Recent Nicotine Research
- Thread starter KDMickey
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
If nicotine were considered beneficial the reasearch commentry would have been worded differently. e.g.
"Nicotine isn't just addictive. It may also interfere with dozens of cellular interactions in the body, new Brown University research suggests."
could be
"Nicotine's beneficial effects on clarity of thought might be mediated through its effect on dozens of cellular interactions in the body, new Brown University research suggests."
The wording of the article assumes that nicotine being an exogenous substance must be bad. Caffeine, high glucose foods, chocolate etc all exhibit the same "addictive" effects attributed to nicotine. There is one striking difference between nicotine "addiction" and most other addictions that is often not mentioned. The effect of nicotine seems to increase clarity of mind and thought. (many other drugs do the opposite). No nicotine "addict" has lost his job, wife and property due to progressively deteriorating mental condition etc. as is common with most other substances.
When reading the results of research we must bear in mind the reason for the research. Nicotine has been branded as an addiction and research into stopping people from smoking is mostly funded by pharmaceutical companies that could generate huge profits by treating people for an addiction that they do not have.
"Nicotine isn't just addictive. It may also interfere with dozens of cellular interactions in the body, new Brown University research suggests."
could be
"Nicotine's beneficial effects on clarity of thought might be mediated through its effect on dozens of cellular interactions in the body, new Brown University research suggests."
The wording of the article assumes that nicotine being an exogenous substance must be bad. Caffeine, high glucose foods, chocolate etc all exhibit the same "addictive" effects attributed to nicotine. There is one striking difference between nicotine "addiction" and most other addictions that is often not mentioned. The effect of nicotine seems to increase clarity of mind and thought. (many other drugs do the opposite). No nicotine "addict" has lost his job, wife and property due to progressively deteriorating mental condition etc. as is common with most other substances.
When reading the results of research we must bear in mind the reason for the research. Nicotine has been branded as an addiction and research into stopping people from smoking is mostly funded by pharmaceutical companies that could generate huge profits by treating people for an addiction that they do not have.
I would like these researchers to add more information about the form of nicotine they use in the studies. From what I have been reading it seems that some use cigarettes (combusted) and some use synthetic nicotine. How many use nicotine taken directly from tobacco and NOT combusted?
How sure are they that it isn't the added chemicals that are addictive and not the tobacco itself? How are they sure that their synthetics are not skewing the results?
How sure are they that it isn't the added chemicals that are addictive and not the tobacco itself? How are they sure that their synthetics are not skewing the results?
There is nothing of any value presented in the article, just that "nicotine" deals with some of the same receptors that some proteins deal with, and 40% of all drugs on the "market" also deal with those proteins. Nothing in the article said if that was good, bad, or indifferent, nor was anything done in this study (from what the article notes) dealing with nicotine per se'.
This is not anything important.. not from the way the article was written or the information presented. The "research" might be more comprehensive and meaningful, but the article sure didn't highlight anything useful, just seems to be potentially fear mongering (might be a problem for other drugs!!!!!).. ALL drugs might be a problem for all other drugs... that's not new.
This is not anything important.. not from the way the article was written or the information presented. The "research" might be more comprehensive and meaningful, but the article sure didn't highlight anything useful, just seems to be potentially fear mongering (might be a problem for other drugs!!!!!).. ALL drugs might be a problem for all other drugs... that's not new.
- Status
Similar threads
