
QuitGenius (YC W18) raises $2M to help people quit smoking - nafizh
https://techcrunch.com/2018/05/22/quit-genius-helping-smokers-quit-picks-up-an-extra-1-1-million-in-seed/
======
griffinmb
> Since launch Quit Genius has grown to 300,000 registered users, with over
> 20,000 people officially smoke-free in the app (which Quit Genius defines as
> having not smoked for over 28 days).

I'd be interested to know how "smoke-free" time is established. Are users
self-reporting that they have or haven't smoked with the app? And 28-days of
not smoking is great, but it feels dishonest to call that "smoke-free".

> Healthy employees save the company money and are more productive, and Quit
> Genius thinks it can not only help employees get healthier but give
> employers a way to track that progress.

Dystopian.

~~~
jbob2000
> Smoking costs 45,400 lives, $16.2B in a year, study finds [1]

It is the largest single expense to employers and to the [Canadian] healthcare
system. It is not dystopian to want to track smokers on their journey away
from smoking - it's the only way we know if we're getting better at helping
them quit.

28 days is a good measure of smoke free. By that time, you are through the
nicotine withdrawal of about 72 hours, which I think is the biggest cause of
relapse. After that, you need to resist the social and habitual pressures, and
that is wholly up to the individual. Some people can go 20 years resisting
these pressures, others collapse in a few days. So 3 weeks is a fair balance,
I think.

[1] [http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/smoking-economic-
cost-1.4357...](http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/smoking-economic-
cost-1.4357096)

~~~
hiram112
> It is the largest single expense to employers and to the [Canadian]
> healthcare system.

I've read numerous times that smokers are actually a net gain for a healthcare
system, assuming the same system pays for the whole life of the patient.

The majority of medical costs are incurred by a small minority of patients,
usually at the very end of their lives. Smokers die earlier and faster,
usually without the slow and expensive deterioration many healthier patients
will go through.

~~~
dragonwriter
Whether actually true or not, tobacco companies have definitely used this
argument in lobbying against anti-smoking public health efforts, particularly
in Eastern Europe.

Of course _at best_ this argument assumes that you are looking at cost for a
comparable standard of care, not cost for comparable health outcomes.

~~~
mistermann
> Of course at best this argument

To me, this deflects from the main question of whether it is true or not. Or
in other words, whether those quoting the "costs" of smoking (as a
justification for further anti-smoking measures) are using dishonest
propaganda. Also known as lying.

~~~
dragonwriter
> To me, this deflects from the main question of whether it is true or not.

It points out that the question the claim addresses is different then that
addressed by the opposing claim (and different than the policy concern that is
usually beoing addressed.)

Which means its truth is orthogonal, rather than opposed, to the truth of the
other claim.

------
CPLX
These days it just seems crazy to trust some random SV company that's likely
to be acquired by a huge company with questionable privacy ethics in a couple
years with sensitive data that traditionally has been used to price
discriminate in health insurance.

I went to their website looking for some acknowledgement that they take this
problem seriously and didn't see it. Even worse, the article says that they
envision a future collaborating with employers to track employee programs.
There's just no way I would be able to feel comfortable sharing this kind of
information with a company that has this business model.

~~~
adanto6840
The question is found on all health insurance applications as far as I'm aware
-- "Have you used tobacco in the past 6 months".

I'm under the impression that the question is not optional and that it's
perfectly legal for insurers to price discriminate based on the answer to it
(understandably and justifiably so IMO). I'm not sure, but I'd also assume
that being dishonest when answering the question would technically put you at
risk of having claims denied on that basis -- or, at the very least, having
your rates raised retroactively since it presumably would indicate that you
belong in a higher risk (and premium) pool...

Is my layman's understanding wrong?

~~~
wolco
The fact that these companies can discriminate based protected human
attributes like age or gender doesn't make sense in this day and age.

~~~
ciupicri
The fact that you assume that age and gender don't make a difference in this
age of big data, doesn't make sense.

~~~
wolco
So does race do we include that? So do other factors like politics. Should we
say if you are black you should pay more? A trump fan gets to pay less until
he leaves office.

We create groups based on anything to assign costs to other people.

Everyone should be paying the same general rate with personal factors like
accident history, or tickets.

------
3pt14159
I wish them, and everyone they're trying to help, all the best.

I quit years ago and it was one of the best things I've done. There were only
three mantras in my head when I quit "get through the first 48 hours" then
"get through two weeks" then "don't fuck it up".

It's hard to quit smoking, but only in the short term. It's much harder to
live as a smoker over a lifespan. Remember that.

I have more advice and micro tactics, but I feel like listing them all would
only pollute the message above.

Just get through the first 48 hours.

You can do it.

------
alexbeloi
This seems to me like this should be a non-profit. This company's revenue
growth is misaligned with their customer's goals. Total success would be for
the company to have 100% churn from successful rehab, the better they are at
what they do the higher their churn rate should be. I guess this is a common
issue in the health industry, an area that I haven't the slightest clue about.

~~~
mark_edward
Mobile, can't link now, but the Obamacare expansion required covering rehab
centers, and the industry exploded, and tons of bad actors are doing literally
this. There are even cases of centers next to drug dens with staff acting as
suppliers/runners

I apologise for no link, but quick googling will find the stories.

------
robbrown451
Simpler solution that actually works: buy one of these miracle devices (timer
box) and just taper off your smoking. Make decisions that are in your best
long term interest when you aren't in a weak "I must have a smoke now" mode.

I admit I use it for a different kind of smoke (legal in California, yay), and
for that, no need to completely quit, just keep usage reasonable without
having to constantly fight with temptation.

I don't own stock in the company, but I heartily recommend it.
[https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00JGFQRN4/ref=oh_aui_deta...](https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00JGFQRN4/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1)

~~~
Jonovono
FWIW this is not the right way to think about quiting smoking. It might work
for some people, although i'd bet only temporarily unless the root problem
somehow goes away.

This solution still has people believe they want to smoke and that it's
something they enjoy (it will de-stress them, etc). These core beliefs have to
be addressed IMO. Only until the user does NOT want to smoke and sees smoking
as not only not being a benefit to them but also a harm to them, have they
successfully quit smoking.

Not sure how this app works, though.

~~~
robbrown451
Well I've quit smoking multiple times, the first time in 1990 and then after a
few relapses that each lasted a few months, in the time since.

I still want to smoke. I see no reason that will ever go away. It is enjoyable
and relaxing -- during the time I am smoking and soon afterward. But it makes
me unhealthy and generally feel like crap overall, so I choose not to anymore.

But I do know that during my relapses, this box would have fixed the problem
quick. I just have short term weakness, and if a whole pack is sitting there,
I will smoke it pretty quickly. If I could easily taper it off (and this
device allows that) it would have been easy. (I've actually done the
equivalent, but it required someone to hold onto my cigarettes and dole them
out...the box automates that)

------
anilshanbhag
This reminds me of Weight Watchers ($WTW). The idea is crazy - people will pay
for advice and some instructions I guess. $WTW is a $5B company now.

~~~
dyim
Advice, instructions, and a social group centered around the advice &
instructions! Bill Ackman lost a lot of money underestimating the value of the
latter.

------
choward
Does it bother anyone else that this is a phone app only? Why can't it be a
normal web app? One of the bad habits people have is being glued to their
phones. And the permissions it requires seem pretty skeptical as well.

------
joering2
Frontage and already harvesting for my phone number? Good idea. With email I
can at least mark you as spam or report you, much harder to unsubscribe or
report my cellnumber abuser.

Truly a "Genius" idea.

------
angryasian
I don't know how necessary this is with electronic cigs now. I know many
people that have switched to e-cig, slowly reduced nicotine and have quit
altogether.

------
Bucephalus355
Stopping smoking is not all it’s cracked up to me.

The show Silicon Valley hinted at this when Bachman tries to pitch an app to
crowdsource geolocating smokers.

First, yes smoking is bad, but all the health benefits of stopping have been
completely absorbed by the unhealthy food that is sold / made available.

In fact, the second largest smoking company, RJ Reynolds, used to be called
RJR Nabisco. A ton of snack food executives got there start from the world of
smoking.

Second, there is a community level to this as well. It used to really bother
me how many people at work smoked. I would walk past the designated smoking
area and see 30 of them hanging out. Then I realized that there is something
about smoking that brings people together (one of which is being forced to
gather in a designated area), and perhaps in this era of individualism,
loneliness, and anonymity that is a greater good.

For more on RJR Nabisco, I suggest this great book from the 80’s:

Barbarians at the Gate: The Fall of RJR Nabisco
[https://www.amazon.com/dp/0061655554](https://www.amazon.com/dp/0061655554)

~~~
jabgrabdthrow
I bet in another context you’d happily point out which logical fallacies you
just used for points 1 and 2.

I used to think like you - while I was still addicted.

~~~
wolco
In fairness these safe snack foods being marketed as powerbars or meal
replacement will be outlawed or restricted in the future for the same reason
smoking is now.

