Electronic cigarettes: The nicotyrine hypothesis.

[Lemwise]

An interesting read and it could explain why many of us can go a day without vaping while we couldn't even go 2 hours without smoking.
Electronic cigarettes: The nicotyrine hypothesis. - PubMed - NCBI

 

[Rossum]

Nicotyrine forms by the gradual oxidation of nicotine in e-liquids exposed to air.

I go to some lengths to avoid that!

... Which may explain why I still can't go more than two hours.

 

[Lessifer]

interesting, so, steep those liquids, with the lid off at least for a bit.

 

[LoveVanilla]

So accordingly, the aging/steeping of nicotine/eliquids might reduce juice consumption by increasing levels of nicotyrine. Where nicotyrine is an oxidant of nicotine that inhibits metabolism of nicotine. Interesting... I can think of one personal example that might lend credence.

 

[CarolT]

However, nicotine would also be oxidized in real tobacco products, where the leaf is often warehoused for several years.

 

[Verb]

However, nicotine would also be oxidized in real tobacco products, where the leaf is often warehoused for several years.

But, the nicotine is removed from the tobacco and then added back in to control the dose (along with other added chemicals).

 

[Rossum]

However, nicotine would also be oxidized in real tobacco products, where the leaf is often warehoused for several years.

Isn't nicotine in tobacco leaf primarily in the form of salts, while the nic we use in e-liquid is free (base)? I am by no means a chemist, but I would imagine that salts don't don't oxidize as readily as a free base does.

 

[LoveVanilla]

The marboro innovation (now adapted by most brand) uses ammonia under controlled conditions in late stage tobacco processing. The result is increased free base nicotine (versus to non-treated). No idea how such processing might affect nicotyrine levels

 

[skoony]

This freebase thing gets to much credit. I started smoking regularly in the early 70's.
It is my experience that what ever is addicting in the smoke didn't need any boosting.
If one studies a little history one would realize the very first cigarette sold was a instrument
to freebase tobacco leaf.
So are we saying that the modern processing that causes freebasing is actually freebasing
freebase? If I remember correctly this freebase theory came about before and or while the smoking
rate was beginning its slow and steady decline and didn't have any impact on slowing that down.
As far as i know there certainly wasn't any of this so called freebasing going on in the 50's when over 40% of the adult population smoked. If it was it didn't work as advertised.

IMHO this whole freebasing phenomenon was a tactical ploy to associate smoking with
other evil things that were considered illegal.

Regards
Mike

 

[CarolT]

But, the nicotine is removed from the tobacco and then added back in to control the dose (along with other added chemicals).

That's the slanted story that Tobacco Control peddles. They didn't have to add nicotine until they began using stems and other waste to make sheets, instead of using whole leaf. It's because stems have no nicotine, only leaves do. Sheets are easier to manufacture cigarettes with than leaf. But this wasn't widespread until about the 1970s anyway.

And, any time someone blathers about "added chemicals" in cigarettes, just remember that these cost money. So manufacturers are more likely to be parsimonious with them than the anti-smoking propagandists pretend.

 

[CarolT]

The marboro innovation (now adapted by most brand) uses ammonia under controlled conditions in late stage tobacco processing. The result is increased free base nicotine (versus to non-treated). No idea how such processing might affect nicotyrine levels

Ammonia is used in the freeze-drying process of the sheet tobacco that uses stems. Free-base nicotine is too harsh to inhale, so it's found in pipe tobacco, not cigarettes. Remember, those stories are coming from Tobacco Control, whose intention is to deceive people.

 

[CarolT]

IMHO this whole freebasing phenomenon was a tactical ploy to associate smoking with
other evil things that were considered illegal.

Regards
Mike

Exactly. It's a smear manufactured by Tobacco Control to deceive the public.

 

[DC2]

Exactly. It's a smear manufactured by Tobacco Control to deceive the public.

It's kind of funny when you think about it...

We know how much tobacco control lies.
We can pretty much smell the lies every time their mouth is moving.

Yet once we understand some of the lies, and learn to overcome our brainwashing...
We still embrace other pronouncements, and often repeat them ourselves....

Without considering that they may also be nothing more than brainwashing as well.