Nicotine in the lungs

[MiamiMom63]

Well, as soon as I started trying to follow Spazmelda's post, I got lost. I'm not scientific minded. I do think, from watching my father die and what his doctor told me, his lungs were like a sponge and held moisture because of smoking for so many years. After smoking for so long your lungs become spongy and hold moisture. Which means, from what I have seen in life experiences and sad situations in friends and family members, is that if you get really sick and have any life threatening situation and need surgery, the lungs are VERY important to restabalize yourself. Usually you get fluid in the lungs which poses a huge problem for smokers. Now nicotine, on the other hand, even though we are vaping, a person like me that suffers from high blood pressure, has another problem to deal with. Nicotine won't kill you, per say, but if you suffer from high blood pressure, you should be careful and try to lower your nic level if possible. That's my opinion on all of it, non-scientifically. But yea, if you are a heavy smoker and have sucky lungs and go into major surgery of any sort, you better be praying your lungs will sustain you.

 

[rondasherrill]

I've only found one study that doesn't just say "cigarette smoke" when referring to cilia damage, and it listed the causes as arsenic, CO, and methane...

 

[Spazmelda]

From what I learned in my anatomy class nicotine was not the cause but the actual smoke and its compounds stunning the cilia. I found this, and do not see nicotine named at all. Perhaps you misunderstood what the instructor was saying, or perhaps she got her words mixed up:

How does Smoking Affect the Cilia?

The most common reason to suffer damaged or paralyzed cilia, however, is smoking. Normally, healthy cilia in the bronchial tubes work in sync with specialized cells that produce mucous to capture and remove impurities out of the lungs. Smokers, on the other hand, are subjected to about 4,000 toxic chemicals in cigarette smoke, including arsenic, methane, and carbon monoxide. The cumulative effect of smoking on the cilia is that dirt, environmental pollutants, and toxins from cigarette smoke remain in the lungs. Furthermore, these toxins migrate from the lungs via the bloodstream to other organs.

In response to the presence of excess irritants, mucous cells in the lungs become stimulated to produce more mucous than they normally would. Of course, with damaged cilia, the lungs have no means of moving the mucous out. This usually results in an unproductive cough. In fact, the damage to cilia caused by smoking leaves the smoker at significantly higher risk for frequent respiratory infections, or chronic bronchitis.

Continued smoking may eventually lead to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD, including chronic bronchitis and emphysema) or lung cancer. In fact, smoking eventually destroys the cilia, which may then be displaced by an excessive number of basal cells, or cancerous squamous cells. Over time, these cells may become cancerous. They may also become rogue, escaping through lung tissue and invading other parts of the body.

Remarkably though, smoking cessation can undo the damage to cilia rather quickly. In fact, the cilia begin to repair themselves and regenerate in number within only three days after quitting. It should be noted that coughing is a common side effect to this process and may last from a few days to several weeks. This is because the restored cilia are working overtime to remove impurities and mucous from the lungs. However, if cough persists for more than eight weeks, a physician should be consulted.

I agree that the tars and stuff have to be really bad for cilia in the long term, but some of these studies definitely show a short term effect. In other words they are taking smoke or some liquid form of smoke compounds and perfusing a ciliated tissue that has never been exposed to smoke before (like in some of the animal studies). According to the studies the effects are rather rapid. What these effects are depends on the study, the animal, the tissue, and what chemical or mix of chemicals they are exposing the tissue to. So aside from the long term effects of tar accumulation, there does seem to be some immediate effects as well. I hope that made some sense as it is late and I am tired. Lol.

To summarize... I don't think you can simply say "nicotine paralyzes cilia". #1 I'm not sure the evidence supports that (I'd have to read more in depth, but it doesn't seem to at first glance) and #2 It seems to be way more complicated than that. All the different chemicals, and tissues, etc... Makes it a difficult question to address.

 

[njay23]

Here's an abstract showing a similar effect in Rabbit:

Never trust a bunny who smokes

 

[vsummer1]

I've only found one study that doesn't just say "cigarette smoke" when referring to cilia damage, and it listed the causes as arsenic, CO, and methane...

Sounds like that's the one I posted. Nowhere in there do they mention nicotine. I think the op either misunderstood what the instructor was saying, or the instructor themself was confused and used the term "nicotine" rather than tobacco smoke.

 

[vsummer1]

Never trust a bunny who smokes

^ That there is a very true statement. Smoking bunnies should NEVER be trusted.

 

[tsbrewers]

I would like to find out why..

 

[Rickajho]

I would like to find out why..

Ummm... I forgot what we were discussing.

 

[Orobas]

perhaps that is still so. i still cough a few times first thing in the morning, but i'm not hacking up a mouthful of brownish crap now that i'm vaping instead of smoking.

If nicotine still freezes the cilia, then i'm just doing the previous day's incidental coughing the next morning. I'm okay with it.

Conversely it may well be the tar. I haven't had a cigarette since april and the yellow stain on my left index and middle fingernails has JUST NOW faded away.

 

[KuroCz]

Continuing. If they made 0 nicotine analogs smoking would be not as dangerous, because the tar and other stuff that gets stuck in the lungs and causes problems would be cleared out of the lungs by the cilia.

Your instructors comment was 'technically' correct, and is a perfect example of doctor mentaility. But perhaps for the wrong reasons.
Nicotine is different than caffine, in that caffine is a diuretic, and nicotine , which I always presumed was also a diuretic from the effects of using nicogum (now I have to wonder what else is in the gum) I found out today inhibits diureses after reading this:
Cambridge Journals

*edit - seems oxfordjuornals wants you to register. I refuse, but first time viewers may be able to follow the links from this abstract:
http://qjmed.oxfordjournals.org/content/18/1/51.extract

As you continue your education and speak with more and more doctors, you will understand that many doctors speak in thier own language that can alarm laymen. Technically, smoking 0mg nic cigarettes is safer, because it would not inhibit diureses like a nicotine cig would, reducing the risk of _insert verbose technical info_ by not passing fluid from your body.

A good understandable example is, a doctor will refer to someone as having heart disease. To a doctor if you do not have perfect heart performance, you have heart disease. A better doctor will take the time to explain after the shocked looks from the patients' family. If your kitchen sink drips after you turn it off, it has faucet disease. If the water flow doesn't change when you turn it off, it is Accute heart disease. Doctors, and any specialists, can simply speak in thier 'peer jargon' which causes lots of glazed eyes, confusion, misunderstanding, and in particular in medical issues, overreaction and alarmism. As a begining paramedic, please try and keep that in mind for the sake of your patients family you may speak with

As far as how you absorb nicotine from vaping, wether it is primarily through the mouth/nasal/throat, or lungs, I have not seen any real medical information on it. The closest medical information I've seen relating to that, is the 2009 study done in New Zeland, stating that 98% of nicotine in cigarette smoke is absorbed, so it is presumed that this amount of nicotine is absobed while vaping. A phamacutical company won't fund a medical study about that, for all the wrong reasons.

 

[zymox]

Much info here that is hard to make real.

I did a test many years ago. It goes like this for you vaping m8's.
Ask a friend of yours thats still into analogs to find a white napkin. Let him take a big soak on an analog and form his mouth as you are going to whistle. Place the napkin so it's sealed against the mouth and slowly blow out the smoke through the napkin without having the smoke go down in his lungs first.
Now do the same again next to the brown spot the first blow out caused but this time you ask your friend to inhale the smoke to the lungs before he blows it out.

The result is stunning. I would say that 75% - 80% of that brown stuff is stuck in your lungs...
If you're in the possession of really sensitive scales it's possible to calculate how much of that brown stuff that is stuck in your lungs and how much it have to take care of. Then imagine the amount for a lot of years that many of has used analogs.

 

[Mrgreen819]

Lots of people are professionals, all that means is you do that particular thing for a living.It has nothing to do with actually being good at what you do. People who are exceptionally good at what they do are what I call experts. That being said I have got plenty of incorrect information from mis informed doctors. I helped my x wife study to become a nurse practitioner and read plenty of medical books only to have a doctor try to correct what I read later on. People make mistakes and some dont like to admit it.

 

[denali_41]

That being said I have got plenty of incorrect information from mis informed doctors. I helped my x wife study to become a nurse practitioner and read plenty of medical books only to have a doctor try to correct what I read later on. People make mistakes and some dont like to admit it.

thats why it is refereed to as "practicing medicine"

 

[Medieval Barber]

thats why it is refereed to as "practicing medicine"

Your right about that! That's why it is always good to dig deeper into statements. I was unsure of the actual validity of that stat ment myself after running to catch a plane and still be able to breath when I got to the terminal.

 

[glassmanoak]

What about the effect of smoking on the heart? Coming from a man who had 5 bypasses during surgery.

 

[zoiDman]

I'm not sure why the Doctor that the OP referred to is taking so much Flack?

If the OP quoted Her Correctly, She said: " ... one of the reasons that analogs are so dangerous is because of the nicotine. nicotine stuns the cilia ( which are hairs that act as a cleaning device) of the lungs and trachea, when a smoker wakes up with smokers cough in the morning it's because he cilia are active so to stop it they smoke an analog and it stops."

Isn't the Key Word here "One"?

Also, can Nicotine's Effects be Directly compared when the Delivery Methods Differ?

 

[denali_41]

nicotine by itself is not the problem

when i smoked,i never lit up a stinky to stop the hacking,i hacked up half a lung and was just fine afterwards !!

i lit up to get my 4000 chemical addiction fix


oh,,just because a doctor said it,does not make it true,correct or a fact by any means

 

[Medieval Barber]

That's way medicine is an art and not a science, imho what vsummer posted is the most conclusive (the doc is not a pumologist so they would be the best one to ask). However what was said about the ammonia in analogs stunning the cilia could coincide with us being able to breath better with the pv's. referring to the effect on the heart a Greek Doctor did a test on pv's and said it is not harm full but that is just one study. In my opinion the more I learn the more I am convinced how dangerous analogs are (even more then cigars and pipes where one absorbers the nic through the mucus membrane of the sinus) where as with analogs your basically destroying a key organ that keeps you alive. As a closing point people knew how dangerous anologs were 80 or so years ago, Winston Churchill stated that it seems like most of the cigarette smokers die earlier then the rest of the populous. It's just that big tobacco has been suppressing the info to make money.

 

[Mac]

The tobacco in most commercial cigs is treated with ammonia. This freebases the nicotine (changes the charge of the ions) and makes the absorption rate much much more efficient. Combine that with the cough suppressants that are also added and consider that nicotine in vapor form is absorbed mostly sub-lingually and you have your answer.

 

[wonderland]

^ That there is a very true statement. Smoking bunnies should NEVER be trusted.

sorry, but he's so cute. back to the topic...


Sent from down a rabbit hole using Tapatalk.