Nicotine less addictive via vaping then smoking?

[Coldrake]

So far in this thread, it has been offered that there must be some mysterious addictive ingredient in cigarettes that when combined with nicotine was somehow able to make users dependant, but nobody has known about this ingredient for all of these years.

Not so mysterious, MAOIs in combination with nicotine making nicotine more addictive has been known for ten years. Here are some interesting links.

Monoamine Oxidase Inhibition Dramatically Increases the Motivation to Self-Administer Nicotine in Rats
Monoamine oxidase inhibition dramatically increases the motivation to self-administer nicotine in rats. - PubMed - NCBI
Monoamine oxidase inhibitors allow locomotor and rewarding responses to nicotine. - PubMed - NCBI
Why Is Smoking Addictive? It's Probably Not Just Nicotine, Despite What We've Been Told For Years

 

[DaveSignal]

Edit: I did re-read your answer again, and i might have misinterpret your post earlier. But i'll let my WoT stick around anyway.

Yea i agree it'll stop that sudden "satisfaction" - feeling. But vaping fullfills something most of us are missing when we want to quit smoking. The hand to mouth... or even to inhale. Which vaping gives us. But it does not give us any more nic than anything else realy.

Patches and gums / inhalers has for me personally just failed, as for many others. Just due the fact that most of us crave that mouth to lung/ hand to mouth sensation.

But then back on topic, as i've said. Atleast for me i can go a day or even 2 without vaping. I just feel the same urge for vaping as i do with coffee.
Granted i do intentionally use nicotine due it helps me to focus way better. (Browse my history if u wanna know more, not gonna boast it out here.)

However, what most and maybe even you feel "addicted" to is the sensation of smoking (in our case vaping.) I realy doubt it's the nicotine you realy crave.
Nicotine is good for us though due it's a mild stimulant just like caffeine. Also it's quite a huge amount of it in our vegitables, such as tomatoes.

Oh well all in all, i beg to differ that nicotine would be "so" addicting.
Then the gums/patches/inhalers would be aswell. Yet you now know what they include with them.

Funny though, both PG and VG is present in the inhalers for example. Yet FDA want to tell us how bad it is, and we're vaping antifreeze...
Yea right.

It's all about the money. Well i went abit oT sorry about that.

I agree we need to stop FDA from destroying our pastime. I just don't think that arguing against nicotine being a drug or being addictive is going to be successful way to prevent regulation.

I think the hand to mouth thing that you crave is because you have associated it with the positive effect of nicotine. Just like you can get a dog to salivate simply by rining a bell if the dog was regularly served food along with a rung bell.

And it feels good to have an addiction. You have something to occupy the time. You have something to think about when you can't have it right away. And then you vape and feel satisfied. immediate satisfaction. wonderful. It feels good to inhale. You want to keep doing it. It does not promote criminal activity. It is not creating societal issues. There is no increase in murder, rape, overdoses overwhelming hospitals. There is no current reason to regulate it, other than the hypothetical proposition that it will increase tobacco use, which in turn will cause more tobacco-related illnesses. So why not instead make the argument that tobacco use is decreasing due to vaping?

 

[DC2]

So far in this thread, it has been offered that there must be some mysterious addictive ingredient in cigarettes that when combined with nicotine was somehow able to make users dependant, but nobody has known about this ingredient for all of these years.

Not really too mysterious...
Nicotine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tobacco smoke contains anabasine, anatabine, and nornicotine. It also contains the monoamine oxidase inhibitors harman and norharman.[56] These beta-carboline compounds significantly decrease MAO activity in smokers.[56][57] MAO enzymes break down monoaminergic neurotransmitters such as dopamine, norepinephrine, and serotonin. It is thought that a powerful interaction between the MAOIs and nicotine is responsible for most of the addictive properties of tobacco smoking.[58] The addition of five minor tobacco alkaloids increases nicotine-induced hyperactivity, sensitization and intravenous self-administration in rats.[59]

 

[skoony]

can you list some? because of the top of my head I am thinking: pain relievers, stimulants, sedatives, muscle relaxants, sleeping medication, depressants, anesthetics, opiates, hallucianagens, ... ah wait, antacids.. these are chemicals that neutralize acids in the stomach. I suppose laxatives work in a similar way. But I don't think thats most drugs.

ETA: and steroids too... I think. I might have to look into that one.
EDIT: nope.. i was wrong about steriods. Thses drugs are essentially testostone and can be highly addictive and have huge CNS effects.

heres a list. i will let you sort them out.
Drugs A-Z List - A on RxList
regards
mike

 

[Alien Traveler]

"Could work" yea.. it could.
Yes vaping is far more (imo) more effective, purely due the fact that you get that mouth to loung / hand to mouth sensation.
The ammount of nic i get with vaping is far less than those patches or gums, due they're made to release x/y ammount of nic. (Not mentioning the other chems with it.)

Say... vaping:

• Propylene Glycol
• Vegetable Glycerin
• Flavoring
• Nicotine

Then we've nicorette quickmist for example:

• Propylene Glycol
• Anhydrous Ethanol
• Trometamol
• Poloxamer 407
• Glycerol
• Sodium Hydrogen Carbonate
• Levomenthol
• Mint Flavour
• Cooling Flavour
• Sucralose
• Acesulfame Potassium
• Hydrochloric Acid
• Purified Water
• Nicotine

Now that's a shocker isn't it?

Nope. Not a shocker. Putting things in a stomach or into lungs are two very different things.

 

[skoony]

Nope. Not a shocker. Putting things in a stomach or into lungs are two very different things.

not necessarily.
all sorts of things wind up in the lungs
that are not air.
all sorts of things that are in the air wind
up into the stomach.
they are both filters.
the problem arises when unwanted things
cannot be effectively filtered out.
regards
mike

 

[jpargana]

Na man, I didnt mean any of what you thought.


I said Nicotine is addictive. point blank! I smoked a pack a day since highschool Im 35 years old now. I just quite 5 months ago. Im not new to this ..... A drug is a drug. Nicotine is a drug. And vaping with Nicotine is a drug. And some people not ALL people, spend More, spend more on vaping then they did on cigarettes. Period. Im one of them. But I have what I need and now I'm taking a long break from new products. I'm not against VAPING bro. Im one of you! All im saying is the truth and what I see and read on HERE! And on youtube and on the streets. Some company's care and charge reasonable prices for products when some are in it just for money and are selling 25 dollar mods for 180 dollars. Im not BS anyone. You might be spoending 40 a month like me, Im a Zamplebox subscriber. But some people spend SERIOUS dough on products. For instance, have you watched the youtube vapers. Some of them buy every new mod that comes to market. If you want me to name them I will.

Let's re-run you previous post, and see what you *actually* wrote, shall we?

"Cmon now. If you vape nicotine EVERY DAY you're a nicotine addict. Most addicts in the world are in denial. And the whole ''HOBBY BULL....'' makes me laugh. So loud btw! Vaping is a necessity for most. I think Vaping is more addicting then cigarettes, Once you start vaping, you want to buy more and more vape products. to the point where the addiction makes you spend more money then you did when you smoked cigarettes, You start saying stuff like you say, and start denying that its bad for you. Vaping isn't good for you either. Its just better then tobacco. I would not want my child to vape or smoke. period! If your a caring parent. We know this forrum is FULL of people stuck in Vape denial. blah blah blah vaping is not bad for you bull..... If your e juice contains nicotine its going to effect your body Stimulants are not good for you over time."


Get this straight for once: if SOME people are spending MORE on vaping gear than they used to spend on vaping, that is THEIR "problem", and more than that, it is a "problem" completely un-related with vaping by itself!

Vaping is not an expensive "addiction", (*) (your way of putting things, not mine), and vapers are not poor hooked "addicts" who need to spend more on vaping than they used to spend on cigarettes, just to keep away from cigarettes.

People who do that, they do it because they started collecting stuff they *like*, not stuff they actually *need*. And therefore, it is a *choice*.

I had once a jealous smoker telling me, about my setup "That's a rich man's 'tobacco' " (As if I was showing off my new Ferrari). We was telling that to me in a envious way, like saying "we poor people *must* use cigarettes".

My response? "Not really. Sure, I've spared some money already, but not enough to make me rich!!"

Moments later, his jaw dropped when I told him about my vaping expenses in the last year. And I made it clear for him that if he could afford the excise taxes on smoking, then he could also afford vaping expenses - three or four times fold.



(*) I guess your definition of "addiction" is very generalist. What about people who use non-nicotine liquids, and ALSO spend some money on devides they like? All there's left is the old behavioral side, the "hand-to-mouth", so difficult for smokers to quit. That would make them just as "addicted" as someone who cannot let go of his new iPhone.

 

[DaveSignal]

But there is no problem here. I want a specific legal drug. And I want to inhale it in my lungs, not eat it or absorb it through my skin. It's addictive but doesn't motivate me to rob/steal/harm others in any way. And it doesn't pose any significant known health risk. So why is this even an issue? It is what it is and I want to exercise my freedom to enjoy something that does not have significant detriment to anybody, yet makes me contented.

What if you were to read a study that says that alcohol is not really addictive by itself? They did a test with hundreds of people and rubbed significant amounts of alcohol on all of them and no one desired more alcohol after the study ended. Wouldn't you think this to be a ridiculous study?

Denying the existence of nicotine addiction, which clearly exists, is a horribly weak argument. Why not instead just show that the nicotine addiction poses little threat, and the choice to use is a desired freedom for adults.

 

[Jman8]

I agree we need to stop FDA from destroying our pastime. I just don't think that arguing against nicotine being a drug or being addictive is going to be successful way to prevent regulation.

FDA, much of the time, comes off as ANTZ leaning. I don't think most here dispute this. And this would be partially why it is good to point out "ANTZ logic" or "ANTZ rhetoric" when anyone on our side is using that type of rhetoric in a discussion, such as this, to make points.

Clearly in what FDA has been up to, they are using this rhetoric to influence their "science." It is bias, propaganda. Perfect example of this, and relevant to this thread, is the common ANTZ meme of "nicotine is highly addictive."

I do believe it would be politically advantageous to a) have the discussion on addictions (noting that all things are inherently addictive, and thus nicotine isn't some odd exception), and b) to take the "highly" addictive meme down a notch.

Clearly with vaping, nicotine is not "highly" addictive, and I believe most (ex)smokers would confirm this. That it is plausibly still addictive is one thing, and perhaps honest assessment, but given the players and their tactics in the political game, I wouldn't be so quick to volunteer such info, when they demonstrate incessant need to scrutinize the teeniest and tiniest morsels of information to get what they desire out of a discussion / argument. We'd be wise to play that game, at that level, and to whatever degree, beat them at their game. As in, "hey Mr. ANTZ man, let me know what is not addictive. I'll be waiting for your reply and demonstration of intellectual honesty. If you have any."

Plus with vaping, it is entirely possible for any user, including kids, to engage in vaping and vape zero nicotine. That is one huge political point for vaping. Can't say same thing for combustibles, chew, etc. That people choose to vape nicotine appears to work against vaping, but is arguably not much different than idea that some vapers choose to vape *other stuff* while many vapers do not. Thus, saying that vaping is bad because of nicotine, which is highly addictive, needs to be called out, scrutinized and taken down a notch.

Regulators are still going to (try to) regulate, but if pushing that based on false memes, they will be perceived as zealous. And while the zealous approach may fly for a little while, it can be undone and the tide can turn the other way. As is, or was, case with other stuff. And in that case, zealots had a good 50 year run until the information age dawned upon mankind.

 

[skoony]

Denying the existence of nicotine addiction, which clearly exists, is a horribly weak argument. Why not instead just show that the nicotine addiction poses little threat, and the choice to use is a desired freedom for adults.

no one who has never used tobacco has ever became addicted to nicotine.
we know this from the clinical studies when nicotine was used to test
for its medicinal qualities in the treatment of various illnesses.
zero dependency was observed in those subjects that were lifetime
non-tobacco users. believe me. they looked for it. since nicotine
was thought to be addictive i am sure the test subjects had to sign a waiver
avowing they knew they were getting nicotine and it may cause addiction.
however there wasn't even dependency.
where is your addiction now?

regards
mike

 

[jpargana]

(...)

Denying the existence of nicotine addiction, which clearly exists, is a horribly weak argument. Why not instead just show that the nicotine addiction poses little threat, and the choice to use is a desired freedom for adults.

My own experience contradicts this.

I have suddenly cut from 18mg to 9mg. Then to 6mg. I'm now at 3mg. Did I miss it? Did I have cravings? No. What I craved was the TH provided by nic. With better devices, TH was too harsh, so I simply cut my juice with non-nic. And I did not miss anything at all.


When the new TPD was announced, I started making experiments with DIY. The first one, was unflavoured, non-nic liquid. It was lacking in TH of course, but it still beat smoking by far. I got thru all day with it, with no problem at all. Some years before, I would be climbing walls if I had to go thru a whole day without a cigarette.


A person I introduced to vaping was the mother-in-law of a friend of mine. She had allergies AND asthma, and struggled for years to quit smoking - with no avail, even with the added incentive of having serious health problems.

Two months into vaping, she was already reselling her vaping stuff - while still using 18mg e-liquid on an E-Go setup. She reasoned that with her health problems, the best thing for her was quit both cigarettes and vaping. And guess what? She finally succedded!

You see, with vaping, we're not inhaling all the tobacco MAOI's anymore. And those pose an enourmous difference in the equation: they increase the nicotine effect, making it apparently much more addictive than it actually is. And let's be honest: with all the thousands of chemicals in cigarette smoke, how could anyone be 100% sure that nicotine *alone* was the real culprit? Unlike ANTZ rethoric about the e-cig, this is a case where one could argue, honestly, that "we don't know for sure".

Quitting *nicotine* is not really that difficult. Quitting *smoking* is.


And I'm not alone is this "pet theory" of mine. Here's some food for thought:


Nicotine Replacement Therapy Labels May Change
Nicotine Replacement Therapy Labels May Change
Quote:
"The changes that FDA is allowing to these labels reflect the fact that although any nicotine-containing product is potentially addictive, decades of research and use have shown that NRT products sold OTC do not appear to have significant potential for abuse or dependence."
"The NRT gum and patch products were switched to OTC marketing between 1996 and 2002, based on scientific research showing that these products were safe for use without a prescription. The nicotine lozenge and mini-lozenge were approved directly for OTC use in 2002 and 2009, respectively."


Nicotine Propaganda
Nicotine Propaganda
The Great Nicotine Myth
Is Nicotine Addictive ?
Nicotine Clinical Trials: Why Aren't There Any?

Quotes:
"There is no evidence whatsoever that nicotine has any significant potential for dependence outside of tobacco smoking, and anyone who tells you that it can create dependence is offering an unsupported personal opinion, or is badly misinformed. In the case of a well-informed expert who would know that there is no evidence that nicotine (by itself) is dependence-creating and that in contrast there is a body of anecdotal evidence that it isn't, then it may be hard to avoid the interpretation that the statement is a deliberate lie, especially where they appear financially conflicted (for example if their employment or funding depends on some aspect of public health or pharmaceutical industry grants)."
"It is unlikely that an honest trial of nicotine's potential for dependence could be carried out at this time, since the results would likely be catastrophic for some commercial agendas and ideologies. We should be looking for historical examples that have been removed from view due to their unacceptable results, as with the CDC trial of nicotine in the population."

"2. FDA announces nicotine not addictive or dangerous
In April 2013 the FDA announced they no longer considered nicotine to be dependence-creating, liable to abuse, or dangerous if over-consumed.
In their Consumer Updates, they proposed removing several of the warning labels from NRTs. They have now conceded that several decades of evidence from nicotine-containing meds sales demonstrates that nicotine has no measurable potential for addiction and presents no danger of harm through overdose."

 

[DC2]

Denying the existence of nicotine addiction, which clearly exists, is a horribly weak argument. Why not instead just show that the nicotine addiction poses little threat, and the choice to use is a desired freedom for adults.

Already answered.

First of all, it is not a horribly weak argument when it comes to never-smokers.
In fact, it's most likely the truth.

And that argument, when applied to never-smokers...
Is the nail in the coffin for almost all of the ANTZ arguments to destroy vaping.

So again, it really does matter.
Especially if it's the truth.

 

[stevegmu]

I think the act of vaping itself can be as addictive as smoking cigarettes, whether one vapes e-liquid with nicotine, or without...

 

[jpargana]

I think the act of vaping itself can be as addictive as smoking cigarettes, whether one vapes e-liquid with nicotine, or without...

Well, if you are going to consider an "act" as an "addiction", then I guess almost *anything* we regularly could be considered and addiction as well.

And when everything is an addiction, then nothing is, really... it's all simple "normal stuff" people do.

 

[stevegmu]

Well, if you are going to consider an "act" as an "addiction", then I guess almost *anything* we regularly could be considered and addiction as well.

And when everything is an addiction, then nothing is, really... it's all simple "normal stuff" people do.

I would put it on par with smart phone addictions some have...

 

[DC2]

I would put it on par with smart phone addictions some have...

I think smart phone additions are much worse.
And far more dangerous.

 

[DaveSignal]

Anything can form an addiction. But when something becomes compulsive and habitual to a large group of people, then that something is addictive.

 

[stevegmu]

I think smart phone additions are much worse.
And far more dangerous.

I don't know how my lovely bride does it, but she can't go 2 steps when out and about without looking at her phone, yet doesn't bump into things or get run over crossing the street...

 

[zoiDman]

Well, if you are going to consider an "act" as an "addiction", then I guess almost *anything* we regularly could be considered and addiction as well.

And when everything is an addiction, then nothing is, really... it's all simple "normal stuff" people do.

When you say "normal stuff" people do, are you applying this to the General Population? Or a Smaller Sub-Set of the General Population?

 

[DC2]

I don't know how my lovely bride does it, but she can't go 2 steps when out and about without looking at her phone, yet doesn't bump into things or get run over crossing the street...

I don't care if smart phone addicts bump into things or get run over...
That's their problem.

I just care that they aren't in front of me at a stop light.
Or anywhere near me on the freeway.