Lung Cancer and Smoking (Nicotine) Cessation

[Vocalek]

Stumbled across this shocking statistic:

According to a national survey in 2006, over 60% of lung cancer patients had already quit smoking, 20.9% were current smokers and 17.9% had never smoked.

http://www.lungcanceralliance.org/pr...LC2010_000.pdf

I have to wonder whether the absence of nicotine among the former smokers did a number on the immune system, kicking off the cancer proliferation.

Since Swedish snus users don't have any higher incidence of lung cancer, maybe there's something to my theory.
Lung cancer mortality: comparing Sweden with other... [Scand J Public Health. 2009] - PubMed result

Maybe it is healthier to switch to vaporized nicotine than it is to simply quit all nicotine use.

[sherid]

Stumbled across this shocking statistic:


http://www.lungcanceralliance.org/pr...LC2010_000.pdf

I have to wonder whether the absence of nicotine among the former smokers did a number on the immune system, kicking off the cancer proliferation.

Since Swedish snus users don't have any higher incidence of lung cancer, maybe there's something to my theory.
Lung cancer mortality: comparing Sweden with other... [Scand J Public Health. 2009] - PubMed result

Maybe it is healthier to switch to vaporized nicotine than it is to simply quit all nicotine use.

I have always wondered about this. Of the people I have known who had lung cancer, all of them had recently stopped smoking.

[Ladycats]

My dad died of lung cancer 13 years _after_ he had quit smoking .........

[nojoyet]

The exact no. of years escapes me at the moment but I remember saying to Mom's oncologist that she had quit smoking 14 or 16 years before he delivered the diagnosis of lung cancer. His reply was "yes". I took that to mean no surprise, not uncommon.

Additionally, after she quit smoking she never lost the desire for a cigarette and suffered from mild but stubborn depression and anxiety.

Knowing what I know now, the "experts" did her a huge disservice. She needed her nicotine in ways they and we did not understand.

[rothenbj]

Stumbled across this shocking statistic:


http://www.lungcanceralliance.org/pr...LC2010_000.pdf

I have to wonder whether the absence of nicotine among the former smokers did a number on the immune system............

Those figures were picked off the following Table.

Cigarette Smoking Among Adults --- United States, 2006

That was the last time they provided that information in that form, probably didn't want smokers to see it and keep smoking, since there are only two alternatives, quit or die. However, we now know the real slogan is die or die for smokers.

I finally came up with the percent of smokers at 21%, ex-smokers at 21% and never smokers at 58% based on some national survey that I didn't bother saving since they really don't know. I wonder how many of those 58% hit that magic 100 cigarette limit and halfheimers as well as not the cool thing to do deny, deny deny. That's why the 17.9% develop lung cancer. There is no other cause is there?

Anyway from a more logical look, I would guess that a lot of smokers started getting the tell tale signs of a problem and got scared and quit smoking. Thus by the time they got to the doctor and had it diagnosed, they hit the ex classification.

The problem with the category is that it is made up of some percentage of true pack year smokers plus anyone that ever had five packs of cigarettes. If I take my core five friend group from high school, only two were never smokers by the end of college (not sure about that, but from what I know). The one that never smoked (he did smoke an occasional cigar & his father was called "smokey") died at 23 in a mid-air Navy crash. The second one is still alive. One died in his late 30's, early 40's but I don't know the causes. He smoked a lot before I lost track of him, but he probably would have also been considered morbidly obese and had diabetes problems in high school. The second smoker, probably quit somewhere close to 30 and was never a heavy smoker, basically social type and he died at 59 of a non-smoking disease. That leaves me, the worst of the bunch at 43 years and 50 smokes a day at the end.

Now I have to worry about whether it's the smoking, the nicotine or the other tobacco alkaloids that give you one third the chance of dying from lung cancer if you just keep on smoking. ...

Fortunately, whatever time I have left, I'll breath better getting there.

[nojoyet]

Quote: "Anyway from a more logical look, I would guess that a lot of smokers started getting the tell tale signs of a problem and got scared and quit smoking. Thus by the time they got to the doctor and had it diagnosed, they hit the ex classification."

Agreed, it apparently takes about 20 years for the cancer to develop; symptomatic or not, at the time of quitting, if it's there, it's there.

Quote: "Fortunately, whatever time I have left, I'll breath better getting there."

Very true and my Mom would support you in that.

Quote "Now I have to worry about whether it's the smoking, the nicotine or the other tobacco alkaloids that give you one third the chance of dying from lung cancer if you just keep on smoking. ..."

Now for a little black humour - ... indeed, don't bother to worry, the leading cause of death everywhere is...wait for it...birth!

[CJsKee]

Here is a link that Rose posted in Michael Siegel's blog regarding smoking and lung cancer...certainly something to think about!

Smoking Helps Protect Against Lung Cancer And here are some of the mice who helped to prove it


This is a link to the research...this site requires registration, but I think I've seen it elsewhere. Maybe Elaine will remember:

Combined action of cigarette tar and beta radiation on mice...
Wiley InterScience :: Session Cookies


And here is a good summary of the research:

Scientific Facts | Col Joe

[jjrose]

OMG! My dad was diagnosed with lung cancer about 15 years after he quit smoking.

[CJsKee]

That's a hell of a testimony, Bob!

I've been reading alot recently about niacin (aka vitamin B3 aka nicotinic acid). Smoking provided us nicotinic acid and I'm unclear whether we get it form the nicotine that we vape. I think not because of the lack of combustion, so I've started taking supplements. Here is an article from the New York Times about niacin (and BP!)

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/23/he...sume.html?_r=2

Here's are comments made by Rose on Siegel's blog:

""It is niacin, the ordinary B vitamin.

“Here you have a drug that was about as effective as the early statins, and it just never caught on,” said Dr. B. Greg Brown, professor of medicine at the University of Washington in Seattle. “It’s a mystery to me.
But if you’re a drug company, I guess you can’t make money on a vitamin.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/23/he...sume.html?_r=1


And that appears to be the problem, its too cheap and it can't be patented, and that's where the money is.

If the public had been told that a cigarette was just a way to make a miniscule amount of fresh vitamin B3 that you could buy for pennies in a large jar, the industry would have collapsed.

How could governments justify raking in massive taxes on a few bits of dried leaf that contained a vitamin but only when you burn it?


It was in everybodys interests to keep quiet."

[Kate51]

I've also been taking B3 100mg daily for about a year, the first 2 months @ 200mg daily....the doses for lowering triglycerides varies by study, but all agree it is effective.
Some studies were specifying doses from 100-200mg for detox properties (especially in the lungs!), up to 2000mg per day for serious triglyceride lowering and raising HDL, but higher ones only advisable under a dr's supervision due to affects on the liver. But my triglyceride level has fallen from 200 to 150, or slightly elevated to normal. It is the 'flashing' or 'flushing' type, which also does wonders in restoring healthy circulation in capillaries in the face and neck ~ the 'mask' of broken and sluggish capillaries is easily seen as dark circles and purplish-red areas; the same dynamics as a bruise! Mine has been significantly reduced.
Flushing is rather uncomfortable, causing mild to severe redness, itching, and burning sensation, lasting from a few minutes to an hour; it's advised not to scratch of rub the skin to avoid further damaging skin surface! The sensation is caused by expansion and contraction of these vessels, a GOOD thing!

http://healthfieldmedicare.suite101....and_ldl_lipids

http://inhumanexperiment.blogspot.co...-ldl-vldl.html

Latter one also has additional links to view.