I'm constantly amazed that people can read all of the lies and misinformation about e-cigarettes, yet still buy into all of the misinformation about nicotine and addiction.
This was recently posted in the New Member forum & I had to respond:
First off, consider the original source - basically a press statement about a study that tested the "addictiveness" of different drugs and an anecdotal statement by a researcher who said that ''H-eroin addicts say it is easier to give up dope than it is to give up smoking." Based on their rankings, the numbers for factors such as withdrawl, intoxication, reinforcement, tolerence and dependence, nicotine supposedly had higher numbers.
See: Erowid Addiction Vaults : Media : 'Is Nicotine Addictive?'
Now, let's look at this a little closer. In both studies, nicotine was listed at the top, yet the ranking for h-eroin was actually HIGHER in all catagories, with the exception of "dependence." They based it on the "urge" to smoke.
First of all, how many people do you know of who are addicted to caffeine that even attempt to quit? The perception that it is harmless causes people to keep using it without reserve. So, how do you even compare that "urge" or attempts to quit, when most people don't even try?
Second, the other drugs tested are life-changing drugs. They have a serious, adverse affect on most addicted users, causing impared thinking, impulsive actions, poverty and legal ramifications. Compared to those, the vague threat of possibly dying a few years early or getting cancer is hardly motivational to quitting. And once an illicit drug user does quit their habit, their only crutch is the nicotine, making it even harder to quit.
But, is dependency really the greatest factor in determining addictiveness? What about the other four criteria, where nicotine was better than or close to caffeine and definitely better than h-eroin?
So, nicotine outranked h-eroin in one of five criteria and the media ran with it, conveniently ignoring the rest of the study.
Hmmm...sounds an awful lot like the FDA finding "anti-freeze" in our e-cigarettes, to me. Why are you still believing all of the bull .... they've been feeding you?
Comparing nicotine to h-eroin is simply a tactic to devalue people who use nicotine and get people behind their efforts to ban tobacco. It creates the image of a street addict - dirty, untrustworthy, criminal, almost "sub-human" and not worthy (in their minds) of sympathy or consideration. People who obviously cannot responsibly make their own decisions, so the choices must be made for them. It's pure spin!!
First off, there are other smokeless options. Unless you've been fooled by the antis on this, as well, you'll know that snus and disolvables are nearly as effective as smoking - yet 98-99% safer - pretty much on par with e-cigarettes (and coffee) for health risks. So, an educated consumer knows that smoking is no longer the only option. If e-cigs were banned tomorrow and all destroyed, I'd switch to snus or something like Orbs - which are basically the same thing as Nicorette lozenges.
Secondly, how can people who have the plethora of information about nicotine available here and on CASAA still think nicotine use is any more dangerous than caffeine use? Are you planning to quit drinking coffee or soda, as well? Why are we expected to quit a nearly harmless consumption, when alcohol, sugar and caffeine are perfectly acceptable?
The danger of nicotine is that it makes people SMOKE. Remove the smoke and there is no reason to have to quit, unless you can't afford it.
I had a poster on an article ask me when I was going to quit vaping and I asked him, "Why should I?"
He said I was asking him a trick question. He said I should want to end any addiction and I should spend my money on more productive things.
I replied that I know people who spend $5 one or two times a day at Starbucks to feed their caffeine addiction and that e-cigs were a heck of a lot cheaper than that!
I also said addictions aren't always bad. A lot of people do things just to make them feel good and spend a lot of money on it. People go skiing, skydiving, race cars, build model trains, buy expensive goods, eat at fancy restaurants, buy designer shoes - all things that would bring me no great pleasure and I can't see spending money on it.
I enjoy vaping. I enjoy it even more than I enjoyed smoking - which I did. It makes me feel good, it tastes good, it keeps me from snacking all the time (my mother is morbidly obese because of an eating disorder - she's basically addicted to food, because she uses it to relieve her depression and I didn't want to turn out like that,) it relieves stress, gives me a short break, helps me focus and as long as I can afford it, I'm going to keep doing it.
Again, fooled by what the authorities tell you about addiction. Since the 80's, addiction has gone from being defined as something that people can't live without (whether good or bad) to being inherently BAD.
What is wrong with being addicted to something, so long as the benefits outweigh the detriments?
You can be addicted exercising. You have a morning workout and without it, you feel bad all day, get cranky and can't focus. So, that morning run addiction benefits you. It could go the other way for some people. It's so compulsive that they ignore other aspects of their life and that exercise becomes obsessive - it turns into an all day activity. They lose too much weight, they spend hours from their family, they buy expensive equipment - it ends up having a negative impact. In that case, the addiction turns bad.
The same could be said about vapers who become obsessive about equipment, liquid, mods or forums. Even vaping could turn into a bad addiction for some people.
My nicotine use has the same effect as the exercising for others and while exercising would have an overall better impact on my health, I have no desire to do it to that extent - meaning, without nicotine, I wouldn't likely be found exercising, either. I'd probably eat copious amounts of chocolate and drink more caffeine! LOL
But, since vaping keeps me from smoking, is cheaper and doesn't harm me or those around me - the benefits outweigh the detriments. (Other than my hubby probably wishes I wasn't spending so much time on e-cig advocacy, although I've managed to keep it from disturbing our family time now.)
My nicotine addiction - now that it is smokeless - has a largely positive impact on my life and sense of well-being and I see no reason to give that up. Since I'm on such low mgs anyhow, it would be a breeze to drop it completely, but the truth is - I don't want to and now I don't have to. And why should I be expected to - just because it's "an addiction?" Again - who cares, so long as it's not hurting me or anyone else?? How is this addiction bad when the positives outweigh the negatives??
Chances are, anyone who gives up nicotine completely will find something else that fills that pleasure void. I only hope it's another positive addiction and not one that is as bad as smoking.
This was recently posted in the New Member forum & I had to respond:
Where did you hear that nicotine was "harder" to kick? From the news? From the anti-tobacco groups who want you to believe that?
First off, consider the original source - basically a press statement about a study that tested the "addictiveness" of different drugs and an anecdotal statement by a researcher who said that ''H-eroin addicts say it is easier to give up dope than it is to give up smoking." Based on their rankings, the numbers for factors such as withdrawl, intoxication, reinforcement, tolerence and dependence, nicotine supposedly had higher numbers.
See: Erowid Addiction Vaults : Media : 'Is Nicotine Addictive?'
Now, let's look at this a little closer. In both studies, nicotine was listed at the top, yet the ranking for h-eroin was actually HIGHER in all catagories, with the exception of "dependence." They based it on the "urge" to smoke.
First of all, how many people do you know of who are addicted to caffeine that even attempt to quit? The perception that it is harmless causes people to keep using it without reserve. So, how do you even compare that "urge" or attempts to quit, when most people don't even try?
Second, the other drugs tested are life-changing drugs. They have a serious, adverse affect on most addicted users, causing impared thinking, impulsive actions, poverty and legal ramifications. Compared to those, the vague threat of possibly dying a few years early or getting cancer is hardly motivational to quitting. And once an illicit drug user does quit their habit, their only crutch is the nicotine, making it even harder to quit.
But, is dependency really the greatest factor in determining addictiveness? What about the other four criteria, where nicotine was better than or close to caffeine and definitely better than h-eroin?
So, nicotine outranked h-eroin in one of five criteria and the media ran with it, conveniently ignoring the rest of the study.
Hmmm...sounds an awful lot like the FDA finding "anti-freeze" in our e-cigarettes, to me. Why are you still believing all of the bull .... they've been feeding you?
Comparing nicotine to h-eroin is simply a tactic to devalue people who use nicotine and get people behind their efforts to ban tobacco. It creates the image of a street addict - dirty, untrustworthy, criminal, almost "sub-human" and not worthy (in their minds) of sympathy or consideration. People who obviously cannot responsibly make their own decisions, so the choices must be made for them. It's pure spin!!
First off, there are other smokeless options. Unless you've been fooled by the antis on this, as well, you'll know that snus and disolvables are nearly as effective as smoking - yet 98-99% safer - pretty much on par with e-cigarettes (and coffee) for health risks. So, an educated consumer knows that smoking is no longer the only option. If e-cigs were banned tomorrow and all destroyed, I'd switch to snus or something like Orbs - which are basically the same thing as Nicorette lozenges.
Secondly, how can people who have the plethora of information about nicotine available here and on CASAA still think nicotine use is any more dangerous than caffeine use? Are you planning to quit drinking coffee or soda, as well? Why are we expected to quit a nearly harmless consumption, when alcohol, sugar and caffeine are perfectly acceptable?
The danger of nicotine is that it makes people SMOKE. Remove the smoke and there is no reason to have to quit, unless you can't afford it.
I had a poster on an article ask me when I was going to quit vaping and I asked him, "Why should I?"
He said I was asking him a trick question. He said I should want to end any addiction and I should spend my money on more productive things.
I replied that I know people who spend $5 one or two times a day at Starbucks to feed their caffeine addiction and that e-cigs were a heck of a lot cheaper than that!
I also said addictions aren't always bad. A lot of people do things just to make them feel good and spend a lot of money on it. People go skiing, skydiving, race cars, build model trains, buy expensive goods, eat at fancy restaurants, buy designer shoes - all things that would bring me no great pleasure and I can't see spending money on it.
I enjoy vaping. I enjoy it even more than I enjoyed smoking - which I did. It makes me feel good, it tastes good, it keeps me from snacking all the time (my mother is morbidly obese because of an eating disorder - she's basically addicted to food, because she uses it to relieve her depression and I didn't want to turn out like that,) it relieves stress, gives me a short break, helps me focus and as long as I can afford it, I'm going to keep doing it.
Again, fooled by what the authorities tell you about addiction. Since the 80's, addiction has gone from being defined as something that people can't live without (whether good or bad) to being inherently BAD.
What is wrong with being addicted to something, so long as the benefits outweigh the detriments?
You can be addicted exercising. You have a morning workout and without it, you feel bad all day, get cranky and can't focus. So, that morning run addiction benefits you. It could go the other way for some people. It's so compulsive that they ignore other aspects of their life and that exercise becomes obsessive - it turns into an all day activity. They lose too much weight, they spend hours from their family, they buy expensive equipment - it ends up having a negative impact. In that case, the addiction turns bad.
The same could be said about vapers who become obsessive about equipment, liquid, mods or forums. Even vaping could turn into a bad addiction for some people.
My nicotine use has the same effect as the exercising for others and while exercising would have an overall better impact on my health, I have no desire to do it to that extent - meaning, without nicotine, I wouldn't likely be found exercising, either. I'd probably eat copious amounts of chocolate and drink more caffeine! LOL
But, since vaping keeps me from smoking, is cheaper and doesn't harm me or those around me - the benefits outweigh the detriments. (Other than my hubby probably wishes I wasn't spending so much time on e-cig advocacy, although I've managed to keep it from disturbing our family time now.)
My nicotine addiction - now that it is smokeless - has a largely positive impact on my life and sense of well-being and I see no reason to give that up. Since I'm on such low mgs anyhow, it would be a breeze to drop it completely, but the truth is - I don't want to and now I don't have to. And why should I be expected to - just because it's "an addiction?" Again - who cares, so long as it's not hurting me or anyone else?? How is this addiction bad when the positives outweigh the negatives??
Chances are, anyone who gives up nicotine completely will find something else that fills that pleasure void. I only hope it's another positive addiction and not one that is as bad as smoking.
Last edited:
