Nicotine: The
Drug That Never Was Volume 1: The Biggest Medical Mistake of
the 20th Century by Christopher Holmes
ISBN 978-0-9556829-0-2
As a hypnotherapist the nicotine as addiction argument never
really made any sense to me. As early as the 1990’s both
myself and a large number of hypnotherapists had both
collectively and independently raised concerns. If nicotine
was an addiction, why did smokers so often stop smoking,
often after a single visit to a hypnotherapist?
Hypnotherapists would not expect to treat those addicted to
substances such as cocaine or heroin with anywhere near the
same level of success – therein lies the crux. Hypnotherapy
either works to alleviate addiction, or it does not!
The author of this book, a hypnotherapist specialising in
smoking cessation, asserts that smoking is a compulsive
habit, a behavioural instinct controlled by the
subconscious. He further argues that nicotine should not
even be classified as a drug. The argument that
smoking is a compulsive habit finds favour with
this reviewer because it is a view that I have held for a
long time. But how can this be? Is the subconscious really
that powerful? In a word, yes!
There was once a time when you didn’t know how to drive. You
had to take lessons and had to repeat those lessons. In
fact, you only really became a competent driver when you
were able to get into a car and drive off without having to
think about every step of what you were doing. What
happened? The skills involved in driving a car became
sublimated, i.e. took root in your subconscious, thus
relieving you of the necessity of having to think about
every step of the driving process whenever you needed to
drive. If you don’t drive substitute instead your
experiences in learning how to ride a bike, the same natural
process applies. The subconscious does a lot for us, the
ability to ‘take over’ repeat habitual functions for us is
just one example. The old adage that practice makes perfect
has a physiological underpinning.
However, this behaviour can be described automatic, a
learned habit, but not compulsive. After all, who ever gets
the urge to go for a drive in the same way as you get the
urge to light up? The author gives a good and detailed
introduction to compulsion in this context in the book.
Hypnotherapists are used to working with the subconscious
part of the mind. This makes hypnotherapists unique –seeking
to enter into direct communication with the subconscious
mind.
The author’s case is simple, nicotine is not addictive, and
he makes a strong case in support of his argument. The book
is replete with references to other people’s material and
research, not least our own Department for Health, which the
author proceeds to rip to shreds. Readers can check on the
original research as all of the sources are provided by the
author, and draw their own conclusions.
Central to the debate are the various claims for success
rates of various approaches. Hypnotherapists have claimed up
to 95% success rates for their treatments, in a single
session. This would be very impressive were it not for the
fact that these claims have led to complaints to the
Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). In every single case
the advertiser has been unable to substantiate their claims.
This makes the claims slightly less impressive.
New Scientist, not a
magazine prone to flights of fancy, published an article
into research into the use of hypnotherapy to stop smoking
and concluded that one in five users had stopped smoking as
a result of their hypnotherapy treatment:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg13618450.700-how-one-in-five-have-given-up-smoking-.html
(subscription required but the opening paragraphs are
available for viewing)
I've seen this article used
by a number of therapists to support claims for much higher
success rates, however, back to our friends at the ASA. As
always, if it sounds too good to be true it usually is - a
claim for a 95% success rate using hypnotherapy to help
people stop smoking should be viewed in light of ASA
rulings.
My question is, with a
verifiable impressive success rate, why damage the
reputation of the profession by making exaggerated claims?
However,
this needs to be balanced. In a reply from the Department
for Health in response to a query sent by this reviewer
requesting details of how the DOH/NHS measured their stop
smoking clinics success rates the following was received:
“The primary outcome measure for stop smoking interventions
delivered by NHS Stop Smoking Services is a client's smoking
status at four weeks from their quit date. Smoking status is
usually verified by client self-report and by means of a
carbon monoxide (CO) test, which measures levels of CO in
the client's expired air and reveals the effects of recent
smoking activity. Whilst relapse can, of course, take place
after the four week follow-up point, the relapse rates for
smoking cessation are well documented in the research
literature and highly predictable over time. This means that
given good quality four week data, probable success rates at
later time points, such as six months or twelve months, can
be calculated with a high degree of accuracy.”
The DOH/NHS state in their advertising that you are 4 times
more likely to quit smoking with NHS help. This claim is
measured against will power, not hypnotherapy. In a press
release dated 11th July 2009, Freedom2Choose, working with
the author Chris Holmes, claims that the continued use of
this claim has no evidential basis. Freedom2Choose claims
that they can show that the Department of Health routinely
uses misleading statements to promote Nicotine Replacement
Therapy (NRT) products as its preferred method of treatment
for smoking cessation. For the full text of the press
release see this link:
http://www.prlog.org/10280006-nrt-studies-destroy-four-times-more-likely-to-quit-with-nhs-claim.html
It makes for some very
interesting reading.
Hardly a level playing field then - as a whole the
hypnotherapy profession judges its success by outcome
studies at 12 months, not 4 weeks. Presumably if a Govt
department is allowed to make claims based on 4 weeks
outcome studies then the hypnotherapy profession should be
able to do the same. I for one would be interested in seeing
that data that would result from this approach! CO testers
are cheap and easy to obtain. Any hypnotherapist wishing to
follow the DOH/NHS reporting models above would have a ready
made case for when the predictable complaints to the ASA are
filed.
I liked this book – it sets challenge. It details its
sources so that readers can do their own research if they
are so inclined.
Unfortunately the author makes a few statements in the book
which, although presented as fact, are nonetheless opinions.
The statement that particularly attracted my attention was
that hypnotherapists who used progressive relaxation
inductions were somehow not as professional as, well,
presumably those hypnotherapists who employed the author’s
induction methods.
The book makes an excellent case for those main points that
the author wished to publicise, namely addiction vs.
compulsive habit. Numerous asides to various issues
undoubtedly made for a more entertaining read, but in the
case of effectiveness of induction methods, that one at
least had not been subjected to the same rigorous
objectivity that is a feature of the rest of the book. It’s
not often that parts of a book on a very serious subject
have me by turns howling in laughter and clapping in
appreciation of the authors attention to detail – this book
did both.
The message that I’d like to end this review on is this, if
you intend to be a critic and attack this book, at least
read a copy first! This has the potential to be a landmark
book and as such deserves a wide audience…
Authors contact details:
www.truthwillout.co.uk
Reviewed by:
Michael O’Sullivan
Editor
www.hypnotherapyarticles.com
Be
confident, more relaxed and in control. Be successful in
love, work and so much more! 
