A reader wrote in this week with an important question:

“How do you address the challenges of quitting smoking when you’re also living with diagnosed Generalised Anxiety Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder?”

It is a fair question. Plenty of people are asking themselves the same thing, even if they have never said it out loud.

For many, it is exactly why they keep putting off trying to quit. They believe their cigarette or vape is one of the few things helping them cope, and giving it up feels like giving up support they cannot afford to lose.

Everything below applies just as much to vaping as smoking. Nicotine is nicotine, whatever the delivery device

What the Industry Says

Mainstream quitting support treats a GAD or MDD diagnosis as a reason for more support, not less.

That usually means nicotine replacement or prescription medication, such as varenicline or bupropion, combined with additional counselling. The theory is that people managing anxiety or depression may face a harder quit and a higher relapse risk.

In the US, varenicline and bupropion carried an FDA black box warning for years over possible neuropsychiatric side effects. That warning was removed in 2016 after a major trial of more than 8,000 smokers, half of whom had psychiatric diagnoses, found no significant increase in neuropsychiatric problems compared with placebo.

There is also a reassuring finding in the research: a large analysis pooling more than 100 studies and over 160,000 people found that quitting nicotine is followed by less depression, anxiety, and stress, not more.

What We Say

Ask a room of smokers and vapers why they use nicotine, and you will hear the same product being given completely different jobs.

One person says it calms them down when they are anxious. Another says it is the only thing that gets them through when they are feeling low. Someone else says it makes the good times even better. Another says it gives them something to do when they are bored.

But one product cannot be a relaxant for the anxious person, a lift for the depressed person, and an enhancer for the happy person, all depending on the mood of whoever is using it.

What is happening is the same in every case.

Nicotine leaves the body, and withdrawal adds a fresh layer of anxiety and discomfort on top of whatever the person was already feeling. The next cigarette or vape relieves that layer, and the relief is genuinely felt. That is why it seems to be helping.

But it only cancels out the discomfort the addiction just caused.

It brings the person back to their own normal, not above it.

The Relief Is Real, but the Explanation Is Wrong

We are not dismissing what smoking or vaping feels like it is doing.

The relief is real.

What is wrong is the explanation for it.

Nicotine was never treating the anxiety or the depression. It was only relieving withdrawal from the last hit, while the addiction itself kept feeding the very state it claimed to relieve.

Once that becomes clear, there is nothing left to be afraid of giving up, because the thing being given up was never providing what it seemed to.

That is the core of the seminar.

For most people, it happens in one session. It is the same session whether someone smokes, vapes, uses patches, pouches, lozenges, or a combination. It is not about gritting your teeth and going without. It is about seeing that there was never anything real to go without in the first place.

There is no new medication, and nothing to check against what someone may already be taking for GAD or MDD. The underlying diagnosis stays exactly where it belongs, with the person’s doctor or therapist.

People leave free, with a baseline that is no longer being disturbed by an addiction on top of everything else they are already managing.

Where Both Sides Agree

Whichever route someone takes, the evidence points in the same direction: quitting nicotine eases anxiety and depression rather than worsening them.

The industry gets there with medication and extra counselling.

We get there by showing that the cigarette or vape was never providing the relief it appeared to, and was making things worse the whole time.

What matters most is that someone living with GAD or MDD does not let fear of a harder quit keep them using, because the evidence says the opposite is true.

If you are worried that quitting smoking or vaping will make your anxiety or depression worse, you are not alone.

But nicotine is not your support system.

It is part of the trap.

And once you understand the trap, freedom becomes possible.

Meta’s $18bn Settlement: What Changes for Teens?

Meta has agreed to significant changes to Facebook and Instagram after settling a landmark US lawsuit in which California and 28 other states accused the company of deliberately designing addictive products that harmed young people. The settlement, which requires court approval, could cost Meta up to $18bn and introduces new protections for teenage users across the US.

The agreement is particularly significant because it is the first time in the US that Meta has been forced to change key features affecting the everyday user experience. Meta continues to deny wrongdoing.

Why was Meta taken to court?

The case began as a jury trial in federal court in Oakland, California. The states alleged that Meta deliberately designed Facebook and Instagram in ways that hooked young people and contributed to mental health issues including anxiety, depression and suicide.

The states also alleged that Meta regularly collected data from children under 13 without parental permission, in violation of federal and state laws. Meta denied all the allegations throughout the proceedings and, under the eventual settlement, continues to deny wrongdoing.

Although the trial had been expected to run for several weeks and involve dozens of witnesses, the proceedings ended after only four days when the settlement was reached.

Former Meta safety engineer and whistleblower Arturo Béjar testified that Meta had adopted what he described as a “don’t ask, don’t tell” approach to children’s safety. Béjar also alleged that Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg was aware of harms associated with Instagram and Facebook while publicly promoting their safety. Zuckerberg had been scheduled as a witness but did not testify before the agreement was reached.

Instagram chief executive Adam Mosseri was also questioned about the uptake of teen safety features. When challenged over Meta not publishing low usage figures for such features, Mosseri responded: “We don’t publish every single stat.”

What will change on Facebook and Instagram?

The settlement requires Meta to establish additional safeguards for teenage users nationwide in the US. According to California attorney general Rob Bonta, these changes include daily time limits, stopping notifications during school hours, blocking access during critical overnight hours and banning plastic surgery filters.

Bonta described the agreement as involving “massive transformations” intended to reduce risks to children and said Meta would implement the changes within months.

The measures matter because the case went beyond questions about parental responsibility or individual choices. At its centre were allegations about how social media products themselves are designed and the extent to which platforms should be responsible for protecting younger users.

That raises an important question: when a digital product is difficult for a young person to put down, how much responsibility should fall on the individual, their parents and the company that designed the platform?

Settlement could cost Meta up to $18bn

The scale of the settlement is substantial. Meta may pay up to $18bn over 10 years, subject to court approval. California is expected to receive between $1.5bn and $2.1bn, while Colorado will receive about $615m.

Colorado attorney general Phil Weiser described the relief obtained through the agreement as going “well beyond what any court has ordered or is likely to order”, adding that protecting children was the focus of the case.

Meta is a company valued at $1.36tn (£1tn). The financial settlement is therefore significant, but the required changes to platform design may ultimately prove just as noteworthy.

Meta calls for an industry-wide response

Meta has argued that changes to Facebook and Instagram alone will not solve the wider issue. Its chief legal officer, CJ Mahoney, said teenagers move between dozens of apps and called on TikTok, Snap and YouTube to implement the same framework immediately.

Mahoney also defended Meta’s previous work on child safety and argued that the agreement’s success depends on other social media platforms following its approach.

The settlement does not end the wider legal battle over social media and alleged addiction. Meta, YouTube, TikTok and Snap face thousands of similar US lawsuits from families, individuals, school districts and attorneys general.

Meta and YouTube lost the first of these cases to reach trial in February and were ordered to pay $6m to the young woman who brought the case. TikTok and Snap had settled before that trial. Two further lawsuits scheduled for trial during the summer were settled for undisclosed amounts.

Separately, Meta was ordered to pay nearly $1bn to New Mexico following a lawsuit brought by the state’s attorney general concerning child sexual exploitation on its platforms.

A significant moment in the social media debate

The settlement brings renewed attention to the relationship between platform design, compulsive social media use and the protection of younger users.

It also highlights an important distinction: safety tools can only achieve their intended purpose when they meaningfully affect how a platform is experienced. The evidence discussed during the trial included questions about whether young people were actually using existing safety features. The new settlement instead requires interventions including usage limits and restrictions at particular times.

Whether the changes will produce the intended effects remains to be seen. What is clear from the agreement is that the question of how social media platforms are designed for teenagers has moved beyond a debate about voluntary safeguards. In this case, enforceable changes to Facebook and Instagram form part of a settlement worth up to $18bn.

Comment by Allen Carr’s Easyway

At Allen Carr’s Easyway, we have been warning of the dangers of social media addiction for many years and believe the wider significance of this story lies in the increasing scrutiny of potentially addictive digital experiences and how they influence people’s behaviour.

The allegations against Meta were contested, and the settlement expressly includes Meta’s denial of wrongdoing so the allegations made during the case should not be taken as established facts.

At the same time, the safeguards agreed by Meta invite important questions about the role of platform design. Daily usage limits, reduced notifications and overnight restrictions all seek to change the circumstances in which teenagers interact with social media. For parents, young people and anyone concerned about their own relationship with social media, this case provides an opportunity to consider not simply how much time is spent online, but what keeps drawing someone back and why stopping can sometimes feel difficult.

Read more about Allen Carr’s Quit Tech Addiction

Free Videos & Information

Sign up for free videos to help you, free guidance and discounts.

Young Vapers Face Growing Health Concerns

A major review of evidence on vaping among children and young people has raised concerns about respiratory health, nicotine dependence and progression to cigarette smoking. As reported by The Guardian, the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) review found consistent links between vaping and coughing, wheezing, bronchitis symptoms and asthma exacerbations.

The review also identified associations extending beyond respiratory health, including oral and dental problems and negative mental health outcomes. While researchers stress that vaping is relatively new and its long-term effects on young people are not yet fully understood, doctors say the evidence available already presents a concerning picture.

Youth vaping and respiratory health

According to the review, vaping among children and young people is consistently associated with poor respiratory health. Reported problems include coughing and wheezing, bronchitis symptoms and exacerbations of asthma.

Professor Will Carroll, co-author of the review, argued that vaping should not be considered a harmless part of growing up. He said the available evidence demonstrated links with respiratory symptoms, nicotine dependence and subsequent cigarette smoking, while concerns about broader effects on young people’s health were continuing to develop.

The scale of youth vaping makes those findings particularly significant. Experimentation and regular vaping among young people have risen approximately tenfold during the past decade, with use frequently beginning during adolescence. An estimated one in five 11- to 17-year-olds in Britain has tried vaping.

Vaping and the risk of cigarette smoking

One of the review’s central findings concerns the relationship between youth vaping and subsequent cigarette smoking. The RCPCH review found evidence that vapes can act as a gateway to smoking cigarettes, alongside evidence of nicotine dependence.

That raises an important question: when a young person experiments with vaping, are they fully aware of the possibility that nicotine use may develop into dependence or lead towards cigarette smoking?

The findings are particularly relevant because vaping and smoking are not interchangeable issues. Andrew McCracken, director of external affairs at Asthma + Lung UK, said vapes could play an important role for existing smokers seeking to quit, while stressing that people who do not smoke should not vape, particularly children.

Hazel Cheeseman, chief executive of Action on Smoking and Health, similarly argued that measures intended to reduce the promotion of vapes to children should not make vapes difficult to access for adult smokers using them to quit.

Evidence goes beyond breathing problems

The scale of the RCPCH evidence review was substantial. Researchers considered 14,000 published articles and included 81 studies in their review. Alongside respiratory effects and subsequent smoking, the evidence identified associations between vaping and poor oral and dental health, including inflammation, ulcers and dry mouth.

The review also identified evidence linking vaping with negative mental health outcomes, including anxiety, depression and suicidal ideation. These findings describe associations identified by the research rather than establishing that vaping necessarily caused every reported outcome.

Emerging evidence also indicated potential effects on sleep, eye health, and allergies. Researchers also identified adverse outcomes associated with babies and infants exposed to nicotine during pregnancy.

These findings underline an important limitation of the evidence base. As RCPCH vice-president for policy Dr Mike McKean explained, vaping is a relatively new product, meaning researchers do not yet know its full long-term impact on children and young people. Continued research and monitoring are therefore considered essential.

Calls for stronger protection for young people

Professor Carroll called for rapid implementation of measures announced under the Tobacco and Vapes Act. According to the article, these include plain packaging, moving vaping products out of sight in shops and restricting flavour names inspired by sweets, desserts and alcohol in favour of simpler descriptions such as “apple”. He also called for the number of available flavours to be limited.

McKean described the legislation as an important step towards protecting children from nicotine addiction but argued that regulation cannot be treated as a single, final intervention. He said authorities would need to keep pace with a rapidly changing market and continue responding to nicotine products designed and marketed to appeal to children.

McCracken also called for more research and a faster policy response, criticising the marketing of products designed to look and taste like sweets. Cheeseman highlighted strong controls over marketing and promotion as important to reducing youth vaping while preserving access for adult smokers seeking to quit.

The Department of Health and Social Care said children should never vape. It highlighted the ban on single-use vapes, legislation to prohibit advertising and sponsorship from the following year, and consultation on packaging designed to appeal to children.

Comment by Allen Carr’s Easyway

Unfortunately and sadly, the findings reported here are exactly what Allen Carr has been saying for the last 15 years.

It reinforces the importance of taking nicotine dependence seriously, particularly when exposure begins during adolescence.

The review is also a reminder that discussions about vaping cannot focus just on its potential role for existing smokers seeking to quit, but also on children and people who do not smoke and that they should not vape.

At Allen Carr’s Easyway, we believe it is vital to look beyond the product itself and understand nicotine dependence. With an estimated one in five British 11- to 17-year-olds having tried vaping and evidence linking youth vaping with subsequent cigarette smoking, young people need clear information that allows them to understand what nicotine use may involve.

The unanswered questions matter too. Researchers acknowledge that the long-term consequences of vaping among children and adults remain uncertain. That uncertainty is not a reason to ignore the evidence already emerging around respiratory symptoms, dependence and later smoking; it strengthens the case for continued research, informed discussion and appropriate protection for young people.

Leaders are often praised for their resilience. Staying calm under pressure, making difficult decisions and pushing through setbacks are qualities that help people build successful careers.

But when it comes to anxiety, those same strengths can sometimes work against us.

In a recent article for SmartBrief, Persia Hayley explores why many leaders unknowingly fuel anxiety by approaching it like any other workplace challenge. Rather than easing anxious thoughts, trying to suppress them, analyse them or “power through” them often gives them even more attention.

One of the article’s key messages is that anxiety isn’t a problem to solve through willpower. While determination is invaluable when leading teams or navigating business challenges, anxiety responds differently. The more we fight anxious thoughts, the more significant they can begin to feel.

Instead, Persia suggests recognising anxious thoughts for what they are, separating them from the task in front of you, and returning your focus to the next useful action. That shift can help break the cycle of overthinking and create a healthier relationship with anxiety.

If you’re a leader who finds yourself replaying conversations, second-guessing decisions or feeling the need to control every outcome, this article offers an insightful perspective on why that happens and what you can do instead.

Read the full article here.

Many of the ideas discussed are explored further in Allen Carr’s The Easy Way to Overcome Anxiety, which explains why fighting anxiety often keeps us trapped, and why freedom comes not from trying harder, but from stepping out of the struggle.

In a recent Financial Times feature, HTSI editor Alex Bilmes wrote about 35 years of nicotine addiction – around 250,000 cigarettes, then a switch to vaping he assumed was progress. It wasn’t. He’d simply moved from one dependency to another, vaping almost constantly throughout the day. Patches, gum, hypnotherapy, apps: he’d tried it all, and nothing had worked.

Then he spent a day with us at our Easyway headquarters in Raynes Park. He hasn’t touched nicotine since.

Curious about why the method had succeeded where so many others had failed, Bilmes later spoke with Allen Carr’s Easyway CEO, Paul Baker. He stated that he wanted to know what kind of “voodoo” was being practised in Raynes Park. Paul’s answer was simple: there is no magic and no trickery. The method works by challenging the false beliefs people hold about nicotine and addiction. Once someone truly understands that cigarettes or vapes aren’t giving them anything of value, “there’s no willpower required.”

Paul also discussed why vaping can be even harder to stop than smoking. Because it is widely perceived as the safer option, many people become comfortable continuing the addiction rather than ending it. As Paul explains in the article, switching from smoking to vaping is like jumping from a 10-storey building instead of a 20-storey one. It may be less harmful, but it isn’t safe.

The goal was never to trade one dependency for another, it’s to go straight from smoking or vaping to being free.

Read the full article here

Find out more about Allen Carr’s Easyway to Stop Smoking here.

Persia Hayley is the co-author of The Easyway to Overcome Anxiety and has written an article for Dynamic Magazine. Read the full article below:

For many women in business, control can feel like competence. When you know you may be judged for being too assertive or not assertive enough, too emotional or too cold, it is easy to believe the answer is to manage every detail perfectly. And when women are still so often expected to prove themselves, it can feel as if you must be more prepared than everyone else to be taken seriously.

So you rewrite an email five times before pressing send or prepare for every possible objection before a meeting. On the surface, this can look responsible, professional, even impressive. But often it is anxiety disguised as diligence. It tells you that if you can just find the perfect words, anticipate every reaction, and avoid every possible mistake, you can escape your racing thoughts, the tight chest and the knot in your stomach.

This is the myth of control: the belief that certainty is possible if only you work hard enough to secure it. This often manifests as the Illusion of Preparedness: the idea that if you can mentally rehearse every outcome now, you will be protected later. This is not to suggest you walk into a pitch, presentation or negotiation unprepared. Of course, doing the work matters. But there is a point at which preparation tips over into anxiety. You are no longer sharpening your argument; you are trying to make yourself immune to criticism, embarrassment or failure.

The problem is that no amount of rehearsal can eliminate uncertainty. You can anticipate ten objections and still be asked an eleventh. You can write the “perfect” email and still find that the recipient responds negatively. Worse, over-preparation can drain the very energy, flexibility and presence of mind you need to perform well when the moment actually arrives.

Letting go of the myth of control does not mean lowering your standards. It means writing the email, preparing for the meeting, making the decision, and accepting that the outcome is not entirely up to you.

The strongest position in business is not being certain of the outcome. It is being willing to act without perfect certainty and trusting that, whatever happens, you can handle it.

This is one of the ideas I explore in my new book, Allen Carr: The Easy Way to Overcome Anxiety, which examines how anxiety traps us in false solutions, and how we can break free.