Nicotine less addictive via vaping then smoking?

[Jman8]

I love nicotine. I am certainly not ANTZ. I love vaping. But denying that I enjoy my addiction to nicotine is pointless. I am not hurting anybody. What I am doing is healthier than smoking. I enjoy my life greatly. I don't need to be ashamed that something I enjoy is addictive.

I hear you, but I can't think of a much else where persons addicted can get by with saying they enjoy the addiction. Which seems to suggest that addiction might not be the right word.

I also can't think of any other addiction that affords the opportunity to be used as often daily as nicotine is without more significant withdrawals. Sugar and caffeine are decent contenders, but a heavy vaper takes, say 200 puffs a day, whereas I doubt a heavy caffeine user is drinking 200 sips a day, or person with sugar addiction is taking 200 bites. It strikes me as a very unique activity, akin to breathing. Other things that are smoked, aren't going to afford the opportunity to take even 50 puffs without some serious adverse reactions (and likely lots of money).

I do think that it is partially because the adverse consequences are so negligible that ANTZ people need to make the silly reaches they do, cause with other addictive activities the notion of "hitting rock bottom" pretty much makes the point that no fellow human could possibly put into words.

 

[Jman8]

Its Funny to watch threads like this Evolve.

And to see how some People base what Everyone should Feel and or Do based on a Single Person's experience. Their Own.

Where is "first person" being used in these words?

Please draw me that diagram.

 

[skoony]

"Dependency" is a term used by medical professionals to describe a drug addiction. Something being harmful to the human body has no relevance to the terms addiction or dependency.

yes it does.a dependency does not require medical and or legal intervention.
a addiction does but,that does not necessarily happen.
regards
mike

 

[VNeil]

Iwhereas I doubt a heavy caffeine user is drinking 200 sips a day, or person with sugar addiction is taking 200 bites.

You are obviously not a serious coffee drinker I think I can easily milk 40 sips per cup of java, at 5 cups per day. And I've cut way back over the years

But seriously you are very on point. The problem with 25 years now of Political Correctness is that words have no meaning any more and can be twisted any way one wants, if the politics are on their side. So here we have someone suggesting that if I want to sneak a vape in the grocery store, that is an "adverse consequence", where 35 years ago an adverse consequence was a loss of employability, destruction of family relationships,homelessness and etc. And back then everyone agreed on the definition of "adverse". Yes, words have no meaning any more. What a shame.

 

[DaveSignal]

yes it does.a dependency does not require medical and or legal intervention.
a addiction does but,that ones not necessarily happen.
regards
mike

nicotine does not require medical intervention, because it is much safer than many other dependencies that do require medical intervention.

 

[DaveSignal]

You are obviously not a serious coffee drinker I think I can easily milk 40 sips per cup of java, at 5 cups per day. And I've cut way back over the years

But seriously you are very on point. The problem with 25 years now of Political Correctness is that words have no meaning any more and can be twisted any way one wants, if the politics are on their side. So here we have someone suggesting that if I want to sneak a vape in the grocery store, that is an "adverse consequence", where 35 years ago an adverse consequence was a loss of employability, destruction of family relationships,homelessness and etc. And back then everyone agreed on the definition of "adverse". Yes, words have no meaning any more. What a shame.

all of those things are adverse. There is no degree to the word. It just means not the same or better. If it instantly kills you, that is adverse. And if it takes a very small amount of time to go out of your way in the gorcery store, that is adverse too. If you wanted there to be some kind of extreme degree, they would have to put that in the definition of the word.

Same thing for 'beneficial'. It could mean I won the a million dollars. Or it could mean that I saved a few seconds of time in some part of my work routine. Both are beneficial.

 

[Jman8]

You are obviously not a serious coffee drinker I think I can easily milk 40 sips per cup of java, at 5 cups per day. And I've cut way back over the years

I probably drink more soda than you drink coffee. Maybe not, but is how I was partially making that comment before. Which covers both caffeine and sugar.

But seriously you are very on point. The problem with 25 years now of Political Correctness is that words have no meaning any more and can be twisted any way one wants, if the politics are on their side. So here we have someone suggesting that if I want to sneak a vape in the grocery store, that is an "adverse consequence", where 35 years ago an adverse consequence was a loss of employability, destruction of family relationships,homelessness and etc. And back then everyone agreed on the definition of "adverse". Yes, words have no meaning any more. What a shame.

I think words have always had the meaning we give them. I think of this sort of thing along scale of: like, preference, strong desire, dependence

Like and preference are what moderate users experience, in my understanding, and strong desire / dependence are what addicts are experiencing. But I think if dependence isn't full blown and isn't having self identifiable adverse reactions, that it probably isn't really more than strong desire.

Even this understanding I could poke holes in, and to me, it really does come down to self identifiable adverse events as to whether there is problem worthy of considering, or is more likely anti-type who is trying to shame user and move user / observers toward the anti position.

 

[James Wilson]

For me it is more of a stress reliever. When I quit smoking I needed the higher nic but now i got no problem vaping anywhere between 3mg and 12 mg. I don't crave nicotine anymore then i crave caffeine. Though mentally I still want to vape all the time lol. Most vapors who were smokers start out higher in nic but end up lowering themselves down even when they don't plan on doing it. I never planned on it but I have. Most Non-smokers likely never end up vaping more then 6 mg. I imagine many vape on 0 to 3 mg more then anything.

 

[DC2]

Like if someone were addicted to reading. That would be tame, and would be unlikely to have noticeably adverse effects. I think a reading addiction would be more tame than nic, but not by a lot.

Funny you should mention that, because I don't read anymore.

I am HIGHLY addicted to reading, and I have been known to call in sick because of it.
If I get involved in a book I'll stay up all night reading it.

And I usually get involved in the books I read.
So I had to go cold turkey on reading.


I have a pile of books stacking up for when I retire though.

 

[DaveSignal]

And I just think that, in this instance, there is no reason to be ashamed. Nicotine is addictive, so what? Any adverse effects are trivial and are things that I am happily able to deal with and far worth the continuted inhalation of said nicotine.

 

[skoony]

nicotine does not require medical intervention, because it is much safer than many other dependencies that do require medical intervention.

that is why it's not an addiction.
it's not like anything that does.
mike

 

[DC2]

Some people quit smoking and chew nicotine gum for YEEEEAAARS after they quite smoking.

I would postulate that smoking could possibly cause changes in the brain in some people.
And some of those people may develop some sort of addiction to nicotine.

 

[DC2]

And I just think that, in this instance, there is no reason to be ashamed. Nicotine is addictive, so what?

It's a big deal because "vaping will addict a whole new generation" according to the ANTZ.

It's a concept that all the regulations, laws, and ordinances are based on.
And it's why flavors are going to be a thing of the past eventually.

 

[MagicJosh]

I could easily be spending more than 160 Eur/month on cigarettes.
I'm spending around 40 Eur/month with vaping.

You seem to imply that people who spend more on vaping than with cigarettes, do so because they *need* to spend that much to keep their "vaping cravings", and therefore, vaping is a costly "addiction", even more expensive than tobacco cigarettes - excise tax included.

And this is what I call BS.

You should not mix up "vaping expenses" with "collectible expenses". And yes, collecting vaping stuff IS part of the "hobby" for some people. But those people spend more to *collect* stuff, not because they *need* it to vape.

Think for a moment: if you used to collect expensive pipes and Zippo lighters, instead of simply *smoking*, your "smoking" expenses would also be way too high, would they not? And then, maybe "vaping expenses" would *still* be lower than "smoking" expenses.

Comparing collectible expenses with smoking expenses is like comparing oranges to apples.

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.

 

[Rossum]

So, if they use it there (compulsively), it is adverse and if they go outside and use (compulsively), that is also adverse.

Well, I consider it adverse that I avoid and refuse to willingly spend time anyplace where I can't vape. That's the biggest reason I despise airline travel, and why I won't own property anywhere that would require lengthy flights to get to. In this respect, it affects my life for the worse, but this adversity is imposed by society, not be nature. I suspect what you really mean by "adverse" is that it has consequences in terms of health or the ability to perform physical or mental tasks..

Seems about right, for ANTZ logic.

Is that really necessary?

 

[AXIOM_1]

Let me get this straight, you disbelieve that study due to your own personal experience. But the study was based on NON-SMOKERS and you were a HEAVY LONG TERM SMOKER. How could your experience possibly be relevant to that study, or any non-smoker that took up vaping with nic juice?

You sort of got it straight, but not totally ..... Yes, my 40 years of being chained to nicotine, does account for something, besides being just addicted to something. You asked how my experience can possibly be relevant to a study of non-smokers when I was a heavy smoker... You are missing the obvious.... It IS BECAUSE I was a heavy smoker that my assumptions may just have validity. I think some of you guys are making this thing much more complicated than it really is. Once again, I view it like this .....

1) Nobody on this forum nor anyone else for that matter, knows the desires/cravings for nicotine in ALL people. (Notice I said ALL) Not me, not you, not anyone... You may assume that you know that nicotine is not addictive (therefore causes no physical cravings) because a couple of "qualified" people did some experimentation on a "few" people who never smoked. To me, that certainly is not "concrete" evidence. No, I do not have NICOTINE confused with tobacco. I am talking about NICOTINE here..... Why do you suppose that nicotine is placed inside of smoking cessation products such as gum and lozenges? Just because the non-smoking test subjects did not get addicted to nicotine means very little. It may be that genetically they are normal in those regards. Some folks on the other hand may be genetically highly susceptible to becoming addicted to nicotine. It would be like if I took 100 people, fed them liver and then observed their response. Maybe all 100 would claim that they loved liver and maybe all of them would exhibit no physical maladies. Then they could claim that because of this test that it is proved that everyone in the world likes liver and it has no ill physical effects. Of course, we all know this is false because there are plenty of people in the world who hate liver and some who get very ill from eating it. Same goes with that faulty experiment that everyone keeps touting.

2) I am not saying that nicotine alone is the only thing responsible for nicotine addiction. Like I said before, addictive personalities play a portion in the role as well. How much I do not know. I only know that I have a highly addictive personality and so I am assuming it plays a significant role.

But I am saying that I think physical nicotine addiction exists in SOME (not all) people as well. No, I don't think it is entirely due to addictive personalities but I also don't think it's entirely nicotine caused. I think it takes both. I also think only certain individuals who are genetically inclined can get addicted to nicotine. No test that they have in the world can prove that (not yet)..... When/if they find the genetic markers for nicotine addiction then my thoughts will be validated.

 

[DaveSignal]

that is why it's not an addiction.
it's not like anything that does.
mike

There are many addictions that do not require medical intervention. Some have been discussed in this thread already.
It's a very general word that is not directly related to any medical implication.
Aspirin is a drug. And so is *insert illegal narcotic here*. That doesn't change the meaning of the word drug.

But, since it seems that some people are scared of the word 'red', I guess we can use the word 'crimson' instead. Although it might be hard to remember every time.

So, lets call it 'compulsive dependency'. I will use 'compulsive dependency' to mean 'chemical dependency with compulsive behaviors'. I believe that nicotine creates a 'compulsive dependency' via both vaping and smoking. Removing the carcinogens from smoking, I do not think that the consequences from the nicotine 'compulsive dependency' are significantly detrimental and a person can go on living their life without much issue while experiencing this 'compulsive dependency'. I also believe that there are some beneficial aspects to the 'compulsive dependency', one of which is that inhalation is immediatly enjoyable. I have also heard that it may help prevent Alzheimer's Disease. So what if it creates a compulsive dependency? Who cares? It is very enjoyable. It affects heart rate and metabolism, but its not unhealthy for most people. And there could even be a possible health benefit if protects brain function. So the ANTZ Just saying that nicotine creates a 'compulsive dependency' is not a good argument against nicotine, if thats what they are trying to do. But that doesn't change the fact that the drug does create a 'compulsive dependency'.

 

[zoiDman]

It's a big deal because "vaping will addict a whole new generation" according to the ANTZ.

It's a concept that all the regulations, laws, and ordinances are based on.
And it's why flavors are going to be a thing of the past eventually.

Unfortunately, I believe that you are Correct.

And the Latest Da/AP Debacle has not Helped save Flavors either.

 

[MagicJosh]

it costs money. and if I had no e-juice and no food, I would go out to the vape store and buy e-juice before I went to the corner shop to buy food.

That is an adverse consequence.
Therefore, I am compulsively engaging in rewarding stimuli, despite adverse consequences. It fits your definition perfectly.

haha... See! I would probably do the same thing.

 

[DC2]

I don't entirely disagree with the things you are saying, but I do want to comment on a couple of points...

Why do you suppose that nicotine is placed inside of smoking cessation products such as gum and lozenges?

Another good question would be, why don't those things work?

Same goes with that faulty experiment that everyone keeps touting.

It's certainly not one experiment, it's a growing body of evidence...
Nicotine maybe not so addictive after all?