Just a question ..... A work colleague asked me why I gave up smoking "Cold Turkey" when I could have used patches or something to make it all so much easier. In a nutshell - I explained to her that it is the nicotine in cigarettes that a smoker is addicted to and by using any kind of NRT's - you would be defeating (for the most part) the purpose of quitting. She responded by saying, "well it is not the nicotine that causes cancer etc - so what's the problem? Why did you not just use patches to get your nicotine instead of cigarettes". It was hard to explain to her that although this may be the case - why would one want to be addicted to the drug - regardless? Kinda got me thinking though ...... (I have read John's article on nicotine and it's possible cancer correlation) .... If there were no nicotine in cigarettes, less people would smoke would they not? If you took the "addictive" drug out of the cigarette it would not be as appealing (not that it is appealing at all, it's just that you would not have the constant cravings so you would not bother?). Then on the flip-side, even if nicotine were taken out of cigarettes - every other chemical that was left (although not addictive) are so dangerous and are the major cancer, emphysema, heart disease etc causing agents in a cigarette. So REALLY - when you look at it - there is no way out at all except to NOT SMOKE at all! Sorry if this sounds a bit confusing ... I guess I just wanted to better understand what other function nicotine serves (other than dangerous addiction) in a cigarette? Also - why can they not remove it? Just curious .... ???