Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The way I knew was by trying to stop for at least a week, if I could accomplish that, then it wouldn't be a problem. Not being able to stop for a week shows you are an addict. But being able to stop for week doesn't really show you aren't one. Most addicts do quit for weeks or even months at a time.
> Not being able to stop for a week shows you are an addict. But being able to stop for week doesn't really show you aren't one. Most addicts do quit for weeks or even months at a time. Correct. "Not doing $X anymore" doesn't mean you aren't an addict. "Being able to turn on/turn off doing $X" means you aren't an addict. If you haven't had a drink in years, but having a single one means that you now cannot do without…
This kind of absolutism may end up discouraging present-day smokers from trying to quit at all. It's also not necessarily true. Some people do go from being smokers to hating the sight/smell/thought of smoking.