Limited Time: Grab your FREE Box of Dark Chocolate Almond Bars Get Yours>>Close
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 44 of 44

Thread: Quitting Coffee

  1. #41
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    Shop Now
    Quote Originally Posted by Rocco Hill View Post
    Hence why she needs to look at why she needs it to wake up. The not being in a good state upon waking is a clue. You seem to imply her complete lack of morning energy is somehow connected to the coffee. I'm saying for the last time that she needs to broaden her horizon by alot, because the lack of energy is irrelated to a need of coffee, but the need of coffee is indicating something to her. Whether or not coffee is addictive for her, it's pretty irrelevant to the first issue which is poor energy and therefore a skewed metabolism.

    I'm sure you'll get over it. Your junkie analogy is retarded though(i.e - underdeveloped).
    If she had never been a coffee drinker and then suddenly felt lethargic and foggy in the morning, I would agree with you that there could be many health conditions, nutritional deficiencies, etc. that could be to blame. But she herself states that the problem is the "crazy cycle" of needing a lift from the coffee and then getting jittery from it. Why do you not take her at her word?

    I'm sure you will get over being juvenile. It takes some people longer than others.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Quote Originally Posted by Rocco Hill View Post
    I CAN wake up without it(do everyday infact), I don't get headaches without it, nor am I 'cranky' in it's absence. I drink it perhaps once or twice a day, though went one week without it this month. Does this still mean it's a drug? Because it doesn't seem that I'm addicted to it.

    Your junkie analogy helps NO-ONE, other than to be sensationalist. A habit is different from an addiction, might I add.

    Now, what I have been trying to get across to the OP is that her issues probably lie elsewhere away from coffee. If she feels shit with it, by all means don't drink it. But her context is different from mine, and thus your drug and junkie analogy is actually just callous generalising, or spreading bullshit as i like to put it. Op needs to take coffee out of the equation because her health quandry has nothing to do with it.
    Well of course its a drug and as such has the capacity to be addictive and/or abused. You don't have withdraw symptoms and don't believe yourself to be addicted. Super! Me either! However, that doesn't change the facts.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleobird View Post
    Derp's idea of convincing scientific research to rationalize his two pack a day habit:

    Nitric oxide mediates a therapeutic effect of nicotine in ulcerative colitis - Green - 2001 - Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics - Wiley Online Library
    This is about nicotine being used as a drug to treat colitis in a topical application, not even about smoking.

    Recurrent aphthous stomatitis and smoking - T[]z[]n - 2001 - International Journal of Dermatology - Wiley Online LibraryThis one is about canker sores. Sure smoking probably does blast the little buggers out of your mouth. It will give you mouth cancer but at least you won't have canker sores."It is not our intent to promote smoking as a protective measure against Parkinson's disease," Evan L. Thacker from Harvard School of Public Health emphasized in comments to Reuters Health. "Obviously smoking has a multitude of negative consequences. Rather, we did this study to try to encourage other consider the possibility that neuroprotective chemicals may be present in tobacco leaves. Studies to determine if, in fact, there are neuroprotective compounds in tobacco are warranted, the researchers say. The observation that smokeless tobacco users also have a lower risk of Parkinson's disease suggests that the most likely candidates are not compounds generated by combustion, but rather constituents of the tobacco leaves."
    I'm all for using compounds found in tobacco in medicine. That is not the same thing as a two pack a day habit. one is conclusive about absolutely nothing. "There is a need for further studies with a prospective design to certify the causal direction of this association.", about IV nicotine used to kill TB cells. Hooray. "It worked even when used in doses smaller than what's found in a single cigarette. Naser said such small quantities are not likely to cause addiction. But no one is suggesting that people with TB take up the potentially deadly habit of smoking" one isn't even about smoking, it's about the potential use of carbon monoxide as an emergency measure to break up blood clots. "This research is very preliminary. For all practical purposes, the gas remains a killer, so don't throw out your carbon monoxide detector just yet. (You do have a detector, don't you?)" Diggin deep there, Derp.

    FORCES International - ArchiveThis one is about women with the BRCA mutation`Smoking may reduce breast cancer risk for these women, but cigarettes sharply increase the incidence of other cancers,'' said Jean-Sebastien Brunet, lead author of a study being published Wednesday in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.
    ``This study is interesting scientifically, but it should not encourage anyone to smoke,'' Some breast cancers have been linked to estrogen, the female hormone, and cigarette smoking is known to lower production of estrogen" There are better ways to lower your estrogen than giving yourself lung cancer. one is a preliminary report about using a nicotine patch to try to improve cognition in people with Down's syndrome and had a sample size of FIVE people. Real impressive.

    Derp, if you choose to commit suicide on the installment plan by smoking, no amount of logic is going to stop you. Just don't try to pass it off as "healthy" by any stretch of the imagination. Even your "research" doesn't support it.
    Way to look at the picture through a pinhole. What do all those things have in common? You should be able to put it together. Here's more:

    ". . . cigarette smoking has been found to be negatively associated
    with thyroid cancer (29–33)."

    ". . . nicotine was shown to downregulate prolactin gene expression
    (40). Baseline prolactin levels are thus lower in chronic smokers than
    non-smokers (41, 42)."

    "Higher levels of androstenedione and dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate
    (DHEAS) are found in smokers (62–65)."

    "Free testosterone levels have also been found to be higher among
    smokers (41, 91, 92, 94, 95)."

    "Though TSH levels have been reported to be lower in smokers in a few
    studies (3–5), others have not found this effect (6)."

    Smoking and hormones in health and endocrine disorders

    Smoking brain scans - Stock Image M370/0778 - enlarged - Science Photo Library

    And a really good thread:

    Smoking is good for you! - Lifestyle - LONGECITY

    And calling coffee a drug, or an addiction is being a sensationalist, it's simply untrue and on the level of most CW drivel you would find on Dr. Oz. The fact you, or someone else thinks it's an addiction is only a testament of your own willpower and problem -- not the substance, of in caffeine's case, the nutrient.

    "The fact that a taste of chocolate can provoke a wild lust for more chocolate, or that once cigarette renews the addiction, does not mean that the presence of chocolate or nicotine in the blood creates a craving. Rather, it is that an organism in an unstable state perceives the availability of something which promises to partially restore the desired stability."

    FYI, not that it matters in the slightest, but I don't smoke 2 packs a day. I don't even know where you came up with this number besides a baseless ASSumption and an attempt to give credit to your argument by making up some bullshit.
    Last edited by Derpamix; 07-22-2013 at 04:32 PM.
    Make America Great Again

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Shop Now
    The thing with coffee that I have noticed it that people get so charged up over it! The whole "I couldn't live without my coffee!" Suggests to me that it IS an addictive substance which doesn't mean it is addictive to everyone... My issue with coffee is that I get physiologically addicted to it (but not psychologically). In other words I can quit it easily but get awful headaches when I do (which begs the question of why I start drinking it again after a time off it... And I don't really know the answer to that except that I feel like it).

    Anyway I agree that when someone wakes up foggy and lethargic and needs caffeine to get them going it seems as if they have a problem with caffeine addiction! (Like a junkie needs a fix ?!) and thus, quitting the habit is probably a good idea. I don't buy that the problem is independent from the caffeine, at least without any evidence to prove it is). The problem is that the argument is over cause vs effect which is something that's not easy to diagnose ... At least not by a bunch of people on an Internet forum.

    I tend to think,though, that if you feel that you can't live without coffee, it's probably time you tried to! Just reminds me of those people who swear they'd die if they couldn't eat bread or pasta again... Ho hum...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts