Nicotine vs. Caffeine

Status
Not open for further replies.

VelvetVisions

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 15, 2009
282
0
Waukesha, WI
Why doesn't the FDA drop their plight against nicotine and take up caffeine? While I am a caffeine drinker (and don't want to give it up), there are many similarities between the two. Caffeine is also considered a drug and marketed to children. In fact, most schools have soda vending machines and no one seems to have issues with that drug.

I'm just so tired of the government telling me what is best for me. I would sign a global waiver stating I won't sue anybody if that is what it takes. Just leave me alone and let me make adult decisions. :p

With that said, I found this article rather interesting.

Caffeine In Colas: "The Real Thing" Isn't The Taste
 

chas73

Full Member
Mar 26, 2009
10
0
TamaraSJ, Very good point your making... All the Anti groups are complaining that e-cigarettes are geared toward kids with the flavors but they think nothing of giving their children gallons of soda, really makes no sense when both nicotine and caffiene are so simalar to each other in the way they affect the body. Caffiene down the road will cause as many if not more health problems as our children get older. This is one of the points I put into my letters I sent to my Senators and congressmen, but as of yet still "NO REPLY"
 

GreySaber

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
May 6, 2009
249
2
Savannah, Ga
TamaraSJ, Very good point your making... All the Anti groups are complaining that e-cigarettes are geared toward kids with the flavors but they think nothing of giving their children gallons of soda, really makes no sense when both nicotine and caffiene are so simalar to each other in the way they affect the body. Caffiene down the road will cause as many if not more health problems as our children get older. This is one of the points I put into my letters I sent to my Senators and congressmen, but as of yet still "NO REPLY"


Or worse, they give them nothing but rabbit food.
 

MlrGrl

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 27, 2009
1,326
54
Milwaukee, WI
I can remember about 20 years ago, decided I'd give up diet pepsi for lent.

By 1pm, I was a shaking, sickly mess. I can remember laying down in a bag cart, wondering how I was going to work the next flight that was due in 30 min. Someone mentioned I was probably going through a caffeine withdrawl, and to have something with caffeine to easy my body into not having it.

I took a few swiggs of a full flavored Pepsi and I was fine for the rest of the day. Even now, looking back, it still freaks me out that my body could have been so addicted to it and I really didn't even know it!

Even the times that I have quite analogs in the past, I never went through any kind of physical withdrawl like that before. Got grumpy (being polite! LOL), but never shaking and nausea like that!

You do bring up a good point that no one really seems to mind that soda's are available to children, yet they freak at the thought of an adult having some nicotine.....
 

Nuck

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Feb 14, 2009
2,265
10
Ontario, Canada
Every few years I break the caffeine addiction. It's actually quite easy as long as you don't try to do it cold turkey. The headaches I get when I tried it that way were insanely strong and uncontrollable with medication. It's much easier to just have a small glass of coke or a tea when you get moderate symptoms. It takes about 3-4 days to break the addiction and is pretty much symptom free if you wean yourself.

I won't get into the addiction from smoking since I'm pretty sure most people here have first hand knowledge of how difficult that fight can be.
 

VelvetVisions

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 15, 2009
282
0
Waukesha, WI
Honestly, I don't think most have tried to cut caffeine on purpose. I don't drink a lot of caffeine, usually one cup of coffee and one soda a day, but I know then when I don't have them I do get a headache. I think most don't even think about the lack of caffeine when they have a headache.

I can remember some years ago when I went to my yearly OB\GYN exam, by doctor mention that I had a lot of fibrous (sp?) in my breasts and mentioned that caffeine has a tendancy to do that. At that time I was drinking a lot more caffeine than normal (lots of stress that year). I cut back on my caffeine intake and I haven't had the problem since.

My husband went through a period where he was experiencing a lot of nausea (we ruled out pregnancy, LOL), so he decided on a whim to stop caffeine and blam, no more issues.

I think there are a lot of potential issues with caffeine that never get associated. Don't get me wrong, I like my caffeine products and I still drink it, but I just don't understand why it is so much more widely accepted, especially with kids. There is a heck of a lot more ADHD than ever in the past.

I just truly wish the government would stop trying to run my life. What ever happened to living in a free country. If we decide to take things that will kill us, it should be our choice and the government should just look at it as a kind of population control. :)

Again, make me sign a waiver stating I won't sue or claim any wrong doing on the part of others, it's not really in my nature to do so anyway, then let me make my own choices.

Stepping down from the soap box now... thanks for letting me rant.
 

nqhqhz

Full Member
Verified Member
Jan 1, 2009
66
0
Ireland
I agree with most of what you have said, but you must account for the facts that:

1. Caffeine is far less addictive than nicotine
2. Caffeine is often consumed in a plant-based drink that many generations of use show does not cause significant harm.
3. Caffeine is relatively non toxic - LD50 of caffeine is 10 grams, that of nicotine is 40-100 milligrams.
4. Caffeine is extremely useful - the drinks containing it form social rituals, and it aids productivity.

Governments are very selective about what drugs they attack. The reasons are never compelling for us believers in responsibility, and many are rightly suspicious that it comes down to money and favours. However, the above explanations are the one you will encounter.

They make sense to me, but do not account for policy. Coca leaf, from which by a very convoluted process the chemical ....... is also derived, makes a mildly stimulating drink that is very good for you. Unfortunately. it is widely banned for completely different reasons, one of which is making coca growing uneconomical.

I won't even go into alcohol or the bizarre treatment of other plants and forms of life.

I will go on drinking coffee and ingesting nicotine for the time being. Both of them are somewhat unhealthy, but my justification is that they form part of my policy for life. I believe people on these forums are very overhyped about how big our hobby is and some of the rhetoric in other threads borders on conspiracy theory. It is a sad fact that we can't expect leaders to base their policies around the freedom to take sensible risks. Government is a blunt instrument.
 
Last edited:

robbiehatfield

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
May 10, 2009
129
1
I may be one you're thinking about when you say 'conspiracy theory', but when it comes down to it, there certainly is an element amongst us that feels it's okay to impose their will upon the rest of us. I actually went to the A.S.H. website and was flabergasted to listen to them say that vaping is spreading unwanted nicotine to others. Good Lord already! It is so benign when compared to cigarette smoke that it's not even worth mentioning. These people have public opinion on their side as there's more ignorance than knowledge floating around about e-cigs.

Robbie
 

VelvetVisions

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 15, 2009
282
0
Waukesha, WI
NQ, the problem with everything you stated is that very little has been tested as far as nicotine without the aspects of a cigarette, since there was very little need, since that has been the means of ingestion for so long. Nicotine is not what causes the primary issue with cigarette smoking.

Nicotine has also been shown to have some health benefits (do a search on the benefits of nicotine, there are too many sites to list here) The addiction itself has limits. Most people do not have to increase their intake of nicotine to stay content, they find a level that satisfies and typically stay there.

I do agree that the LD of nicotine is much lower than caffeine; although, I have not heard of many cases where people have reached that level.

All I am saying is that nicotine in itself gets a very bad rap, when in reality I don't feel it is much different than caffeine (with the excpetion of the LD, but less is needed to get the benefits or satisfy the addiction). I feel I have the right to ingest nicotine for that very reason. I do drink caffeine, maybe not as much as some, but I don't want to see it go away, and I feel nicotine should be treated the same way.
 

tescela

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 28, 2009
536
5
Before the people in this thread shoot themselves in both feet:

This type of argument was used by activists seeking the full legalization of marijuana. They argued loud and long that the government was being hypocritical by keeping marijuana illegal while allowing mainstream tobacco use.

The result wasn't quite what they expected. They wanted marijuana legalized, but what they managed to do instead was just provide support to the puritan anti-smokers.

In short, this type of discussion will not improve the public standing of nicotine...it will only provide support to puritans and a government always looking for something new on which to slap "sin taxes."

The trend is ALWAYS AND EVERYWHERE *TOWARDS* fascism unless you actively, directly reject fascism as an acceptable policy.
 
Last edited:

Nuck

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Feb 14, 2009
2,265
10
Ontario, Canada
Before the people in this thread shoot themselves in both feet:

This type of argument was used by activists seeking the full legalization of marijuana. They argued loud and long that the government was being hypocritical by keeping marijuana illegal while allowing mainstream tobacco use.

The result wasn't quite what they expected. They wanted marijuana legalized, but what they managed to do instead was just provide support to the puritan anti-smokers.

In short, this type of discussion will not improve the public standing of nicotine...it will only provide support to puritans and a government always looking for something new on which to slap "sin taxes."

The trend is ALWAYS AND EVERYWHERE *TOWARDS* fascism unless you actively, directly reject fascism as an acceptable policy.

Continue this discussion (and waste your time and energy) at your own peril.

Learn from history or doom yourself to repeat it.

I understand the principle but a bit melodramatic :)
 

VelvetVisions

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 15, 2009
282
0
Waukesha, WI
Tescela, it's not like I'm making this argument to the government and it's not like people get high on nicotine or caffeine the way they do from maryjane. Caffeine also has harmful effects, yet is sold to children all the time. I get really tired of all the talk about e-cigs being marketed towards children, yet they drink caffeine by the truckload (among the many other things kids manage to find and do).

I thought this forum was a place to discuss our frustrations, and that is all I'm doing, bringing to light a frustration. I apologize if I offended. I'm just looking for the freedom to make my own decisions, without the government's input and I'm tired of seeing how they seem to pick and choose what is good and bad without even looking at the reseasrch that has been done. It is all about the money, or e-cigs would be a non-issue.
 

tescela

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 28, 2009
536
5
I apologize if I came off a bit rough, Tamara. You haven't done anything to offend me.

You are absolutely right...this forum is a place to do all sorts of things...including vent.

If I responded too strongly, it is because -- when people DO get into activist mode -- it is very important that they not adopt an approach that will actually lead to more consumer items getting stigmatized, instead of e-cigs being accepted.
 

OutWest

Unregistered Supplier
ECF Veteran
Feb 8, 2009
1,195
1
Oklahoma USA
www.alternasmokes.com
from the article linked in OP
. . . and industry has now started targeting advertising to children.
Um... I thought they (soda makers) had been doing that for a number of years. I remember the cartoon hillbilly that Mt. Dew used to use in their ads in the 60's and early 70's, for example.
 

nqhqhz

Full Member
Verified Member
Jan 1, 2009
66
0
Ireland
NQ, the problem with everything you stated is that very little has been tested as far as nicotine without the aspects of a cigarette, since there was very little need, since that has been the means of ingestion for so long. Nicotine is not what causes the primary issue with cigarette smoking.

Nicotine has also been shown to have some health benefits (do a search on the benefits of nicotine, there are too many sites to list here) The addiction itself has limits. Most people do not have to increase their intake of nicotine to stay content, they find a level that satisfies and typically stay there.

Nicotine has been extensively studied in isolation. Have a look at pubmed. The fact that we don't need to use increasing doses simply means tolerance hits a plateau. It's still highly addictive, otherwise why would people here be worried about having to go back to analogs?

I do agree that the LD of nicotine is much lower than caffeine; although, I have not heard of many cases where people have reached that level.

Definitely. The problem is that I can have a lethal dose of coffee sitting in my cupboard in the form of beans, and nobody bats an eyelid because it would take days to drink it all. I mean in terms of e-cigarettes: I have a bottle of liquid sitting next to my keyboard that I bought without signing any forms or asking any doctors, that contains 16mg/ml = 320mg of nicotine, enough to kill several people. Can you imagine the sort of hysteria you can whip up about the latter? I'm not saying it's right. But surely you can see where people are coming from. There are many people that don't have any idea what kind of thing "their kids" can buy on the internet. (As long as their kids have credit cards ;))

All I am saying is that nicotine in itself gets a very bad rap, when in reality I don't feel it is much different than caffeine (with the excpetion of the LD, but less is needed to get the benefits or satisfy the addiction). I feel I have the right to ingest nicotine for that very reason. I do drink caffeine, maybe not as much as some, but I don't want to see it go away, and I feel nicotine should be treated the same way.

It's clear we differ: I think nicotine's wildly different from caffeine, in dose, structure, effect, action and duration. Caffeine is more comparable to pot in use pattern and psychological factor alone, although it has the opposite effect. The addiction metrics show a gap as wide as that between .... and cough syrup. But maybe I should stop annoying you because I agree with you, these are two drugs which are safe in responsible use and it's none of a government's business what we do with them.

The trend is ALWAYS AND EVERYWHERE *TOWARDS* fascism unless you actively, directly reject fascism as an acceptable policy.

I sort of agree with this, though I think it might be a bit early to bring in fascism. Godwin's law is just waiting to be invoked. But this is what I'm struggling to say ... the argument from comparison never works when dealing with the right to put whatever you want into your body. We're never going to have a sensible policy on nicotine when dealing with a completely insensible system.

I may be one you're thinking about when you say 'conspiracy theory', but when it comes down to it, there certainly is an element amongst us that feels it's okay to impose their will upon the rest of us. I actually went to the A.S.H. website and was flabergasted to listen to them say that vaping is spreading unwanted nicotine to others. Good Lord already! It is so benign when compared to cigarette smoke that it's not even worth mentioning. These people have public opinion on their side as there's more ignorance than knowledge floating around about e-cigs.

I wasn't thinking of you, I have enjoyed your posts. What you're saying makes complete sense. There are just some people who think that this entire thing has been controlled by evil forces since some time last year, when in reality, most people in the western world have still not even heard of what we do.

"Big Tobacco" can be reassured that tobacco will still need to be sold even if everyone in the world used e-liquid, because every drop of nicotine comes from tobacco, and pharmaceutical companies are too busy rolling around in huge piles of money to take any notice of us. It's easy to say the whole world is against us when we're probably just a minor annoyance at this early stage. Of course I applaud any efforts to educate, and I've been trying to win over everyone who asks me why I'm sucking on a pen.
 
Last edited:

VelvetVisions

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 15, 2009
282
0
Waukesha, WI
NQ, thanks for all the further input.

I wasn't stating that nicotine isn't addictive, it most certainly is or it wouldn't be so difficult to stop (although I do think there are many other parts to the addiction besides just nicotine). I was just saying that generally speaking, people do not need to cosume higher and higher doses to sustain the addiction, as is often the case with other addictions.
 
I believe the greatest difference between the two is the fact that there is nicotine in cigarette smoke, cigarette smoke being linked with lung cancer, the standard association in the average person ties nicotine with lung cancer. While Caffeine pretty much has its nose clean. Thus, people will care far less about caffeine then the demonized nicotine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread