I know this is probably debatable but I cant seem to get a straight answer does the nicotine alone cause heart disease. I have read where its just like caffeine and I have read horror stories can someone explain please? Thank you
Nicotine
- Thread starter Gina Morris Clark
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
-
- Tags
- nicotine
- Status
I have also read that nic is no more dangerous than caffeine but nic can constrict the arteries to the heart so it's not recommended with people with heart problems. For those that don't have heart problems there is no noticeable difference. I've been vaping for 3 yrs and my blood pressure has remained in the normal range the whole time. I should add that I don't have any heart issues.
My wife says that I don't even have a heart, so I can't really comment.
Seriously though, unless you're DIYing your juices and handling high concentrations, or ordering anything over 24mg, you shouldn't notice anything. As far as nicotine itself causing issues, there just haven't been enough studies on it. Nicotine is a stimulant, but then, like tmcase said, so is caffeine.
You'll find horror stories about everything, though...everything.
My advice to you is this: If you're worried about it, stick to no nic or low nic liquids.
Seriously though, unless you're DIYing your juices and handling high concentrations, or ordering anything over 24mg, you shouldn't notice anything. As far as nicotine itself causing issues, there just haven't been enough studies on it. Nicotine is a stimulant, but then, like tmcase said, so is caffeine.
You'll find horror stories about everything, though...everything.
My advice to you is this: If you're worried about it, stick to no nic or low nic liquids.
It's a matter of worst evil. Nicotine is a toxin it can raise your BP. So the idea is to vape with the goal of reducing the nicotine at some point even if you don't quit. But If you are a smoker this is the lesser of the two evils. Hate to use that analogy but could not come up with a better one. Go look up what all is in cigarettes now. My poison was cigars but I smoked the really big ones and inhaled them at the end. I now get normal chest xrays and my BP even after vaping is that of a health 19 year old now and i have not been 19 for over 50 years. LOL
OH on two occasions I was hospitalized because my BP was so high. I'm talking the nurses jaw dropped when she saw my BP. Later they said I could have died.
I've seen a number if studies that the title and abstract say they are studying"nicotine" and it's effects, but when you read the methodology, they state they used tobacco.
It's sloppy science at best and fear mongering at worst to say you are studying the effects of one chemical, but actually using a substance that contains many chemicals and only one of those chemicals is the one you say you're studying.
Perhaps it would help to dig deeper into those studies you saw and read the methodology for yourself?
Sent by big fingers on a tiny phone via Tapatalk
It's sloppy science at best and fear mongering at worst to say you are studying the effects of one chemical, but actually using a substance that contains many chemicals and only one of those chemicals is the one you say you're studying.
Perhaps it would help to dig deeper into those studies you saw and read the methodology for yourself?
Sent by big fingers on a tiny phone via Tapatalk
I have seen no research which indicates nicotine causes heart disease. Nicotine should be avoided when pregnant and can slow down some forms of healing like bone fractures. Both nicotine and caffeine cause blood vessels to constrict so for people with something like hardening of the arteries, both should be avoided.
Nicotine does help people with some gut diseases, some mental alertness and concentration issues and I've heard some forms of depression.
Nicotine does help people with some gut diseases, some mental alertness and concentration issues and I've heard some forms of depression.
Nicotine is not associated with cancer or CVD (cardio-vascular disease: heart disease, stroke, etc.).
This means it does not cause it and it does not make an existing condition worse, on average. This means that for normal people, there is little or no risk. For those with vulnerabilities it is a different matter:
- For example, if you have an existing medical condition related to this area, the above does not apply to you
- If you have a genetic predisposition to certain conditions, such as CVD, the above does not apply to you
So the answer to your question will vary according to who the subject is. People with a family history of early death from heart disease or stroke will need to take care.
With specific regard to blood pressure, note the following:
1. Nicotine is a vasoconstrictor. It will raise the blood pressure acutely (this just means at the time it is consumed, nothing more).
2. Dr Newhouse has a body of evidence showing that nicotine lowers the blood pressure chronically (this just means over time, and nothing more). He states that medium-term nicotine consumption can be shown to reduce the systolic (but not diastolic) pressure. So in point of fact, nicotine lowers 'half' of the blood pressure measured in medium-term consumers of pure nicotine who have never smoked.
Acute means 'at that time'.
Chronic means 'over time'.
Dr P Newhouse
Paul Newhouse of Vanderbilt is currently regarded as the leading expert on practical nicotine issues, because he has the most experience with administration of the pure compound to never-smokers. He has administered large quantities of pure nicotine to non-smokers who included many never-smokers, daily, for months at a time, in multiple clinical trials for the investigation of nicotine's positive effects for certain medical conditions. He almost certainly has the best current database for the effects of pure nicotine on tobacco-naive subjects (those who have never smoked or consumed tobacco in any form). To avoid repetition and needless work here, all the citations for the above statements are listed on my personal website, on the References page, and the Vaping Quotes page: E-Cigarette Politics
The current state of medical knowledge on nicotine consists of two bodies of work: research on tobacco and smokers that claims to have relevance to nicotine, and research on pure nicotine administered to never-smokers. It seems logical that only materials relevant to the specific compound administered to never-smokers has any value; trying to determine the effects of one item from the immensely long list in consumption of tobacco containing up to 9,600 compounds (Rodgman, Perfetti 2013) does not seem valid.
The conclusions taken from these two bodies of work are radically different. Traditionally, nicotine was only examined in connection with smoking; or rarely, in connection with ST use (smokeless tobacco such as Snus). Any perceived value in such work has been completely destroyed by recent developments, although the propaganda based on it is still widely circulated. Most of this older body of work can be accurately described as complete rubbish.
Nicotine is now regarded as relatively harmless (assuming the subject consuming it is average); and far less toxic than previously claimed. Finally, of course, there is no person known to medical science who has ever become dependent on nicotine without exposure to tobacco, and it is looking increasingly likely that this is either impossible or as close to it as makes no difference. The potential for pure nicotine to create dependence is about zero.
This means it does not cause it and it does not make an existing condition worse, on average. This means that for normal people, there is little or no risk. For those with vulnerabilities it is a different matter:
- For example, if you have an existing medical condition related to this area, the above does not apply to you
- If you have a genetic predisposition to certain conditions, such as CVD, the above does not apply to you
So the answer to your question will vary according to who the subject is. People with a family history of early death from heart disease or stroke will need to take care.
With specific regard to blood pressure, note the following:
1. Nicotine is a vasoconstrictor. It will raise the blood pressure acutely (this just means at the time it is consumed, nothing more).
2. Dr Newhouse has a body of evidence showing that nicotine lowers the blood pressure chronically (this just means over time, and nothing more). He states that medium-term nicotine consumption can be shown to reduce the systolic (but not diastolic) pressure. So in point of fact, nicotine lowers 'half' of the blood pressure measured in medium-term consumers of pure nicotine who have never smoked.
Acute means 'at that time'.
Chronic means 'over time'.
Dr P Newhouse
Paul Newhouse of Vanderbilt is currently regarded as the leading expert on practical nicotine issues, because he has the most experience with administration of the pure compound to never-smokers. He has administered large quantities of pure nicotine to non-smokers who included many never-smokers, daily, for months at a time, in multiple clinical trials for the investigation of nicotine's positive effects for certain medical conditions. He almost certainly has the best current database for the effects of pure nicotine on tobacco-naive subjects (those who have never smoked or consumed tobacco in any form). To avoid repetition and needless work here, all the citations for the above statements are listed on my personal website, on the References page, and the Vaping Quotes page: E-Cigarette Politics
The current state of medical knowledge on nicotine consists of two bodies of work: research on tobacco and smokers that claims to have relevance to nicotine, and research on pure nicotine administered to never-smokers. It seems logical that only materials relevant to the specific compound administered to never-smokers has any value; trying to determine the effects of one item from the immensely long list in consumption of tobacco containing up to 9,600 compounds (Rodgman, Perfetti 2013) does not seem valid.
The conclusions taken from these two bodies of work are radically different. Traditionally, nicotine was only examined in connection with smoking; or rarely, in connection with ST use (smokeless tobacco such as Snus). Any perceived value in such work has been completely destroyed by recent developments, although the propaganda based on it is still widely circulated. Most of this older body of work can be accurately described as complete rubbish.
Nicotine is now regarded as relatively harmless (assuming the subject consuming it is average); and far less toxic than previously claimed. Finally, of course, there is no person known to medical science who has ever become dependent on nicotine without exposure to tobacco, and it is looking increasingly likely that this is either impossible or as close to it as makes no difference. The potential for pure nicotine to create dependence is about zero.
- Status
Similar threads
