A retrospective study on the health effects of vaping
- Thread starter Dr. Robert Cranfield
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Again, not trying to be contentious, but can you point me to a study that shows that nicotine, by and of itself, is an addictive chemical? As far as it's danger is concerned, think about what's under your kitchen sink, lots of really dangerous stuff!
Any mild stimulant can be addictive to a person with the right neurochemestry. Heck, jogging is addictive to some people. There are no absolutes in this reality we occupy only probabilities.
After a bit more thought, I realize you also have to factor in the subtle difference between an addiction and a habbit. Quitting from either will show symptoms of withdrawl. The brain doesn't like to change patterns, it will "punish you" for doing so.
I am wondering same. I did do a self study a few weeks back. This is what I found. History first- (51 yr old woman, in fair health) I quit my 2PAD, 38 year smoking habit the same day I picked up vape over 10 months ago. I started at 12 sometimes 18 mg. I decreased that to 6mg and 3mg at night over time. A few weeks ago I did a self study to see how I would do with 0mg so I eliminated it for two weeks. The hand to mouth still gave me that comforting feeling and I didn't notice any outstanding withdrawals. I might say I was a little more tired, but that could have just been a coincidence. At the time I wasn't really trying to do a study. My aim was to see if I could go without the nicotine. It was then that I started to read more about the latest on nicotine and so I have added it back for the benefits of it. I will continue to vape at 6mg and 3mg for those reasons but I also know I am no longer a slave to the addiction of nicotine in tobacco cigarettes. I must add, however, that I also believe that the nicotine does help with my stress levels. vaping the 0mg I did notice that it didn't quite satisfy me as much but saying that was withdrawal would be going too far. What it said to me was that if I was a person that never smoked or looked to cigs as a vice that I would probably get pretty bored with vaping as a hobby with 0mg nic in it. I think it is human nature to search out vices or comforts to do in our down time. I see vaping as a fairly benign vice that can help people unwind, but for me the ticket is the whole of vaping, nicotine included. I would rather vape then stress eat, drink alcohol, smoke or any number of vices but I say without a doubt that if I had to give up the nic for some reason I know I easily could. But, and this is an important BUT, it would be replaced by another vice that may be far more unhealthy. Also as a side note. I have a 20 something year old niece that picked up vaping to help support her boyfriend in his goal to quit. She was a never smoker but vaped his liquid with nic in it and as soon as her boyfriend appeared to have beat the habit a year later, she sold her gear and didn't look back. Easy peasy give up the nic!!!
So Mattiem, I wrote this on your post to show you that some (at least me) have already attempted what is being suggested to you. Do it if you want to prove something to yourself, but I think you already know what your results will be. Have fun with it.
I'm not sure if I can insert links yet so I'm going to try. When you read an article like this it's also important to look at the references and read the ones that pertain to the issue you are concerned about.
A little story. I had a concern in my office one day that one physician was using our clean minor surgery room to do procedures on infected areas. I wanted a policy in place to stop doing dirty procedures in a room used for clean procedures. I was asked by our quality team to present documentation that there is a risk of cross contamination. My research always showed that the discussion began with the assumption that it occurred, but never with references to actual studies. I finally found the landmark study done in 1912. Since then, it had entered into common knowledge, so there was no need to repeat the research. The only way I found that study was in reading the references cited and following it back to that ancient reference.
Nicotine Addiction
A little story. I had a concern in my office one day that one physician was using our clean minor surgery room to do procedures on infected areas. I wanted a policy in place to stop doing dirty procedures in a room used for clean procedures. I was asked by our quality team to present documentation that there is a risk of cross contamination. My research always showed that the discussion began with the assumption that it occurred, but never with references to actual studies. I finally found the landmark study done in 1912. Since then, it had entered into common knowledge, so there was no need to repeat the research. The only way I found that study was in reading the references cited and following it back to that ancient reference.
Nicotine Addiction
I'm a little short on time this morning so I just scanned the link. The first thing I notice is, again, it starts with smoking tobacco as the delivery system, not nicotine as a stand alone component. There are too many variables when using combustion of organics to achieve nicotine delivery or any other chemical for that matter. I'll read, in depth later today or this evening and check some of the references, but on the surface this is not what I am discussing. I am looking for a study of nicotine extracted from tobacco and delivered either IV or in a vapor, probably using PG as a carrier. Anything else is not comparable to nicotine delivered in vaping.
I feel that this maybe the key,holy grail, pandoras box or any other analogy you would like to insert. With all the dollars given to medical research and variuos agencies that do research and testing for are benefit,why cant they do the research that might actually benefit society.IE nicotine,PCBs,Hydronegation of varius substances,MSG, and the list goes on.And remember were all paying for this.Sorry for the rant,now back to lurking.Thanks.
When you have time, you need to read the rest. It discusses nicotine's specific effects on receptors. It also goes briefly into other substances in tobacco that have addiction potential. The MAOIs. Then it will be important for you to review and read specific references they site. There are no articles that stand alone. If you only read the article without reading the references, you will not get the information you need to make an assessment.
Again, I question the delivery system of tobacco, burning organics, producing other variables that certainly could effect how nicotine works with MAOIs. I am not saying that nicotine doesn't effect the brain at all, but caffeine, alcohol and a whole host of other, commonly, consumed chemicals do exactly the same things and are not branded as addictive in the way nicotine has been. If the reference articles used just nicotine, not delivered by tobacco smoke inhalation, that is another story.
Studies based on modern tobacco cigarette smoking and nicotine addiction don't answer the question. We all know cigarette smoking and it's inherent addiction go far beyond nicotine. Yes, nicotine plays a role in it. But the comprehensive reasons cigarettes are so addicting goes far beyond nicotine. Tobacco companies spent decades perfecting their addiction sticks because they realized that just smoking pure tobacco wasn't nearly addicting enough to sink the hooks deep into getting people hooked for life. It's all about repeat customers. Honestly, it's pretty sick. Borderline criminal. The "tobacco" in cigarettes compared to pure leaf is about as similar as mystery meat in a 7-11 burrito compared to grass fed organic beef tenderloin.
This is a good scientific read about what happened to cigarettes post 1970. It's shameful. Tobacco companies call it things like "experience enhancing" additives or whatever but the real comparison is more like taking a cup of coffee and turning it into {Other Stuff}. Cigarette smoking addiction/habit and pure nicotine addiction/habit are apples to oranges in my opinion and nobody can convince me otherwise.
Pharmacological and Chemical Effects of Cigarette Additives
Last edited by a moderator:
Nicotine Propaganda
Very interesting reading...nicotine only (no combustion involved) combustion of tobacco is the operative word.
Very interesting reading...nicotine only (no combustion involved) combustion of tobacco is the operative word.
This is an effective argument in your favor. There is a lot of research showing nicotine, separate from combustible tobacco products, is addictive. The referenced article is one of them. If you use the argument that nicotine is not addictive as a premise, you actually weaken your position. Because the bulk of evidence is contrary to this position. People who understand and have studied this, understand the addiction potential, and will discount your positive information if your dental us based on opinion, not research.
You should read the last line of that piece.
"Welcome to the world of propaganda: you just had your first lesson in how easy it is to convince the general population to believe the opposite of the truth."
That piece was satire.
You have made up your mind and I have made up mine. We will just have to agree to disagree. I have studied every article I can find during the 3 1/2 years I have been vaping and smoke free after 45+ years of smoking.
I am very interested in the rest of your study though and will be following to see how it is going.
Very good paper. Shows how positive feelings of nicotine consumption associate with smoking process and form addiction. Or, as author said "This article focuses on nicotine as a determinant of addiction to tobacco".
I have no data, but my experience (yes, anecdotal) shows that in the first 1-3 years smoking does not became an addiction and is reversible.
This forum sees a lot of childish believes that "nicotine is not addictive because there were no studies which show it is addictive without smoking". There will be no studies on humans which can result in any form of addiction/dependence, it is unethical.
Today most vapers are ex-smokers, people who decided to quit smoking and were successful at it. This group does not fully represent all smokers, for most of whom vaping does not work. Things are more complicated than they look from the point of view of a vaper.
Life will stage an experiment on nicotine/vaping. Unfortunately new wave of vapers is coming - people who never smoked before. May be in future researchers could isolate group of vapers who never smoked but for 3-7 years had nicotine consumption on a level of one (or more) pack a day. Then we'll know if nicotine works "as a determinant of addiction" to vaping.
My belief: vaping is less addictive than smoking, but still...
Opinions are the product of how we process facts and our life experiences. That's why opinions differ. No 2 people have the same facts, or process them similarly. And no 2 people have the same life experiences. That's why, in a country of 320 million people, we have such a diversity of opinion. People believe in Bigfoot, ancient aliens, etc. I will caution you though. Be careful what you use as fact. That last piece was intentionally created to misinform to make a point. If you don't read it in its entirety, it will be taken as fact. It isn't.
Seems like you are assuming that I've not read it in its entirety when in fact I have and more than once. I reread it every time I post the link to it. It seems we just see things differently and that is OK. We are all entitled to our own opinions. Thus my comment-We just have to agree to disagree.
I guess we interpret that last line differently, then.
I think we're starting to split hairs a bit. It's hard to refute that there are stark differences between ingesting nicotine via cigarettes or other forms that don't include tobacco.
Nicotine is habit forming at the very least and addictive at the worst. But the important question is whether or not ingesting nicotine in responsible amounts as a habit without smoking or using tobacco products actually causes harm. I have yet to see anything that proves it does in any way shape or form. It's not like nicotine is new. It's been consumed by humans for 100's of years if not 1,000's. Without smoke or chewing up leaves, is it unhealthy? Are there any consequences? Anybody?
Nicotine is habit forming at the very least and addictive at the worst. But the important question is whether or not ingesting nicotine in responsible amounts as a habit without smoking or using tobacco products actually causes harm. I have yet to see anything that proves it does in any way shape or form. It's not like nicotine is new. It's been consumed by humans for 100's of years if not 1,000's. Without smoke or chewing up leaves, is it unhealthy? Are there any consequences? Anybody?
- Status
Similar threads
