Does nicotine only cause problems long term?

[UncLeJunkLe]

Jeezissss!! How big was that removed mole that you're worried about a little scar?

You're worried about a scar?

How many tattoos do you have? 99.999% of tattoos are uglier than scars.

 

[Brewdawg1181]

I had a mole removed which im not concerned about it healing, just the scar part that concerns me bc I know nicotine doesnt do good with scars.

Anyways...

I havent vaped nicotine in 2 weeks and originally vaped 30mg nic salts, but im losing my mind and im about to cave.

Do you guys think if i just vaped 1 day, that it wouldnt slow down my healing process?

So basically 2 weeks no nic, then 1 day vape nic, then 2 weeks off again?

First, Bean Stocker- sorry some seemed to misunderstand your question, and twist it into asking "is vaping/nicotine bad." And congrats for staying off smokes for the last 8 years.

Here's a study on nicotine's effect on scar formation: Smoking and its effect on scar healing

This differentiates between healing and scarring. Interesting that they only studied the nic that came from smoking, but it was only 2012. Oddly, the results discussion included this statement:
"The clinical impression that smokers, although having increased risk of developing wound complications, have better cosmetical appearing scars and a diminished risk of hypertrophic scar formation was confirmed by demonstrating decreased vascularity reflected by the diminished redness of the scar."

So you could actually end up with a prettier scar, if there would be any difference at all.

But my $0.02: I'd guess the effect would be minimal, if even detectable. If I were you, my focus would be on staying off smokes, so I'd vape. Let the scar do what it will. And if you're really not convinced, you might start trying 0 nic for a time, to see if just the act of vaping helps. So many get to 0 nic and still have trouble quitting vaping, it's a fair bet that would at least help. If not, just go low nic and ramp up as necessary.

 

[Nermal]

Out of context.

 

[Nermal]

I can ace that test, here's what nicotine does straight from the Cancer Council of Zeus:

Covertly operating through the unconscious weak spots and blind spots in the human psyche; making people oblivious to their own madness, causing and influencing them to act against–their–own–best–interests and higher-good, as if under a spell and unconsciously possessed. This means that they are actually nourishing the lower vibrational energy with their lifestyle, choices, energy and habits, which is unconsciously giving the lower-energy the very power and fuel it needs—for repeating and recreating endless drama, suffering and destruction, in more and more amplified forms on a national and world stage.

Didn't quite follow all that.

 

[StormFinch]

First, Bean Stocker- sorry some seemed to misunderstand your question, and twist it into asking "is vaping/nicotine bad." And congrats for staying off smokes for the last 8 years.

There was a right turn at surgical healing, yeah and a common happening around here. However ultimately it wasn't so much "is vaping/nicotine bad." I believe, but more "you can't trust anything telling you nicotine will cause X because most studies were done on smoking," and there's definitely a distinction.

Here's a study on nicotine's effect on scar formation: Smoking and its effect on scar healing

Nitty picky moment: this is smoking and scar healing, not nicotine by itself.

This differentiates between healing and scarring. Interesting that they only studied the nic that came from smoking, but it was only 2012. Oddly, the results discussion included this statement:
"The clinical impression that smokers, although having increased risk of developing wound complications, have better cosmetical appearing scars and a diminished risk of hypertrophic scar formation was confirmed by demonstrating decreased vascularity reflected by the diminished redness of the scar."

Ye Gads! They finally found something smoking is good for! Really though, this makes absolute sense because from what I understand, fast healing produces more scar tissue. It's basically a survival over perfection issue, so if smokers heal slower then there's probably less haphazard scar formation.

From anecdotal evidence at the very least, smokers also have less of an immune response. Many people have suddenly developed a previously hidden auto-immune condition after quitting smoking. Less immune response equals less inflammation and again, a slower wound closure.

 

[AvaOrchid]

Why? Im vaping nicotine, so im on a vaping forum. I dont smoke ciggeretes anymore.

Merry christmas tho

Maybe they thought you were trying to attack vaping I'm not sure people are on edge because of all the stuff in the media I think. Occasionally you'll see someone pop up claiming that vaping made them 3 inch shorter or some other crazy stuff.. maybe they thought that's what you were doing but it didn't sound like that's what you are doing to me.

 

[QcVaper]

Now i'm no medical expert, but being diabetic makes scarring an issue sometimes by itself, but in my 3 years of vaping i've never had 1 issue from vaping making it worst per say.

Imho the answer is a no,there's no issue with nicotine, but again I'M NOT A MEDICAL EXPERT.

 

[AngeNZ]

The only problem I have with this is that doctors typically don't stay up to date with research once they're out there treating patients. From my experience, even in non-vaping matters, it's best to keep up with the research and be your own advocate.

As an example, all the recent research says that in those people without a thyroid, like myself, the TSH test should take a back seat to measurements for the replacement thyroid hormone and the hormone that particular replacement is converted to. To my horror, 99% of the doctors I've seen want to run only a TSH test and adjust my medication accordingly, which leaves me very hypo and feeling like three day old crap.

It also doesn't help that vaping is constantly under attack in the mainstream media, which doctors probably consume a lot more of than medical publications. Look at any study about nicotine in NRTs and you'll see that vasoconstriction is present but less than in smoking, and that NRTs are safe to use by cardiac patients and adolescents, yet the same nicotine in vaping is the devil?

I agree 100%. As far as I'm concerned medically - vaping nicotine is no different than using other forms of NRTs.

And my surgeon and anaesthetist had no problem with me using nicotine, before and after surgery

 

[optsmk]

I'm no Dr, but I think it's fair to say that nicotine causes absolutely no harm at all to the human body. The only thing that makes nicotine harmful is the way that some of us get the nicotine into our bodies. Some people may have an illness where nicotine can be harmful to their health. But some people have health problems just using over the counter medications like pain killers and allergy medication. Some even die from it. But you don't see those products being removed from drug stores.

I'm also a big believer that the only thing that should go into your lungs is clean fresh air. But where in the world can you get clean fresh air? Nowhere, that's where. So with that said, the only way that is probably safer than vaping for getting nicotine into your system, is probably a nicotine patch. But I enjoy vaping too much to give it up. So the patch is not for me at this time.

 

[Lowjumper]

I'm no Dr, but I think it's fair to say that nicotine causes absolutely no harm at all to the human body. The only thing that makes nicotine harmful is the way that some of us get the nicotine into our bodies. Some people may have an illness where nicotine can be harmful to their health. But some people have health problems just using over the counter medications like pain killers and allergy medication. Some even die from it. But you don't see those products being removed from drug stores.

I'm also a big believer that the only thing that should go into your lungs is clean fresh air. But where in the world can you get clean fresh air? Nowhere, that's where. So with that said, the only way that is probably safer than vaping for getting nicotine into your system, is probably a nicotine patch. But I enjoy vaping too much to give it up. So the patch is not for me at this time.

Well the nicotine you vape is not absorbed by your lungs, it's absorbed by the mucus membranes. So inhale as much or as little into your lungs, it will make no difference!

 

[Jman8]

As someone who's quit cold turkey, multiple times (never less than a year), I would say no nicotine is arguably more harmful. Possible migraines will increase and get stronger without nicotine. Plausibly you'll be far less alert, though other things, i.e. coffee, can help with that.

Instead of vaping one day and then taking 2 weeks off, I'd suggest going with lowering dose over time. Then keep low dose on hand in case things go haywire (i.e. you start getting migraines more frequently).

Admitted though, the first time I went cold turkey (for 8 years), I had very little issue with stopping. Only health issues I recall from that time was I basically substituted food, particularly sugary foods, for cravings. And they weren't even nicotine cravings. Just craving something to take the edge off from daily living.

 

[Skeebo]

I always forgive my doctor for telling me to quit vaping. She has very soft hands.

 

[dripster]

The only problem I have with this is that doctors typically don't stay up to date with research once they're out there treating patients. From my experience, even in non-vaping matters, it's best to keep up with the research and be your own advocate.

As an example, all the recent research says that in those people without a thyroid, like myself, the TSH test should take a back seat to measurements for the replacement thyroid hormone and the hormone that particular replacement is converted to. To my horror, 99% of the doctors I've seen want to run only a TSH test and adjust my medication accordingly, which leaves me very hypo and feeling like three day old crap.

It also doesn't help that vaping is constantly under attack in the mainstream media, which doctors probably consume a lot more of than medical publications. Look at any study about nicotine in NRTs and you'll see that vasoconstriction is present but less than in smoking, and that NRTs are safe to use by cardiac patients and adolescents, yet the same nicotine in vaping is the devil?

Last time I checked, Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos did admit that it is still too early to conclude that people who have cardiovascular disease don't get any elevated risk from vaping nicotine, i.e. if they continue to vape nicotine rather than make the gradual transition to zero nicotine use. (However, this should not be ripped out of the main context, which also includes the potential risk of a relapse, back to smoking tobacco, associated with this same transition to zero nicotine.)

So this is one of those topics that still needs to be studied further. But NRTs never are "safe". Instead, I believe that the Royal College of Physicians concluded the evidence to support that the harm caused by vaping nicotine does not exceed 5% of the harm caused by smoking tobacco is overwhelming. By wrongfully calling vaping nicotine "safe", you are only fueling the war on vaping. Because, the stigma you'll get as a result will be, "See what I mean? That's what all addicts always say." And, this stigma will ultimately survive people's attempts to reason, i.e. despite hard evidence suggests that vaping a normal dose of freebase nicotine is only about equally as addictive as drinking coffee, extremely very unlike smoking tobacco of course.

 

[dripster]

I suspect it's the combination of both. MAOIs are known to potentiate the effects of anything that increases dopamine production, which nicotine clearly does. The fact that tobacco delivers both simultaneously makes it harder to kick a tobacco habit that either substance alone.

I also think the lack of the MAOIs in vapor products is why they are not an adequate substitute for tobacco for many who've tried them. Those of us who had no trouble switching from tobacco to straight nicotine vapes like to think that vaping is the cure for smoking, but it really isn't, at least not for everyone.

When talking specifically about nicotine and addiction, the classical-old dopamine theory has already been shot.
https://doi.org/10.1111/add.14235

 

[dripster]

I'm no Dr, but I think it's fair to say that nicotine causes absolutely no harm at all to the human body.

I would change that sentence to "Nicotine, by itself (i.e., as opposed to propelling the Black Magic that is confounding it with smoking tobacco), in normal dosages has not been shown to cause any significant harm to the human body of an adult who doesn't already suffer from some kind of disease or abnormality that would trigger harmfulness" because, after all, a very high dose of nicotine is in fact still lethal nevertheless. But then, if the dosage is right, it can also be used to help treat/prevent some diseases, e.g., Parkinson's disease.

 

[Rossum]

When talking specifically about nicotine and addiction, the classical-old dopamine theory has already been shot.
https://doi.org/10.1111/add.14235

Isn't that pretty much what I wrote, that nicotine-triggered dopamine alone isn't sufficient to explain the addictive potential of tobacco?

 

[dripster]

Isn't that pretty much what I wrote, that nicotine-triggered dopamine alone isn't sufficient to explain the addictive potential of tobacco?

No, it goes waa-aaaa-aaaaaaay further than that. I.e., dopamine synthesis and endocortical dopaminergic pathways alone aren't sufficient to explain anything much about addiction, or about the addictiveness of ANYTHING, as the holes in that old theory are in fact cannon-sized.

 

[stols001]

Um, I just couldn't wade through the whole thred,l but I wiill say a lot of doctors get it backwards. You need to stop BEFORE the oral or other surgery for about 12 weeks (this is smoking mind you I have not read ANY informtion about vaping) because like, the blood vessels and whatnot are constircted by SMOKING and the act of COMBUSTION, and so they need to be restored to health.

Competent doctors know this nd will not do elective surgery BEFORE the patient has stopped for 12 weeks. Most of them seem fine with nic replacement just not SMOKING.

Stoppig AFTER the surgery is kind of the best you can do sometimes. but the damage has already been done.

I will also note that many women in the past were allowed to smoke not ONLY during pregnancy but also LABOR and while it is perhaps not IDEAL they were also eating sushi, drinking regularly, and etc.

I'm just saying the best you can do is what you can do. You just have to take your chances and decide...

Personally, I smoked (via my nose, the husband rigged something up) because I had 24 teeth removed and bones shaved at once. I smoked frequently. I also healed up just fine. No dry sockets which I wanted to avoid. Maybe I healed slower, but I healed.

I am not a medical professional. Unlesss the mole is gigantic and on your face or something, I don't quite get the paranoia. Call your freaking doctor and ask if nicotine replavcment is okay because you are going batty. If he says yes, then I think you would be FINE to vape.

Anna

 

[optsmk]

I would change that sentence to "Nicotine, by itself (i.e., as opposed to propelling the Black Magic that is confounding it with smoking tobacco), in normal dosages has not been shown to cause any significant harm to the human body of an adult who doesn't already suffer from some kind of disease or abnormality that would trigger harmfulness" because, after all, a very high dose of nicotine is in fact still lethal nevertheless. But then, if the dosage is right, it can also be used to help treat/prevent some diseases, e.g., Parkinson's disease.

Nicotine in general has no negative effects. If you combine it with a burning cigarette, it will contain cancer causing carcinogens, But everything that burns emits cancer causing carcinogens while it's burning. Everyone knows that, right?

 

[Rossum]

But everything that burns emits cancer causing carcinogens while it's burning. Everyone knows that, right?

I think that's an over-generalization. It depends on what exactly is being burned and how cleanly it's burned. E.g.: I think you'd be hard pressed to find carcinogens in cleanly burned very light hydrocarbons such as natural gas.