Study Reveals Cancer Culprits In Tobacco Smoke

[Calaban]

"They said people with high concentrations in their urine of a nicotine byproduct called NNAL had double the risk of developing lung cancer compared to smokers with lower NNAL concentrations in their urine.

And smokers who had high urine levels of both NNAL and another nicotine byproduct called cotinine had more than eight times the risk of lung cancer compared to smokers with the lowest concentrations of these two compounds."


Study reveals cancer culprits in tobacco smoke | Health | Reuters


Maybe nicotine is not as benign as we had previously thought?


Hmm.....

[nitewriter]

Very interesting find! Makes me want to reduce to 0-nic even more.

[smoking gnu]

Stopping smoking with or without nrt is the best way of a smoker reducing his or her chances of developing lung cancer. that’s good enough for me and my doctor.

So my advice for what its worth is don’t worry be happy to quit smoking that really does kill and that’s a fact.
Somethings going to kill us its just nice to be able to breath until then.

[walkstheplanes]

So, did the smokers with higher NNAL levels smoke a considerable amount more than those with low NNAL levels? The article didn't make it clear. Correlation, causation, etc.

[Lithium1330]

The article is not very specific, but, if the people in the two groups analized smoke a significant different amount of cigarettes per day, then that could explain why one group has a higher level of those byproducts.

Maybe if one person smokes more could get a higher level of those byproducts and also (because the person is smoking more) a higher risk of cancer, maybe the levels of those byproducts are just an indicator and not the culprits per se.

[MPodjski]

All those years I smoked I was told whether I smoked ultra lights or full strength I could still get lung cancer. Now this! Does this mean I should switch to ultra lights? Do they have less chance of getting cancer cause there's less nicotene in the cigarette? I'm wondering now if I should switch to a lower strength nicotene cartridge for the e-cigs.

Is there any newer updated information concerning this? Are the urine tests standard enough that my doctor would know about them and how to read the results?

[Nestran]

This article does not tell me that NNAL and Cotinine, therefore Nicotine CAUSE cancer. What I am seeing is that possibly an individuals lack of ability to metabolize these products may be directly related to cancer. There could be other conditions that cause you to not metobolize them AND causes cancer.

This is not conclusive that these two products are what cause it.

Nestran

[ladyraj]

The article states that 1 in 10 smokers will ever get lung cancer. Out of 50,000 potential subjects they identified "246 smokers who later developed lung cancer and 245 smokers who did not during the 10-year period following their initial interview and exam." This means that .5 in a hundred actually contracted lung cancer in a 10 year period.

When using these figures the harm reduction of vaping, rather than smoking tobacco, would by definition be a smaller ratio. The biggest confounder for lung cancer risks is the fact that air pollution can not be seperated from other variables. Don't let the numbers game scare you!

[helki12]

I always like to smoke a full king size cigarette but in next few seconds I lits up a new cigarette and I throw it quickly also.

[gep]

And IF NNAL and cotinine ARE byproducts of nicotine, why is big Pharma allowed to sell NRT's? Wouldn't the people using those be just as likely to develop lung cancer?

I know the study states "smoker's" specifically and doesn't mention non-smokers who consume nicotine but the question is still relevent to me because perhaps these byproducts are the result of the combustion of the nicotine along with the other chemicals and not with the combustion of the nicotine alone.

They don't even address the non-combustion consumption of nicotine so.....

Too many variables. Junk science.