Nicotine and Cancer Research On The News

[Somoney]

I usually don't go though main stream media as they are woefully bias. I get most of my health related information from webmd.com and then google it also, as I can read both sides of an argument and make an informed decision one way or the other.

WEBMD.COM has a similar article written back in 2005 Titled: Nicotine and Cancer: Are You Among Misinformed?
--Begin SNip--
The mistaken belief that nicotine causes cancer has led to the popularity of so-called "light" cigarettes, which are just as likely to cause cancer as any other tobacco product
--End SNip--

In another study article published by uleth.ca : Nicotine Holds Promise for Stronger Stroke Recovery
--Begin SNip--
July 26, 2005
Nicotine, the addictive stimulant absorbed with cigarette smoke, is helping laboratory animals recover more quickly from stroke and reach higher levels of rehabilitation, one of Canada's leading neuropsychologists has found.
--End SNip--

Thanks for the post! While the news is not new per say, we should always point out new articles whenever the effects of nicotine and health are brought into the limelight. They are great discussion arround the table while your smoking your e-Cig and the others are sucking down tobacco smoke.


I found this Article posted yesterday from boston.com THE MOST DISTURBING:
Nicotine found to spur breast cancer growth
By Elizabeth Lopatto
Bloomberg / October 16, 2008


That article just made me angry and deserves no snips because it has no facts.
You'll need to find that witch hunt article on your own as it clearly states tobacco smoke, yet makes the football field size leap mid article to assume its nicotine causing the brest cancer.

[Grumpysanta]

Seems to me that the real question is 'can e-cigarettes gain acceptance'.


We can all find articles both positive and negative with regard to nicotine, in truth we will find what we want to find. In the end we will still want to inhale nicotine by whatever means are available.


Like TropicalBob, I don't think that e-cigarettes should currently be promoted as an NRT product, there is no medical proof that e-cigarettes would work as NRT. There has not been sufficient studies to prove that e-cigarettes are safer medically than tobacco.


I chose the e-cigarette because there is significantly less chance of causing a fire when in use. I have found the e-cigarette to be socially accepted because there is no smell and the people around me believe that I'm trying to do something that is beneficial them.


OK slightly off subject, but as I said we will only see what we want to see, those who are against nicotine will find articles against nicotine and those who approve of nicotine will find articles exclaiming the benefit of nicotine.

[hesham8]

As a social smoker - (One to two cigs a month, perhaps the occasional cigar during the football game) I don't see any risk whatsoever in my smoking eCigs, only in that I don't do it much. We see what we want to, until there is scientific evidence to challenge it.

[e-pipeman]

We all hope that e-cigs prove to be safe. In the absence of evidence one way of the other the last thing i want to see is a pre-emptive ban, however. That would smack of the worst kind of nannying. I hold the view that, if the state wants to modify my behaviour, it should have good reason for doing so backed up by hard evidence. In short government should have to prove that e-cigs are harmful before they can restrict their use.

[bribri]

The truth is though, their is a small percent chance vaping could be worse for you then smoking. We all have upped our nicotine dosages because we aren't getting sick from all the junk in cigarettes. If nicotine itself is very bad for you, then we are in a world of hurt.