Read this! Dr Michael Mosley. Not hooked!

[K_Tech]

When I put the analog cigarettes down in favor of vaping, interestingly enough, I found I was addicted.

Addicted to a mysterious chemical in which I was always told was nicotine.

However I soon found out that considering I had nicotine going in to my body, through ecigarette liquid, yet still had a severe craving for that 'something'. That something is what at that time and continues to strike a bit of mental fear in me. What in the blazes was I putting in my body!?

After a short time, while continuing to use the ecigarette, maybe one month give or take a few extra weeks, I no longer had the drastic 'I must have a cigarette' feeling, yet this craving continued sporadically for many months. Until I completely forgot about it.

The question here, again, is what is being put into the 'tobacco' slurry, which is addicting enough to keep an analog cigarette user entranced. Find this chemical, and we find the real death dealer.

I had much the same experience when I first switched to vaping full time. The interesting thing to me is that I have been able to lower my nicotine level over the last almost three years without setting any goals. And my e-liquid consumption hasn't increased significantly.
The handful of times that I tried to switch to "light" cigarettes, my cigarette consumption went up dramatically.
I know that's not scientific in any way, but to me, it says something about the difference between vaping and smoking.

 

[redrebel821]

I agree with a lot here.

I smoked Winston, which is supposedly just 100% tobacco, no additives. And they were still very addictive. I think it is the combustion process, all the other chemicals in the smoke, and that the smoke is much finer particles as opposed to vapor.

The main point for me is I have no idea how much nic I was intaking with cigs. Or the relative nic levels of various brands. Or how the level would change per my smoking habits. Hitting it too often, hot-boxing, smoking almost to the filter, etc.

But with vaping, I know EXACTLY how much is being used. (not sure how much I ingest, but still, I imagine that to be fairly constant.) Started with 24mg, now at 5 for mtl on a 1.6ohm Naughty mini, or 2 or 3 subohm.

And I feel my "addiction" is fully under my control, and I could end it. (if I wanted to, but I gotta vape up all this liquid I've got on hand, lolol)

I could not say this about cigs. Also, I notice Marlboro smokers were addicted not to cigs, but to Marlboros. Other cigs don't fix the urge. This is the additives in "boros".

The other amazing thing is how many otherwise educated people today still believe that nicotine is carcenogenic.

I'm gonna have to thumbs up the line about Marlboros.....no other cigarette seemed to hit the right spot. I smoked red 100's for over 30 years...nothing else would do!

 

[crxess]

Through Careful manipulation this Puppet is taking over Vaping on the Behalf of Corporate Greed.........
How so many arms could fit up one amazes me

 

[7sixtwo]

...
How so many arms could fit up one amazes me

As Sam, (The Vaping Bogan), would say, "It's wide as your mum."

 

[Hulamoon]

When I put the analog cigarettes down in favor of vaping, interestingly enough, I found I was addicted.

Addicted to a mysterious chemical in which I was always told was nicotine.

However I soon found out that considering I had nicotine going in to my body, through ecigarette liquid, yet still had a severe craving for that 'something'. That something is what at that time and continues to strike a bit of mental fear in me. What in the blazes was I putting in my body!?

After a short time, while continuing to use the ecigarette, maybe one month give or take a few extra weeks, I no longer had the drastic 'I must have a cigarette' feeling, yet this craving continued sporadically for many months. Until I completely forgot about it.

The question here, again, is what is being put into the 'tobacco' slurry, which is addicting enough to keep an analog cigarette user entranced. Find this chemical, and we find the real death dealer.

(Forgive me if my tin foil hat is visible ) I don't believe it's ever been nicotine that is the major problem with cigarettes any more than coffee or soda might be addictive, but the many other chemical compounds either naturally caused by burning, or from pesticides retained from spraying crops and so on, or (warning: tin foil hat) because they have been modified and increased by cigarette manufacturers to make them addictive.

Here's my example.... Arsenic. Minute quantities of arsenic won't kill a person because the body adapts to it. When not replenished, and when the body DOESN'T get it, then you get severe withdrawal - even a form of shock syndrome. It's also a highly recognized carcinogenic.

 

[Hulamoon]

Well, I've been saying this for years.
Not only saying it, but insisting on it you might say.



This was posted by Stormfinch on another thread...
Does smoking tobacco fulfill a nutritional need? - Health Supreme

I haven't read the whole thing yet so I won't comment on it...
Other than to say it's pretty darn fascinating...


As for me, I switched from vaping 12mg liquid every day for over six years...
To vaping zero nicotine liquid...

Overnight.
No withdrawals, no nothing.

That was about five months ago.
Still using zero nicotine and never think twice about it.

BUT THAT'S JUST ME.
And I would not doubt that some ARE quite addicted to nicotine.

After all, if there is anything we have all learned here...
It's that we are all different in nearly every way...

That's fascinating. [me smacks head] - I never made a link between niacin and nicotine before!

 

[skoony]

I'm gonna have to thumbs up the line about Marlboros.....no other cigarette seemed to hit the right spot. I smoked red 100's for over 30 years...nothing else would do!

Our you confusing your desire to be in with the "hip crowd" against what was actually
happening. IMHO when push comes to shove you get what you need not,what you want.
Now if you can afford what you want this never becomes an issue.

Jjust saying.
Regards
Mike

 

[skoony]

cigarette manufacturers to make them addictive.

BT at no time ever made cigarettes (and the issue is cigarettes not anything else) to be
more addictive.

They didn't have too.
Regards
Mike

 

[evan le'garde]

The Tobacco Plant is to people what the Venus Fly Trap is to flies.
No help from big tobacco needed.

 

[evan le'garde]

Plant life was here 4.5 thousand million years before us. And it will still be here long after we're gone.

 

[Hulamoon]

Well, I was responding to the chemical composition of burning tobacco that makes it hard for some people to quit, nicotine replacement or no. And I do believe it has been in BT's interest to enhance or magnify some of the more addictive properties such as MAOI's, arsenic and methyl compounds. You don't and that's cool too.

 

[Robino1]

Well, I was responding to the chemical composition of burning tobacco that makes it hard for some people to quit, nicotine replacement or no. And I do believe it has been in BT's interest to enhance or magnify some of the more addictive properties such as MAOI's, arsenic and methyl compounds. You don't and that's cool too.

Actually, BT had a problem with the tobacco changing in taste from crop to crop... depending on growing conditions. As a NET vaper, you well understand that concept

So in order for their cigarettes to be consistent from pack to pack, carton to carton, they played around with additives to keep that flavor the same without having to depend on Mother Nature.

In the process, they discovered that certain additives made the nicotine more available in a more efficient manner. Side benefit.... the 'addictive' property was more pronounced.

 

[Max-83]

BT at no time ever made cigarettes (and the issue is cigarettes not anything else) to be
more addictive.

I disagree. Having been a 1.5 pad smoker who smoked several different brands over the course of 37yrs I believe at least some of the over 600 additives, known to be used in BT cigs, are used to increase the effects of nicotine.

When I first began vaping I was vaping more often than I smoked and I was somewhat concerned that I was more "addicted" to vaping than smoking. I believe after much research on vaping,being neither an advocate nor protaganist just a consumer, I realized that I smoked because I HAD to but now I vape because I WANT to.

 

[skoony]

In the process, they discovered that certain additives made the nicotine more available in a more efficient manner. Side benefit.... the 'addictive' property was more pronounced.

I disagree. Having been a 1.5 pad smoker who smoked several different brands over the course of 37yrs I believe at least some of the over 600 additives, known to be used in BT cigs, are used to increase the effects of nicotine.

Sorry to pop any bubbles but this is totally untrue.
BT never did anything to make cigarettes more addictive. They did not have to.
It is what is was and still is.
This is a total myth. Every change BT did was because three letter non-profits were
recommending changes or the government was going to make them make those changes.

There is no such thing as ammonia making 'nicotine' free base. Burning tobacco makes every thing in it free base. There is no need for them to do anything. Why spend the money?
Regards
Mike

 

[crxess]

Sorry to pop any bubbles but this is totally untrue.
BT never did anything to make cigarettes more addictive. They did not have to.
It is what is was and still is.
This is a total myth. Every change BT did was because three letter non-profits were
recommending changes or the government was going to make them make those changes.

There is no such thing as ammonia making 'nicotine' free base. Burning tobacco makes every thing in it free base. There is no need for them to do anything. Why spend the money?
Regards
Mike

And I don't care. I no longer smoke or have the desire

BT, BP, FDA, Health Org's

 

[Max-83]

Sorry to pop any bubbles but this is totally untrue.
BT never did anything to make cigarettes more addictive. They did not have to.
It is what is was and still is.
This is a total myth. Every change BT did was because three letter non-profits were
recommending changes or the government was going to make them make those changes.

There is no such thing as ammonia making 'nicotine' free base. Burning tobacco makes every thing in it free base. There is no need for them to do anything. Why spend the money?
Regards
Mike

Don't wanna get in a ...... contest but, even a quick Google search on cigarette additives will bring up many results that refute your assertion.
You can even find studies from some of the very people I believe are now being used to assail vaping that suggest this.

I really like this passage from US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health:

In addition, tobacco companies have devoted a significant amount of research and development to the use and inclusion of additives in cigarettes, and the industry has acknowledged using 599 different cigarette additives.15,16 According to various tobacco company documents, many of these additives are used to improve taste and decrease harshness.17 We propose that, in contrast, tobacco companies have expended resources to exploit the pharmacological and chemical effects of cigarette additives.

 

[skoony]

Don't wanna get in a ...... contest but, even a quick Google search on cigarette additives will bring up many results that refute your assertion.
You can even find studies from some of the very people I believe are now being used to assail vaping that suggest this.

I really like this passage from US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health:

In addition, tobacco companies have devoted a significant amount of research and development to the use and inclusion of additives in cigarettes, and the industry has acknowledged using 599 different cigarette additives.15,16 According to various tobacco company documents, many of these additives are used to improve taste and decrease harshness.17 We propose that, in contrast, tobacco companies have expended resources to exploit the pharmacological and chemical effects of cigarette additives.

I have done that. i wonder why every single reference on the google comes
from websites with a vested interest against BT. I am not claiming BT
is a paragon of virtue. BT did add nicotine to the tobacco. After they had stripped
the nicotine out and re-added it to guarantee a precise dosage as it was either being
recommended by health group's or was going to be requested by the FDA anyway.
Ammonia was added to insure consistent taste. BT simply never deliberately doctored
the tobacco to make it more addictive. All the science made up after the fact was to
support political agenda's. One notes there is no study saying if BT does this
it will make cigarettes more addictive. All the studies are after the fact.
Considering the political climate that has surrounded BT starting midway or so
half way through the last century it would be madness for BT to do such things.
Considering the fact that doing so was completely unnecessary as smoking
cigarettes has the highest dependency rate of any so called addictive substance
consumed by man why would they mess with a good thing. Cigarettes sell themselves.
More than 40% of the adult population habitually smoked cigarettes at one time.
Why is that rate 20% or lower depending on the state. Why haven't smoking rates
actually increased if in fact cigarettes are more addictive due to manipulation.

Now we are being demonized just as BT and smokers were. With the same
tactics and so called indisputable science. I am sure there are no comparisons
to be made.

Regards
Mike

 

[Max-83]

I guess in this information age we are all consumers who try to make sense of the sensory overload we experience. We are all probably have a tendency to lend more credence to the points of view we personally believe.
But at least as far as I know they haven't deemed agreeing to disagree as a tobacco product.

 

[crxess]

I have done that. i wonder why every single reference on the google comes
from websites with a vested interest against BT. I am not claiming BT
is a paragon of virtue. BT did add nicotine to the tobacco. After they had stripped
the nicotine out and re-added it to guarantee a precise dosage as it was either being
recommended by health group's or was going to be requested by the FDA anyway.
Ammonia was added to insure consistent taste. BT simply never deliberately doctored
the tobacco to make it more addictive. All the science made up after the fact was to
support political agenda's. One notes there is no study saying if BT does this
it will make cigarettes more addictive. All the studies are after the fact.
Considering the political climate that has surrounded BT starting midway or so
half way through the last century it would be madness for BT to do such things.
Considering the fact that doing so was completely unnecessary as smoking
cigarettes has the highest dependency rate of any so called addictive substance
consumed by man why would they mess with a good thing. Cigarettes sell themselves.
More than 40% of the adult population habitually smoked cigarettes at one time.
Why is that rate 20% or lower depending on the state. Why haven't smoking rates
actually increased if in fact cigarettes are more addictive due to manipulation.

Now we are being demonized just as BT and smokers were. With the same
tactics and so called indisputable science. I am sure there are no comparisons
to be made.

Regards
Mike

Perhaps careful wording to avoid multi billion dollar law suites from Big tobacco for Slander if unsatisfactorily proven in a court of law?

Sadly, yes we are now being Exploited for Profit in the Same manor as Big Tobacco has been Demonized. This Time under direction of Government officials using Government and Pharmaceutical Funding to Gather Controlled results Fitting their Profiling agenda.

Mitch Zeller is Not the Town Sheriff
Stanton Glantz is a Money Funneling Anti-Tobacco Activist and will Promote anyone Agenda in the name of his Truth Initiative (formerly the American Legacy Foundation) an Anti-tobacco Organization.
For Glantz - Funding is Funding

 

[DaveP]

Great article. As a precious poster said, its nice to see a trial test conducted by a non-smoker (who felt no addictive aftereffects).

I vaped 24mg juice for over 5 years before deciding a year ago to titrate myself downward in nic. I dropped from 24mg to 18mg to 12mg to 6mg to 3mg over a 4 month period. I had no issues with reduced mic during that time.

When I went to zero I had no cravings for nic, but missed the slight nic bite of my 3mg juice, so I went back to 3mg. I suppose I could add a small drop of pepper flavor to achieve the same, but a little nic is supposed to enhance memory. Who am I to argue with that?