16/12/2017 How to quit smoking

              From my experience I can teach you how to succeed in quitting smoking. I smoked more than twenty years, but I quit twenty years ago and have not smoked even one cigarette since then. I discovered that quitting smoking has something to do with number ‘3’. My method has no monetary cost. It is the following:
(1)  Choose three consecutive holidays.
(2)  Quit smoking three hours before the supper of the day just before the first holiday.
(3)  Do not work but do what you like in the three holidays. When you feel painful (or uncomfortable) from withdrawal symptoms, lie in bed or sofa for a while, then the pain will disappear. If you do not smoke in these days, you are approximately 50% successful in quitting permanently.
(4)  In the following three weeks you will experience strong pain about five times, although the degree of pain is less than in (3). Relax for a few minutes by taking a seat, having coffee or tea, walking, talking, etc. and try to forget smoking.
(5)  In the three hundred days after you quit, slight uncomfortableness will occasionally hit you, but never smoke. Smoking a single cigarette will waste all your effort up to that day.
(6)  If you do not smoke for three years, you will have perfectly succeeded in quitting. Congratulations!
Comments and questions are welcome.
Kazuhiro Arai’s English twitter:          https://twitter.com/araikazuhiroe88
Kazuhiro Arai’s Japanese blog:           https://araikazuhiro.blogspot.jp/
Kazuhiro Arai’s Japanese twitter:       https://twitter.com/araikazuhiro88   
Kazuhiro Arai’s Japanese home page: http://araikazuhiro.world.coocan.jp/







Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Nature of Economics (5)

Image
The Nature of Economics (5) We see here a good example for the fact that the values researchers possess affect their choice of the topic and method of research generating bias in ‘scientific works.’ 　 Researchers who want to support individualism do not analyze firms or households seriously. They simply introduce exogenously given production functions and utility functions. Economists tend to ignore or distort social aspects that are inconvenient to build models with conclusions they like. It is really hard to establish social sciences that are value-free. Researchers need to recognize this. On the other hand, a unified theoretical model may be formed to explain the cultural difference mentioned in the example given in the above third reason. It may be done by introducing a measure of the degree of cooperativeness as an exogenous variable. In such a model different types of equilibrium may arise for different values of the measure. If we can endogenize the variable for that m
Read more

The Nature of Economics (3)

Image
The Nature of Economics (3) A crucial defect of neoclassical economics related to the above discussion is that it analyzes seriously only markets, more specifically organized markets. It does not seriously analyze firms or households. It ignores government, the environment, and international relations. Although the real economy has a variety of market types, it treats all markets as the same type. Can the demand-supply analysis (with auctioneers) be applied to medical markets or education markets? This implies that neoclassical economics analyzes only a limited part of the economy. Although it deals with firms, it does not seriously analyze them in the sense that it fails to explain how a particular set of input levels achieves the level of output given by the production function. In other words, it does not describe the process of production or how production is carried out. Firms in the real economy try hard to improve their technologies. They also try to invent new products
Read more

The Nature of Economics (7)

Image
The Nature of Economics (7) Neoclassical economics does not consider efficiency of the whole economy because the production function and utility function are exogenously given. Since I do not think that this point is made clear in books or papers, I would like to discuss it in some detail. Consider two economies E1 and E2. The workers in E1 are more cooperative and hard-working. Those in E2 are selfish and lazy. Hence, the labor productivity in the firm in E1 is higher for equally given levels of physical inputs. However both economies are efficient in neoclassical economics! Both E1 and E2 are efficient as far as all firms maximize their profits subject to exogenously given (different) production functions! It is obvious that E1 is more affluent than E2. I would like to emphasize that efficiency differs from affluence in neoclassical economics. Next consider two economies E3 and E4. The people in E3 are more harmonious and other-regarding within the household. Those in E4 ar
Read more