i've just recently switched to 0mg and my nicotine cravings are pretty high, i dont know the risks of nicotine in a vape form comparing to a nicotine form. pls reassure me that 6mg is not bad for body building
is 6mg a healthy alternative of smoking cigs to get light headed
- Thread starter jesusman22
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Nicotine use in any form will work against your body building goals because nicotine is a vasoconstrictor. Smoking nicotine is even worse because it replaces oxygen in your blood with carbon monoxide. It's up to you to decide. Nicotine USP from vaping never makes me light headed. The first cigarette hit of the day with ammonia and all of the other crap in cigarettes did make me slightly light headed for a few seconds. I don't miss that.
Last edited:
Everything I have read says nicotine is no more harmful than caffeine. I ain't givin' up my coffee either. 
I started out with 18mg over a year ago and I am still at that level and really don't plan to change it. Everyone is different. I think it is great if you want to do 0mg. I know others that do. That is what is important. Do what makes you happy. I would suggest keeping a bit of higher nic juice around for those times that someone or something gets on your "reserve nerve". I keep 36mg. And pretty sure it is why I have not been incarcerated. heehee Good luck to ya and happy vaping. 
I started out with 18mg over a year ago and I am still at that level and really don't plan to change it. Everyone is different. I think it is great if you want to do 0mg. I know others that do. That is what is important. Do what makes you happy. I would suggest keeping a bit of higher nic juice around for those times that someone or something gets on your "reserve nerve". I keep 36mg. And pretty sure it is why I have not been incarcerated. heehee Good luck to ya and happy vaping. 
While I can't speak on the long term effects of nicotine use, I have seen the long term effects of smoking. It isn't pretty. But, I can tell you that both my Primary Care Physician and my Cardiologist were both trilled that I quit smoking and vape now!!!
Can you site that please? Cigarette smoking certainly causes this, but I was under the impression it was from the other chemicals rather than the nicotine itself. I may be wrong, but I'd like to see the studies!
The relationship between smoking and CO levels in blood has been known for just about forever. This is the first study I found using Google. You could finds hundreds more. CO is not a carcinogen. Burning just about anything can produce CO.
http://www.covita.net/pdfs/Clinical...O_for_smoking_status_in_the_military_2004.pdf
Yes, I know about the relationship between smoking and CO2. What I'm questioning is your saying this is caused by inhalation of nicotine. I was under the impression that this was caused by the other chemicals in cigarettes, which are not present in vaping!
Well, he didn't say nicotine; he said smoking nicotine. I'm good with the idea that smoking nicotine implies smoking.
No. Carbon Monoxide is CO, not CO2 (carbon dioxide). I never stated that nicotine produces CO in the bloodstream I stated that smoking nicotine (which means lighting leafy tobacco on fire and inhaling the smoke) will produce CO in the bloodstream. Jeez.
eh, academicaly, maybe. Vasculary contriction has been observed with smokers, not nicotine independent of smoking. It is a fact that nicotine increases heart rate and therefore blood pressure. You cannot have increased BP and HR, and also shrinking arteries. In fact, its the other way around. Any body builder or fitness expert will tell you vascularity is increased due to the increased demand for blood and oxygen to the extremities. The only effect 6mg in a vape would likely have is a nominal boost in energy and reflex.
Yes, my error on the CO2. You are suggesting we are 'vaping' the whole tobacco leaf? Or am I totally misunderstanding you? Yes, of course actually smoking the leaf does this. I thought you were saying that vaping nicotine did also!
My bad for the misunderstanding! (Sorry about that LOL)
As the CEO of a major chemicals producer once put it succinctly :
'Only the quantity zero has the effect zero.'
Seeing that life is a finite affair anyway - and this particular life is yours and that the 'habeas corpus' act is still in effect ( for now ) - feel free to some unhealthyness in your life.
Your hide - you decide
Vape on ( at whichever level you choose )
12mg in a carto tank does nothing for me. 6 mg in an rda does get me light headed.
Keep a second small tank with higher nicotine strength in it for when you feel a craving.
I'm confused by the bolded statement. You're suggesting that Nicotine isn't a vasoconstrictor and is instead a vasodilator, or that a vasoconstrictor won't cause an increase in BP? The latter seems to be off. What's the Physics law that deals with pressure, P1V1=P2V2? Either way a thinner artery would result in greater BP.
The whole post is off, nicotine is a vasoconstrictor, which raises blood pressure, and as a stimulant it increases heart rate. You most certainly can have increased BP and HR along with vasoconstriction.
Vegetables contain nicotine, and also the co-located and similar compound nicotinic acid (also known as vitamin B3 or niacin).
Tomatoes, potatoes and several other vegetables all provide dietary nicotine. Tea often contains nicotine, which after all is one of the reasons it works as a pick-me-up. Some vegetables such as aubergine (eggplant) contain significant amounts. These vegetables are broadly (but not exclusively) members of the Solanaceae family, one of our most often-consumed vegetable groups.
Nicotine is a perfectly healthy, normal and natural part of the diet. Some individuals may need more than the usual dietary quantity, as is observable for many other dietary constituents. Just as some may need a very large supplement of 2,000mg of extra vitamin B3 (nicotinic acid) in order to normalise cognitive function, short-term memory and work capacity; so a similar increase of nicotine may be necessary for such persons. This has been demonstrated by clinical trials that showed the positive effects on stress, work capacity, memory and cognitive function for some individuals. Although research in this area is sparse at this time (due to the unfashionable reputation of nicotine since it tends to be conflated with smoking), it is reasonable to expect that:
Some people need more of a specific dietary component than others; it is why people take supplements.
Since similar effects can be shown for nicotine and nicotinic acid (vitamin B3), it seems possible that those who demonstrate a requirement for supplementary B3 may also require supplementary nicotine.
No one has ever demonstrated:
a. That nicotine is harmful in reasonable quantities - many vitamins or dietary ingredients are of course toxic or even fatal in large quantities, such as vitamin A, vitamin D and iron, so that this is a non-argument.
b. That nicotine is any more harmful than coffee (caffeine).
We know from the Swedish national health statistics that ad lib long-term consumption of nicotine by tens of thousands of people over periods of decades has no identifiable risk.
The key to all of this is to remove the smoke. Without the smoke in cigarettes, consumption of certain specific types of tobacco (and, especially, nicotine consumption alone) can be proven to be ultra low risk. If a large population of people consume nicotine ad lib for decades with no visible health impact, then the issue is not debatable.
Tomatoes, potatoes and several other vegetables all provide dietary nicotine. Tea often contains nicotine, which after all is one of the reasons it works as a pick-me-up. Some vegetables such as aubergine (eggplant) contain significant amounts. These vegetables are broadly (but not exclusively) members of the Solanaceae family, one of our most often-consumed vegetable groups.
Nicotine is a perfectly healthy, normal and natural part of the diet. Some individuals may need more than the usual dietary quantity, as is observable for many other dietary constituents. Just as some may need a very large supplement of 2,000mg of extra vitamin B3 (nicotinic acid) in order to normalise cognitive function, short-term memory and work capacity; so a similar increase of nicotine may be necessary for such persons. This has been demonstrated by clinical trials that showed the positive effects on stress, work capacity, memory and cognitive function for some individuals. Although research in this area is sparse at this time (due to the unfashionable reputation of nicotine since it tends to be conflated with smoking), it is reasonable to expect that:
Some people need more of a specific dietary component than others; it is why people take supplements.
Since similar effects can be shown for nicotine and nicotinic acid (vitamin B3), it seems possible that those who demonstrate a requirement for supplementary B3 may also require supplementary nicotine.
No one has ever demonstrated:
a. That nicotine is harmful in reasonable quantities - many vitamins or dietary ingredients are of course toxic or even fatal in large quantities, such as vitamin A, vitamin D and iron, so that this is a non-argument.
b. That nicotine is any more harmful than coffee (caffeine).
We know from the Swedish national health statistics that ad lib long-term consumption of nicotine by tens of thousands of people over periods of decades has no identifiable risk.
The key to all of this is to remove the smoke. Without the smoke in cigarettes, consumption of certain specific types of tobacco (and, especially, nicotine consumption alone) can be proven to be ultra low risk. If a large population of people consume nicotine ad lib for decades with no visible health impact, then the issue is not debatable.
Nicotine Doesn’t Increase Cardiovascular Risk
Heart complications have long been associated with smoking, but a group of researchers correctly pointed out that tobacco smoke is a cacophony of things, not just nicotine. To test if it was the nicotine or the other chemicals, they reviewed studies which looked at the effect of nicotine (in the form of NRT) on people at particular risk for “acute cardiovascular events” (like heart attacks). The evidence showed that nicotine itself did not increase the frequency of cardiovascular events in the trials. This was assumed to be because other chemicals in tobacco smoke lead to the thickening of the blood (which raises the likelihood of heart problems) and nicotine does not. The researchers conclude that “The risks of NRT for smokers, even for those with underlying cardiovascular disease, are small and are substantially outweighed by the potential benefits of smoking cessation.”
Heart complications have long been associated with smoking, but a group of researchers correctly pointed out that tobacco smoke is a cacophony of things, not just nicotine. To test if it was the nicotine or the other chemicals, they reviewed studies which looked at the effect of nicotine (in the form of NRT) on people at particular risk for “acute cardiovascular events” (like heart attacks). The evidence showed that nicotine itself did not increase the frequency of cardiovascular events in the trials. This was assumed to be because other chemicals in tobacco smoke lead to the thickening of the blood (which raises the likelihood of heart problems) and nicotine does not. The researchers conclude that “The risks of NRT for smokers, even for those with underlying cardiovascular disease, are small and are substantially outweighed by the potential benefits of smoking cessation.”
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
