Can Reducing Nicotine Help Wean Smokers?
- Thread starter r77r7r
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
It's an old article:
© Oxford University Press 2007.
But it is true that the FDA is looking into lowering nicotine levels as a way of making cigarettes "less addictive."
Here's a recent article about using Very Low Nicotine Content (VLNC) cigarettes, alone and with a nicotine patch.
http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/22/6/1015.long
© Oxford University Press 2007.
But it is true that the FDA is looking into lowering nicotine levels as a way of making cigarettes "less addictive."
Here's a recent article about using Very Low Nicotine Content (VLNC) cigarettes, alone and with a nicotine patch.
http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/22/6/1015.long
Last edited:
The problem with this approach is it shifts the emphasis from smoking reduction to nicotine reduction.
Not of any use as a health measure unless it done by the individual smoker to wean off the addiction to nicotine so as to reduce smoking.
Attempting this on a smoking population scale with unwilling subjects is doomed to fail.
Replacing the delivery method of nicotine with a smoke free method, like NRT snus or, dare I suggest ecigs! would be a better idea. It would return the focus onto what causes the harm, smoke.
Not of any use as a health measure unless it done by the individual smoker to wean off the addiction to nicotine so as to reduce smoking.
Attempting this on a smoking population scale with unwilling subjects is doomed to fail.
Replacing the delivery method of nicotine with a smoke free method, like NRT snus or, dare I suggest ecigs! would be a better idea. It would return the focus onto what causes the harm, smoke.
Is this because they're unwilling or unable to separate the nicotine from the smoke? Or to admit that nicotine, separate from smoke, may not be harmful? Or that they don't *really* understand smokers?
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 67
The biggest problem with very low nicotine cigarettes is that those who advocate/research/tout the products (as a way to reduce the addictiveness of cigarettes) want the FDA to impose mandatory standards to require ALL cigarettes to sharply reduce their nicotine levels.
A decade ago, Vector (formerly Liggett) tobacco company test marketed Quest cigarettes (that contained very low nicotine levels, as a strategy for smokers to wean themselves off nicotine) in seven states, but Liggett never marketed Quest nationwide and halted their test market because nobody bought them (i.e. smokers didn't like them or want them).
Unfortunately, tobacco control researchers don't understand that markets are created and sustained by consumers, as they myopically believe that markets are created and sustained by government regulators.
After I informed the low nicotine cigarette advocates that smokers won't buy very low nicotine cigarettes (even if FDA mandates them), their response was basically "that would be even better for public health".
This demonstrates that most/all very low nicotine cigarette advocates are just prohibitionists, and that FDA standards to mandate very low nicotine cigarettes is nothing more than backdoor prohibition of cigarettes.
Similarly, the proposed EU TPD would mandate very low nicotine levels (i.e. 2mg) in all e-cigarettes because those who proposed it knew that limiting nicotine to 2mg in e-cigarettes would be the same as a ban on all e-cigarettes (but of course they called it a regulation).
A decade ago, Vector (formerly Liggett) tobacco company test marketed Quest cigarettes (that contained very low nicotine levels, as a strategy for smokers to wean themselves off nicotine) in seven states, but Liggett never marketed Quest nationwide and halted their test market because nobody bought them (i.e. smokers didn't like them or want them).
Unfortunately, tobacco control researchers don't understand that markets are created and sustained by consumers, as they myopically believe that markets are created and sustained by government regulators.
After I informed the low nicotine cigarette advocates that smokers won't buy very low nicotine cigarettes (even if FDA mandates them), their response was basically "that would be even better for public health".
This demonstrates that most/all very low nicotine cigarette advocates are just prohibitionists, and that FDA standards to mandate very low nicotine cigarettes is nothing more than backdoor prohibition of cigarettes.
Similarly, the proposed EU TPD would mandate very low nicotine levels (i.e. 2mg) in all e-cigarettes because those who proposed it knew that limiting nicotine to 2mg in e-cigarettes would be the same as a ban on all e-cigarettes (but of course they called it a regulation).
Last edited:
And it doesn't occur to them that people will find some way to get what they want.
I have lowered my nicotine levels substantially from where I started. But while my daily nicotine intake is still less than it was in the beginning, I have made up a fair amount of the difference by vaping like a research monkey. I suspect that if smokers only had low-nicotine cigarettes available, they would just smoke more of them.
*edit* - the more I think about it, that is a win-win for the government and BT. More sales=good for BT, and more taxes collected. And the FDA gets a gold star for "doing something".
*edit* - the more I think about it, that is a win-win for the government and BT. More sales=good for BT, and more taxes collected. And the FDA gets a gold star for "doing something".
Last edited:
Piano guy, that's exactly how I jumped from 2 pad to 3 pad, by switching over to Light cigarettes. Drove me crazy it did.
At least with our vaping, just by switching wicks or attys or both, we can decrease the vapor output usage.
At least with our vaping, just by switching wicks or attys or both, we can decrease the vapor output usage.
In my opinion it is because if the public were allowed to understand the truth, they would all be out of work.
It's like entering Bizzaro land to read the ending-
“If we got the levels in cigarettes down to that of tomatoes (0.3 mg/g), we wouldn't have people outside of buildings smoking cigarettes,” he says. “When was the last time you saw a person outside of a building eating a bag of tomatoes?
This seems to be out of place for a publication like this, more like something from " The View".
Oh, hey, speaking of such- thought I saw Jenny Mcarthy is joining them. Does she actually vape or just model for it?
As far as I'm concerned, the whole ANTZ propaganda machine is Mondo Bizzaro!
Following their logic, if I were still a smoker and they mandated ridiculously low nic levels, they'd sure as hell see me outside scarfing down tomatoes, with probably an eggplant or two thrown in...! (I think they're running out of relevant analogies...)
Coming up: "Vapin' on the View"
(Whatever you think of JM, someone vaping on the View would be great PR, IMO)
Next thing you know, Monsanto will be producing genetically enhanced tomatoes and eggplant with a higher yield of nic!
Next thing you know, Monsanto will be producing genetically enhanced tomatoes and eggplant with a higher yield of nic!
And ANTZ will come to stand for Anti Nicotine and Tomato Zealots...
- Status
Similar threads
