Nicodemon's Lies or Our Lies?

TerrysDaughter Green
Joined: 18 Dec 2008, 23:58

19 Sep 2003, 19:18 #11

Thank you for this insight. I can see that this information will be helpful to me in any weak moment that I might feel like smoking. I can't blame it on some evil force that is more intelligent than I am. It is my choice.

It is a comfort to know that nicotine has the I.Q. of zero. I have always given it much more credit than that. It helps to see the addiction in this light.

Thank you for all of the information. Educating myself has been my number one line of defense.

TerrysDaughter
Reply

Joel
Joined: 18 Dec 2008, 23:57

19 Sep 2003, 19:27 #12

You are welcome TD. I found a piece I wrote back in February that further elaborates on the concept. Hope you find it helpful.

Joel

Earlier today I referred to the use of the term "Nicodemon." My comment was that when I see terms like "Nicodemon," or "Hellweek," or "Nicomonster," I generally assume that the person writing has been on other sites and have picked up lots of cute terms and conventional wisdoms about quitting smoking. This concept always makes me nervous though, for somehow many people have trouble separating fact from fiction in things that they read elsewhere.

Nicodemon seems to give the impression of an evil persona associated with the chemical nicotine. Nicotine is no more evil than arsenic or carbon monoxide or hydrogen cyanide--all chemicals found in tobacco smoke. Although nicotine is unique among the thousands of other chemicals that comprise tobacco smoke because it is the addictive chemical in tobacco.

Even so, the idea that nicotine is somehow calling to a smoker who is off smoking for weeks or months is quite inaccurate. It is the person himself or herself whose own mind is creating the desire from triggers that he or she is experiencing. Those triggers are also not evil, they are just life events being experienced for the first time.

I think the problems I have with the terms is they make nicotine seem to have more power than it actually does. The personification given to it can make an individual feel that nicotine has the potential of tricking him or her into smoking. An inanimate object such as a chemical has no such power. As John has said often nicotine has an IQ of zero. People do not overcome the grip of chemical addictions by being stronger than the drug but rather by being smarter than the drug.

Lets not give nicotine more credit than it is due. Lets not make it some cute and cuddly or evil and plotting entity--it is a chemical that alters brain chemistry. It is no different than heroin, cocaine or alcohol. These drugs don't have cute names given to them either and giving them to nicotine can start to make it seem different than these other substance--more trivial or less serious in a way. Nicotine is not more trivial than other drugs of addiction and in fact kills more people than all other drugs of addiction combined.

I think the only place where I think I have ever appreciated the term "Nicodemon" is in this one string. Because in this one post the lies that people make up in order to secure their continued use of a deadly drug are all dispelled in one quick swoop. It has a short, simple and catchy title that seems to fit the logic used in this piece very well--Nicodemon Lies. But anyone reading this whole article and the associated links quickly will realize that these are not the lies of a demon, these are the lies made up by an addict rationalizing, legitimizing, defending and protecting his or her drug use. They are the lies that people make up and tell themselves to defend the otherwise un-defendable.

People cannot rationalize the reason that they smoke with truths; they can only do it with lies. More important for people here though is that a person cannot secure his or her quit by telling himself or herself lies either, but he or she can secure his or her quit by telling himself or herself the truth. The truth is that the only way to keep yourself smoke free is to simply accept the truth that to stay smoke free you must never take another puff!

Joel
Reply

Joel
Joined: 18 Dec 2008, 23:57

23 Feb 2004, 23:02 #13

I've seen the "demon" word kicked around a few times recently. The original post and the above commentaries explain the problems of using such words or more importantly in believing or being intimidate in such a fictitious figure.
Reply

Sal GOLD.ffn
Joined: 16 Jan 2003, 08:00

03 Mar 2004, 03:45 #14

I think the problems I have with the terms is they make nicotine seem to have more power than it actually does. The personification given to it can make an individual feel that nicotine has the potential of tricking him or her into smoking. An inanimate object such as a chemical has no such power. As John has said often nicotine has an IQ of zero. People do not overcome the grip of chemical addictions by being stronger than the drug but rather by being smarter than the drug.

Lets not give nicotine more credit than it is due. Lets not make it some cute and cuddly or evil and plotting entity--it is a chemical that alters brain chemistry. It is no different than heroin, cocaine or alcohol. These drugs don't have cute names given to them either and giving them to nicotine can start to make it seem different than these other substance--more trivial or less serious in a way. Nicotine is not more trivial than other drugs of addiction and in fact kills more people than all other drugs of addiction combined.
Reply

GrumpyOMrsS (Gold)
Joined: 19 Dec 2008, 00:00

16 Apr 2004, 02:16 #15

There is no Nicodemon
Reply

screechwinter
Joined: 18 Dec 2008, 23:58

08 May 2004, 21:49 #16

Image
"It's something to do with my hands - So is playing with a loaded gun and they both have the same potential for harm. If you really need something for your hands, try doodling with a pen, playing with coins, squeezing a ball or using strength grippers. You might get ink on yourself, rich or strong wrists, but at least you won't be destroying your body and substantially shortening your life. "
Last edited by screechwinter on 15 Feb 2009, 21:49, edited 1 time in total.
Reply

forza d animo
Joined: 04 Apr 2005, 07:00

10 Mar 2006, 18:00 #17


3. My spouse, close friend or family member smokes. I'm waiting for them to quit with me
- Nicotine tells this junkie that they can't quit until their friend or loved one quits too as they're around their smoke, smells, cigarettes, breath and ashtrays, and quitting is thus impossible. Nonsense! How long will you continue to destroy your body while waiting for a human crutch? A lifetime? If and when they do quit with you, what will you do if they relapse? Will "love" cause you to do the same? One of you needs to lead the way. It's okay to have hope for a loved one but you must quit for YOU or it's doomed from the very start. Don't make your health or life dependent upon another person's decision! As for being around smokers, we all do it. It's just a matter of degree. Are you hoping that planet earth's 1.2 billion nicotine [users] will disappear once you quit?
Reply

Sal GOLD.ffn
Joined: 16 Jan 2003, 08:00

24 Mar 2006, 22:07 #18

I'll cut down or quit and smoke just one now and then - You are addicted to a substance that is five times as addictive as cocaine. You may be strong enough to cut back a bit but you'll remain addicted, the decay will continue and a recent study indicates that your health risks will remain unchanged. If you were a pack-a-day nicotine smoker and after quitting you decide to smoke just one cigarette, you might as well get ready to smoke the other 7,300 for the year too as full and complete relapse is virtually assured. The Law of Nicotine Addiction is simple - one puff of new nicotine and it's over! Your addiction has permanently transformed your brain into a highly efficient nicotine processing machine. It may take a few cigarettes or even a few packs before you're back to your old level of intake or higher, but just one puff of nicotne awakens and revives thousands of feeding memories and re-establishes at least one nicotine feeding cue.
Reply

GreenSolveg
Joined: 18 Dec 2008, 23:57

11 Apr 2006, 06:50 #19

RIGHT ON!!!
Reply

JoeJFree Gold
Joined: 18 Dec 2008, 23:57

19 Jul 2006, 10:13 #20

# 21 - It's too late now to heal these lungs -

Nonsense! If you have not yet caused permanent lung damage you should expect to experience an almost one-third increase in overall lung function within just 90 days of quitting! It's amazing how much damaged lungs can repair themselves unless disease or cancer have already arrived. Even with emphysema, although destroyed air sacks will never again function, quitting now will immediately halt the needless destruction of additional tissues! You only have two options - decay or heal. Which cigarette in which pack will carry the spark that gives birth to that first cancerous cell?
Reply