania
Registered: 2004-11-21
Posts: 2149

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

I heard last week on NPR that it takes about seven years for the lungs to pink up again.  But as with Peter Jennings, you can still get lung cancer twenty years after you quit, although you greatly, greatly cut the chances.


Last edited by debbiedowner (Today 12:61 a.m.)
An idea is not responsible for the people who believe in it.

Offline

 

#27 2005-05-14 7:49 am

Farmerkev
Official Dementor
Moderator
Registered: 2003-01-03
Posts: 18620

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

debbiedowner wrote:

I heard last week on NPR that it takes about seven years for the lungs to pink up again.  But as with Peter Jennings, you can still get lung cancer twenty years after you quit, although you greatly, greatly cut the chances.

Smoking increases your odds for lung cancer.
That statement means that even without smoking you may get it since it isn't the only cause.
It's kind of like when they say smoking increases your risk of heart disease, plenty of non-smokers dropping over from a heart attack every day.


Do your part to combat global warming.
Eat a cow.

Online

 

#28 2005-05-14 8:08 am

justine
Elitist Beer Lover
Moderator
From: Sac'to
Registered: 1999-12-23
Posts: 28763
Website

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

debbiedowner wrote:

I heard last week on NPR that it takes about seven years for the lungs to pink up again.  But as with Peter Jennings, you can still get lung cancer twenty years after you quit, although you greatly, greatly cut the chances.

I asked about that 7 year 10 year thing. Your lungs will never get back to their original state, and while quitting may add a few years to your life, the damage has been done. If you really believe your lungs will become like new, sit down and talk to a pulmonary doctor and/or therapist. Some damage just isn't reversible and can take years to cause you problems.

Offline

 

#29 2005-05-14 9:04 am

aki
Member
Registered: 2000-02-02
Posts: 3991

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

justine wrote:

debbiedowner wrote:

I heard last week on NPR that it takes about seven years for the lungs to pink up again.  But as with Peter Jennings, you can still get lung cancer twenty years after you quit, although you greatly, greatly cut the chances.

I asked about that 7 year 10 year thing. Your lungs will never get back to their original state, and while quitting may add a few years to your life, the damage has been done. If you really believe your lungs will become like new, sit down and talk to a pulmonary doctor and/or therapist. Some damage just isn't reversible and can take years to cause you problems.

Justine's hit it on the head. Say you smoked for five years in your twenties and then quit. You can still get lung cancer in your 40s and 50s. Cancer can lie dormant for a long time.

One of the most common types of lung cancer is adenocarcinoma. There is no cure for it at any stage. No "under 5% make it past 5 years" to pray for. You get that one, you're gone, usually in 6-8 months from when it's first diagnosed. If you live 2 years with that one you're a miracle.

You don't hear that too often from Smoking Cessation lobbyists, sure as hell puts a black mark in their promotional material.

Don't mean to piss on your parade. Congrats to all quitters, it should add years to your life and hopefully you'll dodge the cancer bullet.

Offline

 

#30 2005-05-14 9:10 am

justine
Elitist Beer Lover
Moderator
From: Sac'to
Registered: 1999-12-23
Posts: 28763
Website

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

aki wrote:

justine wrote:

debbiedowner wrote:

I heard last week on NPR that it takes about seven years for the lungs to pink up again.  But as with Peter Jennings, you can still get lung cancer twenty years after you quit, although you greatly, greatly cut the chances.

I asked about that 7 year 10 year thing. Your lungs will never get back to their original state, and while quitting may add a few years to your life, the damage has been done. If you really believe your lungs will become like new, sit down and talk to a pulmonary doctor and/or therapist. Some damage just isn't reversible and can take years to cause you problems.

Justine's hit it on the head. Say you smoked for five years in your twenties and then quit. You can still get lung cancer in your 40s and 50s. Cancer can lie dormant for a long time.

One of the most common types of lung cancer is adenocarcinoma. There is no cure for it at any stage. No "under 5% make it past 5 years" to pray for. You get that one, you're gone, usually in 6-8 months from when it's first diagnosed. If you live 2 years with that one you're a miracle.

You don't hear that too often from Smoking Cessation lobbyists, sure as hell puts a black mark in their promotional material.

Don't mean to piss on your parade. Congrats to all quitters, it should add years to your life and hopefully you'll dodge the cancer bullet.

I also want to add, that while cancer is one of the worst things smoking can cause, it isn't the only thing. There are several lung diseases that can occur at a later age as a result of smoking when younger.

It just boggles my mind that people START smoking these days, knowing what we know now.

Offline

 

#31 2005-05-14 9:37 am

rufio
Let the funeral start, hear the casket close...
From: texas/ohio
Registered: 2003-10-26
Posts: 2261

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

justine wrote:

It just boggles my mind that people START smoking these days, knowing what we know now.

I can't understand that either.

I have a friend who smokes in moderation so to speak, about 5 or 6 cigarettes per week. While that won't do near as much harm as some of you who say you used to smoke 3+ packs/day, it is still disgusting and unnecessary and expensive and stupid for him to do it. He started when he was 14, and didn't tell anyone about it until a couple months ago, now 17. He doesn't do it for the cool factor, and isn't addicted so that he cannot stop. Actually, a month ago he quit smoking for a couple of weeks because he didn't want to smell as bad for prom. Sadly, as soon as it was over, he went right back to it. He knows the health consequences and is  going to be a doctor when he grows up most likely, but he doesn't really care enough to not smoke. Strange case, that kid. And he wonders why his cross country times are so much worse now.

I also have a friend whose dad chain smokes like you wouldn't believe. He has wanted to quit for years now, but last time he tried to quit he had a seizure and had to go to the hospital. So he has pretty much given up on the quitting because he doesn't see that there is any 'safe' way to do it. It's sad.


"Outside of this forum
everything is second after first."
       -pcguy

Offline

 

#32 2005-05-14 10:22 am

ckm
f/k/a captkevman
From: over here!
Registered: 2001-03-13
Posts: 6884

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

My maternal grandmother (my Mom's mom, for those of you keeping track) has been a heavy smoker all of her life. She's approaching 80, and is healthy as a horse (physically). For some reason, she just hasn't been that adversely affected by smoking.

My mother, on the other hand, started smoking at around 13 or 14, and continued on until, well...she hasn't quit. She didn't get the same genes as her mother, apparently, because at the age of 52, she had to undergo a 5-way bypass. She tried to quit after that, but couldn't. She was smoke-free for a few weeks, then picked it back up. In October 2003 (just before her 58th birthday), she was admitted to the hospital again, this time she was diagnosed with emphysema. She was told if she didn't quit smoking and did not go on oxygen 24/7, she might not last two more years.

She hasn't done either, and it's a year and a half later. While her outward appearance indicates she's as healthy as she was a couple of years ago, it's anyone's guess as to when her lungs will start to fail her.

So if you're an unapologetic smoker, don't count on an iron constitution to come through for you just because your dad or aunt or someone lived to a ripe old age while smoking -- it can skip a generation.


- twitter - flickr - tumblr -

(links will be added as I discover more cool stuff to share)

Offline

 

#33 2005-05-14 1:06 pm

bratboy
laden with emotion
Royal Wombat
From: Austin, Texas
Registered: 2003-01-19
Posts: 34106

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

I quit about seven weeks ago, cold turkey.

up

Admittedly, I did have ONE cigarette after each of my finals...but I'm back on track now.


"One thing we've learned is there's a difference between being disappointed and having madmen in authority."

                                                                   --Paul Krugman

Offline

 

#34 2005-05-14 1:21 pm

djmozilla
Member
From: Vancouver
Registered: 2002-06-13
Posts: 1403
Website

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

I quit smoking this year after 15yrs,smoked  about half  pack a day.I quit March 14th on my B-Day.I used "Step Two" patch for a week and then will power after that!Best decision I have ever made.I have allot more energy now and feel healthier.

big_smile

Last edited by djmozilla (2005-05-14 1:22 pm)


I'm a dancer!!

Offline

 

#35 2005-05-14 2:21 pm

brendave
Rankin and Rockin like Roger
From: Valparaiso, IN
Registered: 2005-01-10
Posts: 1422

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

I haven't smoked for two years now.  Company does drug tests now sad  I stopped before the tests, but damn if I don't want to smoke more than ever after the chance is gone.

Offline

 

#36 2005-05-14 3:33 pm

justine
Elitist Beer Lover
Moderator
From: Sac'to
Registered: 1999-12-23
Posts: 28763
Website

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

djmozilla wrote:

I quit smoking this year after 15yrs,smoked  about half  pack a day.I quit March 14th on my B-Day.I used "Step Two" patch for a week and then will power after that!Best decision I have ever made.I have allot more energy now and feel healthier.

big_smile

And the stench is gone.

Offline

 

#37 2005-05-14 4:27 pm

KingFred
is enjoying his status as
Royal Wombat
Registered: 2002-05-09
Posts: 7541

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

Cold turkey, Jan 1, 2005.

The only aspect I miss is the "social" one - like when Punkin and I would go down to the smoke room (yes, we smoked in one room only) after dinner. Took a bit to get past that habit.

justine wrote:

And the stench is gone.

That was a big one for me. But boy-oh-boy, I can really tell people who smoke when they come in from their breaks at work. Yuck! And I used to smell like that? Ugh.

I was also not liking the fact I was burning away cash for no real good reason (I gave myself a nice $20 a week "raise" by quitting) and the obvious unhealthiness of it, obviously. So let's see... so far I've saved $380 by not smoking. I'll have enough saved to book a cruise in about four or five more months.


Exploring the intertubes

Offline

 

#38 2005-05-14 9:32 pm

debbiedowner
Member
From: Pennsylvania
Registered: 2004-11-21
Posts: 2149

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

CaptKevMan wrote:

My mother, on the other hand, started smoking at around 13 or 14, and continued on until, well...she hasn't quit... She was told if she didn't quit smoking and did not go on oxygen 24/7, she might not last two more years.
She hasn't done either, and it's a year and a half later.

CaptKevMan: I truly don't know how you must feel about this: angry, resigned, sad, indifferent?  How does the child of a smoker feel, I wonder?  I started smoking at 15 in the days before anyone was informed about the health effects, so I never worried about my mother's smoking. (She stopped at age 80 and lived to 92.) I was still smoking when she quit, so I guess her smoking was never an issue for me. I'm wondering what our children felt when Mr. Downer and I smoked. (We stopped after they were in college.One of them in particular, the one who nagged us most to stop smoking, was the same one who made us both reach for the cigarettes because he could be so damned sanctimonious.)


Last edited by debbiedowner (Today 12:61 a.m.)
An idea is not responsible for the people who believe in it.

Offline

 

#39 2005-05-15 6:39 am

Camp David
Banned
Registered: 2003-04-11
Posts: 6065

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

Smoking is by no means the only risk in today's society... I await the scientific findings to be released on cell phone radiation and its affect upon humans. Further, the prevalance and use of laptop and desktop computer may introduce greater radiation exposure to humans. Both computers and cell phones emit radiation, albeit in small quantities, to users.

I also find it hypocritical that some of the same folks that are so "against" smokers and smoking also happen to be advocates of legalized marijuanna.


Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI: "a simple, humble worker in God's vineyard." Habemus Papem!

Offline

 

#40 2005-05-15 6:46 am

HeadonaStick
Oh, how horrible our Christmas will be!
From: Scotland, UK
Registered: 2003-02-11
Posts: 2857

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

Banning smoking (or disapproving of it in public) is totally different from thinking people should be able to do what they want with their bodies inside their own homes. There isn't a contradiction.


"Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings."

Offline

 

#41 2005-05-15 9:21 am

justine
Elitist Beer Lover
Moderator
From: Sac'to
Registered: 1999-12-23
Posts: 28763
Website

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

Camp David wrote:

I also find it hypocritical that some of the same folks that are so "against" smokers and smoking also happen to be advocates of legalized marijuanna.

Generally, people don't smoke as much pot as they do cigarettes, and pot doesn't have additives such as ammonia and other harmful chemicals. Comparing the 2 is ridiculous.

Offline

 

#42 2005-05-16 2:36 pm

iBubba
Displaced
From: central Iowa
Registered: 2000-10-06
Posts: 7109

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

Camp David wrote:

Smoking is by no means the only risk in today's society...

:looking around:
Nope. No one claimed that.

Camp David wrote:

I also find it hypocritical that some of the same folks that are so "against" smokers and smoking also happen to be advocates of legalized marijuanna.

Proof? Personally I hate weed. I am not sure why you're playing the viscious, smoker azzhole here, but no one has called for a smoking ban or such in this thread. This seems to be a thread for support of people that overcame their addiction or are planning to. Pitch in or piss off.

Last edited by iBubba (2005-05-16 2:37 pm)


"Hell, I'm sure Og had some cool way of banging two rocks together, until he took himself too seriously."
- Pithecanthropus

Offline

 

#43 2005-05-16 3:41 pm

Kirk
Spill the Wine, Take That Girl
Royal Wombat
From: Southern California
Registered: 1999-02-27
Posts: 20201
Website

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

Congrats to all of you that quit.  I never ever smoked.  However I've known a few quitters.  They tell me that the most difficult time is when out social drinking with friends. It seems that smoking and drinking go very well together.  They'd find themselves with a cigarette in hand and not even remember bumming the cigarette from somebody and lighting up.  So try and avoid alcohol for at least a year too.

Offline

 

#44 2005-05-17 12:06 pm

djjorj
Member
From: Greenville SC
Registered: 2005-05-11
Posts: 35

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

I was a smoker for 7yrs....and quit........
now I just smoke WEED all the time!!!!!!!!! up
muahahaha muahahah

Offline

 

#45 2005-05-17 4:34 pm

Zaletoon
Another Day, Another Defilement
From: Back Woods of West Virginia
Registered: 2004-11-09
Posts: 128

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

congrats to all who have quit!!! I've been smoke free for 8 months.


http://img62.echo.cx/img62/3351/sig2be.jpg

Offline

 

#46 2005-05-17 10:12 pm

debbiedowner
Member
From: Pennsylvania
Registered: 2004-11-21
Posts: 2149

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

My 15 year old daughter had me so aggravated last evening that I almost -- for the first time in all these years post quitting -- drove to the 7-11 and  bought a pack. (didn't, thank goodness)


Last edited by debbiedowner (Today 12:61 a.m.)
An idea is not responsible for the people who believe in it.

Offline

 

#47 2005-05-19 1:56 am

SHOOGIES
Member
From: iowa
Registered: 2004-06-17
Posts: 221

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

I quit back in 1990 and dont have any regrets.
I watched as  my mother die of cancer ten years later.
I just cant understand why people still take up smoking
anyway.

Cold turkey is the only way.

Offline

 

#48 2005-05-19 7:37 am

SonicSamurai
Tachikoma!
From: Section 9
Registered: 2003-01-28
Posts: 5129

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

I've been pretty smoke free since new years, I was smoking for about 8 months beofre that. (Yeah, I guess that makes me a lightweight, especially only with about 4-6 cigarettes a day compared to a lot of twin and triple pack people, but I dont think that's the important part here, eh?) I had one cig when I was pissed on Valentines day, but I sure as hell didnt enjoy it.

I dont think that I could really stand one nowadays, so buying another pack would be a complete waste.

I also do not support any smoking bans.

Offline

 

#49 2005-10-07 4:04 pm

jkahless
Member
From: Right in front of you.
Registered: 2002-01-05
Posts: 10017

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

Farmerkev wrote:

debbiedowner wrote:

I heard last week on NPR that it takes about seven years for the lungs to pink up again.  But as with Peter Jennings, you can still get lung cancer twenty years after you quit, although you greatly, greatly cut the chances.

Smoking increases your odds for lung cancer.
That statement means that even without smoking you may get it since it isn't the only cause.
It's kind of like when they say smoking increases your risk of heart disease, plenty of non-smokers dropping over from a heart attack every day.

Dancing blindfolded in the middle of an 8 lane highway increases your chances of being hit by a car, yet some people who don't dance blindfolded in the middle of an 8 lane highway still get hit by cars. 

Funny that.


http://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/sigs/sigimage.php?u=37350

Offline

 

#50 2005-10-07 5:12 pm

Aqua Man
Hip & Naked
From: Purgatory
Registered: 2001-07-29
Posts: 2249
Website

Re: any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

You revived a 5 month old topic to say that?

Offline

 
  • Index
  •  » Unplugged
  •  » any "former smokers" or recent non-smokers around?

Board footer

Powered by PunBB 1.2.6
© Copyright 2002–2005 Rickard Andersson