Courtsey of Patrick J. Gleason
In summary, what the above physical properties are saying is that there is no possible way in this universe, or any other, that a nicotine vapor can exist.
You can not get nicotine by burning tobacco. The nicotine will chemically decompose before a vapor of it is formed. Furthermore, if any nicotine vapor did form by burning tobacco, it would burst into flames before any residual moisture in the tobacco leaves is boiled away.
Now, I realize that the stuff I just said is going to stomp hard on the religion that you have been taught since childhood, but there is no nicotine in tobacco smoke. Never has been and never will be.
When "scientists" study tobacco smoke to measure "nicotine content", they do not actually look for nicotine. They look for a different chemical named "cotinine", which is nicotine oxide.
Cotinine is neither harmful, nor addictive, nor psycho-active.
A great deal of research has been done on cotinine because it blocks the effects of ....... on the human nervous system and is used medically for detoxification from ....... addiction.
"Nicotine" is a chemical component of many related compounds, such as nicotine citrate, nicotine sulfate, nicotine malate, nicotine oxide (cotinine) and nicotinic acid (vitamin B3, niacin). Pure, free base, nicotine is a deadly poison, an addictive drug and also a good explosive. The above mentioned compounds containing nicotine however, bear as much resemblance to nicotine as table salt does to metallic sodium, or as water does to hydrogen.
Now, you may ask, if nicotine is so unstable, how do scientists get it to use as a pesticide? The method used to extract freebase nicotine from dried tobacco leaves was discovered in 1828, and can best be summarized by this quote from a 1911 encyclopedia:
NICOTINE, Ci0H14N2, an alkaloid, found with small quantities of nicotimine, C,9H14N2, nicoteine, Ci0Hl2N2, and nicotelline, CioH8N2, in tobacco.
The name is taken from Nicotiana, the tobacco plant, so called after Jean Nicot (1530-1600), French ambassador at Lisbon, who introduced tobacco into France in 1560. These four alkaloids exist in combination in tobacco chiefly as malates and citrates. The alkaloid is obtained from an aqueous extract of tobacco by distillation with slaked lime, the distillate being acidified with oxalic acid, concentrated to a syrup and decomposed by potash.
The free base is extracted by ether and fractionated in a current of hydrogen. It is a colorless oil, which boils at 247 C. (745 mm.), and when pure is almost odorless. It has a sharp burning taste, and is very poisonous.
It is very hygroscopic, dissolves readily in water, and rapidly undergoes oxidation on exposure to air. The free alkaloid is strongly laevo-rotatory. F. Ratz (Mounts., 1905, 26, p. 1241) obtained the value [o]u = 169-54 at 20; its salts are dextro-rotatory. It behaves as a di-acid as well as a di-tertiary base.
Here is a link to the web page of that enclopedia article:
In other words, to get nicotine from tobacco, you would have to soak your dried tobacco leaves in water to produce an "aqueous extract". Then, mix that aqueous extract with slaked lime (calcium hydroxide). Then, mix the distillate with oxalic acid. Then concentrate it into a syrup. Then mix that syrup with some potash (potassium hydroxide). Then distill it again in an atmosphere of flowing ether and hydrogen. Do you take the time to do all this when you smoke a cigarette? Highly doubtful.
Stop to think, the next time you read some b.s. on "nicotine addiction" and realize that all this crap has been based on 75 years of pure "junk science" and propaganda. Who was it that said, "Tell a lie enough times and it becomes the truth?" I believe that the author of this strategy was a certain high ranking officer in the Nazi Party of Germany in the 1930s, which Party was also the origin of today's anti-tobacco religion.
When you burn tobacco, you don't get any freebase nicotine. What you get is an assortment of harmless, stable chemicals that result from the oxidation of nicotine. Visit a drug store and read the ingredients of "nicotine" gum, lozenges and patches. You will find that most of them contain no nicotine, but rather nicotine sulfate or nicotine oxide, or even good old vitamin B3 (nicotinic acid).
The fallacy that makes "nicotine addiction" junk science is that: Yes, if you make freebase nicotine in a chemical laboratory and inject it intravenously, it will act as a potent, addictive drug, and do every evil thing ascribed to nicotine. However, burning the tobacco does not produce any freebase nicotine.
Many double blind studies have already shown that "nicotine" patches, gum and lozenges are no more effective than placebos at stopping a smoking habit. Strictly, scientifically speaking, there is no (freebase) nicotine in tobacco smoke; never has been and never will be.
If you really want to nail the health-nazis to the wall in court, get the research scientists on the witness stand, under oath and penalty of perjury, and ask, "Did you actually measure 1.5 mg of pure, freebase, nicotine in the smoke from that cigarette, or was it actually cotinine that you measured?" The infamous FTC method devised in the 1960's for measuring the "nicotine" content of different brands of cigarettes is a test for cotinine (nicotine oxide). At the time, the researchers said they had to do it that way because it "is not possible to measure nicotine in tobacco smoke because nicotine decomposes too rapidly." A good library or even the web might have a paper telling exactly how the "FTC Method" is done. Do a Google search on "FTC Method" and I bet you find the word "cotinine" in the same paragraph.
You need to be logged in to comment