Lungs versus mouth?

[PaulB]

A couple of current threads seem to be edging on my question, but I didn't want to hijack either of them. An assertion I've read about e-cigarettes is that most (all?) nicotine absorption occurs in the oral mucosa and not the lungs. Is this pretty well nailed down, or supposition? And does this likewise hold true for regular cigarettes, as I think I read somewhere here?

I guess I'm trying to make some sense out of what seem like very different smoking behaviors and habits. Pipe and cigar smokers (and a relative few cigarette smokers) generally do not inhale their smoke, and from what I've observed, most seem not to crave the frequent and regular doses that cigarette smokers who inhale do. Some cigarette smokers (and vapers) inhale longer and/or more deeply than others. For me, if for some reason I could not inhale what I'm smoking or vaping, I would definitely find it a less pleasurable experience.

So, (how) does inhaling figure into the habit. Is it nicotine or something else?

 

[martha1014]

I don't think you would absorb as much nicotine unless you inhaled it in your lungs. I am not satisfied unless I can feel it in my lungs. If I did not inhale and just vaped from my mouth I may as well use the nicotine gum other than being able to see the vapor.

 

[PaulB]

I don't think you would absorb as much nicotine unless you inhaled it in your lungs. I am not satisfied unless I can feel it in my lungs. If I did not inhale and just vaped from my mouth I may as well use the nicotine gum other than being able to see the vapor.

Exactly, Martha! Same here. The lung involvement has got to be playing some role, even if, after all these years, it's just been a pleasant sensation we get right after the nicotine. (My grandmother smoked from her 20s into her 80s, lived to be 97, and died of something else. But my mother was quick to remind me that, for all that smoking, she didn't inhale. Weird.)

 

[underwater goddess]

I don't think you would absorb as much nicotine unless you inhaled it in your lungs. I am not satisfied unless I can feel it in my lungs.

If you don't inhale you won't absorb any nicotine. If you just leave an e-cig in your hand and don't puff on it no vapor comes out.

 

[SirVette]

I stopped inhaling into the lungs years ago, still some goes into the lungs. Definitely does work & absorb nic.!
I have only had a PV 10+ days & am not having any issues some mention & in general do inhale the PV.

 

[TropicalBob]

If you don't inhale you won't absorb any nicotine.

Not true at all. Not even close. The Health New Zealand report says that MOST of the nicotine intake from e-smoking comes from upper airway, not lung, absorption.

That same report says the mouth and upper airway absorb 98% of the nicotine, and exhaled vapor is almost all PG. Vapor particles are apparently too big to make it as deeply into the lungs as smoke particles. In one study, sizes from biggest to smallest were: aerosol, mist, vapor, smoke.

So, no matter how deeply you inhale vapor, you will not replicate inhaling cigarette smoke.

 

[underwater goddess]

Not true at all. Not even close. The Health New Zealand report says that MOST of the nicotine intake from e-smoking comes from upper airway, not lung, absorption.

That same report says the mouth and upper airway absorb 98% of the nicotine

But I thought that e-cigs have no "sidestream smoke"?

I'm confused...

 

[Scorched]

But I thought that e-cigs have no "sidestream smoke"?

I'm confused...

Sidestream smoke would be qualified as the smoke coming off the end of your cigarette. I think.

So when Bill Clinton says he "didn't inhale", does that mean he still got high? Would the same principal apply?

 

[cainne]

From the studies I read the uncombusted nicotine particles are simply too large to pass through the membrane inside the lungs which does make sense when you understand that lungs were adapted to transfer gasses and most uncombusted particles are much larger than gas particles the lung typically exchanges.

Think of it like burning a large rubber ball and then throwing the pieces through a chain link fence as opposed to just throwing the red rubber ball at the fence. The former passes through, the latter just bounces off.

 

[Devilooman]

Add the nose in there. I started blowing the vape out through my nose and it seems to be more satisfying that way. If I do it slow enough I can actually get a little nic rush, lol.

 

[TropicalBob]

Cainne: Your point is correct. And, yes, exhaling through the nose adds nicotine absorption via the nasal mucosa -- exactly as occurs with users of nasal snuff. Pipe smokers who just "puff" without inhaling the smoke also gain from exhaling through the nose.

Vapers need to learn to do exactly the same: Inhale to the MOUTH, hold it there, then suck to the lungs, then blow out the nose. By all studies, that would result in maximum exposure to the nicotine in the vapor.

 

[markarich159]

I only read the Abstract from New Zealand study(not the entire study itself). Remember, the particle size portion of the abstract was a cascade impactor protocol, not an in-vivo bronchiolar/aveolar study, and , it appeared , the conclusions about alveolar absorbtion were drawn, as I stated, not from actual alveolar data, but from extrapolation of the cascade impactor data.

Cascade impactor data showed e-cig vapor particle size in the order of magnitude of 100's of nanometers. This is very comaparble to particle size acheived by asthma/COPD inhalers & nebulizers already on the market. The in-vivo studies on these inhalers/nebulizers clearly shows that this particle size(the same particle size as the cascade impactor e-cig datum) and larger, reaches, and is active, at least to inflammatory tissue and smooth muscle tissue in the extreme lower bronchiolar, upper alveolar portion of pulmonary epithelium.

Until actual in-vivo testing with e-cig vapor on human pulmonary tissue is done, this will remain unresolved.

 

[underwater goddess]

I'm still confused

 

[Windsage]

What you have to keep in mind here is that nicotine can and will simply absorb right through you skin. It a property of nicotine. You could feasibly get your nicotine fix by just rubbing nic juice on the back of your hand. AKA nicotine patch.

 

[markarich159]

What you have to keep in mind here is that nicotine can and will simply absorb right through you skin. It a property of nicotine. You could feasibly get your nicotine fix by just rubbing nic juice on the back of your hand. AKA nicotine patch.

If it's in it's pure liquid form, this is true. If it's in solution this is true, but only if it's #1. relatively pure. #2. in a volatile solvent. #3. if in a non-volatile sovent, the solvent or vehicle must, itself, be somewhat transdermally active(as in the nicotine patch).

If the nicotine is sufficiently diluted in a non-volatile, non-transdermally active solvent; it loses it's inherent transdermal activity. Unless you lather said solution on your skin and leave it there, unwashed, for an extended period of time(and even then, depending on the diluent, the dermal absorption will not be complete)

 

[Gas]

I only read the Abstract from New Zealand study(not the entire study itself). Remember, the particle size portion of the abstract was a cascade impactor protocol, not an in-vivo bronchiolar/aveolar study, and , it appeared , the conclusions about alveolar absorbtion were drawn, as I stated, not from actual alveolar data, but from extrapolation of the cascade impactor data.

Cascade impactor data showed e-cig vapor particle size in the order of magnitude of 100's of nanometers. This is very comaparble to particle size acheived by asthma/COPD inhalers & nebulizers already on the market. The in-vivo studies on these inhalers/nebulizers clearly shows that this particle size(the same particle size as the cascade impactor e-cig datum) and larger, reaches, and is active, at least to inflammatory tissue and smooth muscle tissue in the extreme lower bronchiolar, upper alveolar portion of pulmonary epithelium.

Until actual in-vivo testing with e-cig vapor on human pulmonary tissue is done, this will remain unresolved.

Exactly, the answer to the question is there is still no answer. Until more accurate and specific tests come out we can't know. Something's for sure, at east to me, and it's that regular cigarettes provide much higher nicotine peacks in your blood.

 

[PaulB]

Put together, if I'm understanding, the effect is interesting. When we inhale(ed) a cigarette, some nicotine absorption occurs in the lungs, as does a sensation of harshness/fullness in the lungs that, by association with the nicotine dose, becomes pleasurable. I think e-cigarettes are effective because, like cigarettes, they provide a semblance of that same lung sensation, even though nicotine delivery apparently does not occur in the lungs. Ingenious!

 

[Hellen A. Handbasket]

Something's for sure, at east to me, and it's that regular cigarettes provide much higher nicotine peacks in your blood.

Cigarettes deliver the nicotine in a different manner. Quicker, hard hitting... Freebase.

Freebase nicotine

The Secret of Marlboro's Success: Freebase Nicotine | Center for Media and Democracy

Even with maximum exposure vaping methods, we'll never get that same nicotine rush and ahhhh factor. Still, I'm grateful to have this method. Beats the crap out of a nasty patch or disgusting gum.

 

[Kate51]

Gotta go with TB and cainne on this one: most nicotine in vapor is absorbed in mouth, nose, throat and bronchi, not in the lungs. There may be minimal transdermal absorption from condensed vapor on lung tissue but most absorption happens closest to the vaporizing source where molecules are closest together. I believe that was covered in one of the later NZ testing, but would have to go back and review. Will post it if I can find it back again.
Hellen, I'm with you, thank goodness for the e-cig.
[edit] this is where I saw the reference for pulmonary absorption of nicotine in vapor: Please derive your own opinion from information, it is very sketchy. This is study relating to Nicorette/Nicotrol inhalers. There are more references from searches of above underlined.

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=1239503

And another:

http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/257/23/3262

However full text report required $43 subscription. I abstained! But text again referenced lack of absorption in lung, but rather in large pulmonary pathways, throat mouth and nose.
It has also been shown by testing that the Nicorette/Nicotrol inhalers were a bit more effective in delivery of nicotine than e-cigs, by a few points. So am by that statement assuming the inhaled vapor/nicotine is absorbed primarily outside of lung alveoli.

 

[dubd1c3]

The "inhaling aspect" is also related to, quite simply, taking a deep breath.

Taking a deep breath, of just air, hold, release, every 2 minutes increases oxygen levels, induces relaxation. Imagine doing that, and you'll see my point.

So the increased satisfaction through inhalation may be related to the deep breath effect.