"Scientists" use vapor to study cigarette smoke. Science laughs.

[Nate760]

Accordingly, the evidence we have on nicotine being "non-addictive", which comes from studies in which patches are used needs to be viewed with a degree of skepticism.

Yes, it does, especially since there's such a paucity of data regarding nicotine use in tobacco-naive individuals. "Smoking" and "nicotine" have been conflated for so long in the public consciousness (among scientists and lay people alike) that we still know very little about what happens when you administer the latter without the former; all we really do know is that when you administer nicotine orally or transdermally in tobacco-dependent individuals, it very rarely results in tobacco cessation.

It seems to me as though this is a case where an RCT using existing smokers would be the optimal means of investigation. Supply one group with their regular brand of cigarettes and have them smoke as they normally would (control group), and give the other group cigarettes made of zero-nic tobacco, or as close to zero-nic as possible, but which are packaged to appear indistinguishable from their regular brand (placebo group). Encourage the members of both groups to try quitting if they're so inclined, and if they demonstrate such inclination, supply them with the same materials and resources you normally would. If, after 12-18 months, the placebo group shows an appreciably higher quit rate than the control group, then we can state with some degree of confidence that nicotine is the primary factor, or at least one of the primary factors, that cause smoking dependence.

Obviously, there would be some rather sticky ethical considerations involved in such a trial, and maintaining proper controls for the duration of the study period would be a major challenge, but it these obstacles could be overcome, we would probably glean much more instructive data on this question than we currently have.

 

[danfinger]

"In a small pilot study, the researchers used electronic cigarettes, or e-cigarettes, to mimic the behavioral aspects of smoking tobacco cigarettes"

"scientists can study the brain effects of what he called the "the behavioral and sensory repertoire of smoking"

""E-cigarettes ... provide a very good simulation of traditional smoking (and) we have shown that using e-cigarettes with fMRI is an excellent paradigm for direct evaluation of the effects of smoking on human neurophysiology," he said."

(my bolds).

Maybe I'm being naive now, or not paranoid enough, but I actually don't see much wrong with this.

HEY! You are bringing nothing to the echo chambe... um, I mean logical discussion by bringing this up.

Now go and enjoy the millions of benefits that vaping does for the entire universe.

 

[danfinger]

and you read what you wanted to read and completely ignored those links...

Even if you could provide 100 of the most conclusive, double blind placebo controlled tests with 100k participants each, you will never get these guys to admit that nicotine isn’t anything except an amazing wonder drug that we should be feeding to children by the gallon. They’ll find something wrong with those studies. “Oh, wait- you see that? Lead scientist on the study? Dr. Stephen Hawking? See the ‘a’ in that name? That stands for ANTZ. These studies are obviously biased by the blah blah….etc.

Don’t bother. Seriously. Nicotine cures cancer, emphysema, rickets, acne, limpdick and baldness. Because internet links.

 

[Nate760]

Even if you could provide 100 of the most conclusive, double blind placebo controlled tests with 100k participants each, you will never get these guys to admit that nicotine isn’t anything except an amazing wonder drug that we should be feeding to children by the gallon. They’ll find something wrong with those studies. “Oh, wait- you see that? Lead scientist on the study? Dr. Stephen Hawking? See the ‘a’ in that name? That stands for ANTZ. These studies are obviously biased by the blah blah….etc.

Don’t bother. Seriously. Nicotine cures cancer, emphysema, rickets, acne, limpdick and baldness. Because internet links.

Uhh.....straw man much?

 

[danfinger]

Uhh.....straw man much?

LOL.

 

[Oliver]

... goes with my long term held belief that it is both the nicotine and the 'smoke/vapor' that makes up the compelling enjoyment of smoking and vaping. I used to think it was 50:50 but it may be just the vapor for many. I've said if 'patches' or Nicorette 'smoked' - they might work better. Even ecigs where you may be getting inhale vapor (and some nic), but not so much exhale vapor isn't as pleasant.

And I've posted many times - an obvious 'sub-ohm' candidate:

"Sherlock Holmes sat silent for a few minutes with his finger tips still pressed together, his legs stretched out in front of him and his gaze directed upwards to the ceiling. Then he took down from the rack the old and oily clay pipe , which was to him as a counselor, and, having it, he leaned back in his chair, with the thick blue cloud-wreaths spinning up from him, and a look of infinite languor in his face."

Holmes again, to Watson:
"It is quite a three pipe problem, and I beg that you won't speak to me for fifty minutes."

Or, we can remember the case in which Holmes needed a pound of the strongest shag tobacco to resolve the problem and stayed alone all the day smoking, and Watson found him in a sort of trance, in a room that "was so filled with the smoke that the light of the lamp upon the table was blurred by it and my first impression as I opened the door was that a fire has broken out".

And even the more recent Sherlock BBC style - there's one line where I had to laugh where he said to another at the murder site where he was observing: "Quit thinking. It's distracting!" lol. Focus is primary.

I think many smokers and vapers can relate to this and there's a reason why - the contemplative, 'relaxed focus' one gets from the nicotine along with the visual of the smoke/vapor which unlike other 'environmental' aspects - talking, tv, radio, music, etc. doesn't impinge on the psyche. (well, unless you're an ANTZ It's a bit like a babbling brook or light ocean waves.... or other stuff they put in those relaxing CDs and then there's the incense phenomena as well - not just for covering up other odors?

Unfortunately, that's a bit too subjective (and not a constant factor) to be 'tested', but imo, just as 'necessary' as nicotine and may be even 'sufficient' or at least prominent - esp. for zero nic vapers.

And, it may in the end be absolutely nothing to do with the nicotine. That is to say, Sherlock (had he not already developed his "relationship" with tobacco) might otherwise just as usefully been using stress-balls or chimes or some such.

Although there is something rather unique about the 'hijacking' of the respiratory mechanism by smoking. I have some undeveloped notion that there's something deeply appealing in smoking that relates to our strange relationship with our own breath: i.e. it's really the only automatic process over which we can and do exert conscious control... but that's for another post, and another hour.

 

[Oliver]

Actually, before I turn in for the night....

I'm hearing chatter that there are never-smokers using zero-nic e-cigs for weight control - not exactly as an appetite suppressant, but as an overindulgence distraction. Like, replacing desert with a vape. And by chatter I mean multiple sources with people saying similar things.

And if this is the case, and people are doing so effectively (i.e. where other methods have failed them), it would suggest that the inhalation route is providing a "pleasure surplus" or something , which is measurable against, say, the willpower required not to overindulge or the pleasure gained from eating a dessert. In other words, one could speculate that my (above) under-developed notion about inhalation really might be worth exploring as an additional factor in understanding, well, all of this.

 

[Nate760]

Actually, before I turn in for the night....

I'm hearing chatter that there are never-smokers using zero-nic e-cigs for weight control - not exactly as an appetite suppressant, but as an overindulgence distraction. Like, replacing desert with a vape. And by chatter I mean multiple sources with people saying similar things.

And if this is the case, and people are doing so effectively (i.e. where other methods have failed them), it would suggest that the inhalation route is providing a "pleasure surplus" or something , which is measurable against, say, the willpower required not to overindulge or the pleasure gained from eating a dessert. In other words, one could speculate that my (above) under-developed notion about inhalation really might be worth exploring as an additional factor in understanding, well, all of this.

On a similar note, I'm reminded of a conversation my wife and I had one night when we were trying out NJoy's "Single Malt Scotch" liquid. We both remarked that it did in fact taste exactly like inhaling scotch instead of drinking it. Then we got to wondering if such things might have some potential for helping to prevent alcoholic relapse. If someone was in grave danger of falling off the wagon and needed a last-ditch option to stop it from happening, mightn't it be a good idea if they had something at their disposal that could, in some degree, replicate the sensory experience of liquor consumption without imbibing alcohol?

 

[AndriaD]

On a similar note, I'm reminded of a conversation my wife and I had one night when we were trying out NJoy's "Single Malt Scotch" liquid. We both remarked that it did in fact taste exactly like inhaling scotch instead of drinking it. Then we got to wondering if such things might have some potential for helping to prevent alcoholic relapse. If someone was in grave danger of falling off the wagon and needed a last-ditch option to stop it from happening, mightn't it be a good idea if they had something at their disposal that could, in some degree, replicate the sensory experience of liquor consumption without imbibing alcohol?

I've thought of this, of course, since my primary indulgence was beer, and there is non-alcoholic beer nowadays. And it does taste remarkably similar to the real thing... but it's just not the same. With vaping, (for those of us using nicotine at the very least, and perhaps even WTA) although the experience itself is somewhat like smoking, there are differences -- the lack of bitterness, the technique, even the object itself, BUT, the "payoff" is quite similar to smoking -- as I said, for those vaping nicotine and/or WTA; drinking NA beer, on the other hand, provides a similar sort of sensory doppelganger... but there is *no* "payoff." Any alcoholic who says they drank for the taste... they're lying. They might have enjoyed the taste immensely -- I did, with Fosters, or Mich Dry... but the real reason an alcoholic drinks is the payoff -- the sensation; the "bubbling" feeling that travels all throughout the body, followed shortly by an increasing languor which is offset by the metabolism of alcohol into sugar, which is why someone who downs a drink fast is suddenly "on," whereas a sipper just gets more and more languid. NA beer or wine gives you none of that, merely the taste. The taste is perfectly fine, if one is having a glass of wine with steak or spaghetti... I've done that, and it's perfectly adequate, and the tastes go together just as well as with real wine. But one glass is sufficient, and that was NEVER true with real wine, for me, because one glass just turns the key; with NA beer or wine, there is no key, no ignition; all it would be likely to do is give the suffering alcoholic even greater motivation to go out and get the real thing -- which is why the most I've had of NA beer is a sip, just to taste it.

Andria

 

[Oliver]

Andria, I'd say you don't even have to be an alcoholic - most regular users of alcohol will find alcohol-free beer a difficult proposition. I would argue that many drinkers - even those without full-blown alcoholic behaviours are still, to some degree, behaviorally sensitized to alcohol. Indeed, I'd include myself in that - I don't crave alcohol in the ordinary course of events, don't think about it at all except in those situations in which a drink is usual - a meal, a bar, with certain friends, etc etc. THEN I do feel form of mild craving (although nothing like I used to have for cigarettes).

What about caffeine-free coffee for a regular caffeine user? Slightly different proposition, but similar concept.

There's an interesting notion in contemporary studies of addiction that differentiates substances on their effects on three brain/behaviour systems. Often this is referred to the "needing, wanting and liking" model.

Needing: the degree to which a drug creates physiological dependence, withdrawal (and includes the tolerance process)
Wanting: Behavioral sensitization & the "craving" phenomenon
Liking: Does a substance have a euphoric component?

It's quite useful, because it provides a neat way of comparing drugs. Nicotine is somewhat unusual in that it's very strong on the "wanting" system, mild (in intensity, at least) on the "needing" element and low on the "liking" component (except, perhaps, in the "release" of craving).

Needless to say, the overall profile depends entirely on the locus of action of a substance on the brain.

 

[Kent C]

And, it may in the end be absolutely nothing to do with the nicotine. That is to say, Sherlock (had he not already developed his "relationship" with tobacco) might otherwise just as usefully been using stress-balls or chimes or some such.

Although there is something rather unique about the 'hijacking' of the respiratory mechanism by smoking. I have some undeveloped notion that there's something deeply appealing in smoking that relates to our strange relationship with our own breath: i.e. it's really the only automatic process over which we can and do exert conscious control... but that's for another post, and another hour.

I don't think there's any doubt that nicotine helps focus. It's the vapor/smoke part that needs more explanation.

 

[AndriaD]

Andria, I'd say you don't even have to be an alcoholic - most regular users of alcohol will find alcohol-free beer a difficult proposition. I would argue that many drinkers - even those without full-blown alcoholic behaviours are still, to some degree, behaviorally sensitized to alcohol. Indeed, I'd include myself in that - I don't crave alcohol in the ordinary course of events, don't think about it at all except in those situations in which a drink is usual - a meal, a bar, with certain friends, etc etc. THEN I do feel form of mild craving (although nothing like I used to have for cigarettes).

What about caffeine-free coffee for a regular caffeine user? Slightly different proposition, but similar concept.

There's an interesting notion in contemporary studies of addiction that differentiates substances on their effects on three brain/behaviour systems. Often this is referred to the "needing, wanting and liking" model.

Needing: the degree to which a drug creates physiological dependence, withdrawal (and includes the tolerance process)
Wanting: Behavioral sensitization & the "craving" phenomenon
Liking: Does a substance have a euphoric component?

It's quite useful, because it provides a neat way of comparing drugs. Nicotine is somewhat unusual in that it's very strong on the "wanting" system, mild (in intensity, at least) on the "needing" element and low on the "liking" component (except, perhaps, in the "release" of craving).

Needless to say, the overall profile depends entirely on the locus of action of a substance on the brain.

When I was pregnant, I had the strangest craving -- coffee! Now of course I know that pregnant women should avoid caffeine, and I had not been a coffee addict for some years... so we got a small coffee-maker, and I brewed decaf, and it satisfied the craving perfectly -- and because I *was* pregnant, I also went very light with the sugar, and used a lot of milk, and that's still how I drink coffee, 27 yrs later. The "real" kind with caffeine just makes me feel sick, and just one cup of it is like slamming a 12-pack of Dr Pepper in one gulp. WHAT?! ME?! NERVOUS???

However, with hot tea, there is just no substitute for Twinings English Breakfast tea -- the decaf version of that has absolutely zero aroma, and the lovely, incense-like aroma is why I bother spending more to get Twinings in the first place. For iced tea, decaf is fine; Luzianne tea tastes the same whether it's "the real thing" or decaf, but I never expect iced tea to have any aroma anyway -- American tea really has none, but Luzianne is the best for iced tea; it's formulated so that it doesn't get cloudy when it's cold.

Andria

 

[Oliver]

I don't think there's any doubt that nicotine helps focus. It's the vapor/smoke part that needs more explanation.

There is doubt. Robert West, for instance, expressed it at the Summit.

And I can't honestly say I know that nicotine is that potent for concentration. It's a mild stimulant, after all - milder than, say, coffee. The only thing I do know is what happens to my concentration without nicotine!

That said, everyone's mileage varies on almost all of these things.

 

[Oliver]

However, with hot tea, there is just no substitute for Twinings English Breakfast tea -- the decaf version of that has absolutely zero aroma, and the lovely, incense-like aroma is why I bother spending more to get Twinings in the first place. For iced tea, decaf is fine; Luzianne tea tastes the same whether it's "the real thing" or decaf, but I never expect iced tea to have any aroma anyway -- American tea really has none, but Luzianne is the best for iced tea; it's formulated so that it doesn't get cloudy when it's cold.

Andria

Why do anarchists drink Earl Grey?

Because proper tea is theft.

 

[Kent C]

There is doubt. Robert West, for instance, expressed it at the Summit.

And I can't honestly say I know that nicotine is that potent for concentration. It's a mild stimulant, after all - milder than, say, coffee. The only thing I do know is what happens to my concentration without nicotine!

That said, everyone's mileage varies on almost all of these things.

West's altitude has now dropped, imo. I'll go along with mileage may vary but I could cite peer reviewed studies that nicotine improves focus, memory and cognitive ability. Some of which are linked in Carl's and Brad's and CASAA's files.

One of the problems is that those types of studies, like two that were done in Switzerland on rheumatoid arthritis (heavier smokers benefited (showed less pain) more than light smokers) are suppressed by the medical community because up until now, nicotine's association with cigarettes tends to discredit any benefits. 'Ends justify the means' thinking.

 

[Nate760]

There is doubt. Robert West, for instance, expressed it at the Summit.

And I can't honestly say I know that nicotine is that potent for concentration. It's a mild stimulant, after all - milder than, say, coffee. The only thing I do know is what happens to my concentration without nicotine!

That said, everyone's mileage varies on almost all of these things.

I'm a fan of nicotine and caffeine alike, but for no other reason than because I like the way they make me feel. If either one actually improves my cognitive abilities to any degree, I can't say I've ever noticed the difference.

 

[FlamingoTutu]

I'm a fan of nicotine and caffeine alike, but for no other reason than because I like the way they make me feel. If either one actually improves my cognitive abilities to any degree, I can't say I've ever noticed the difference.

I have, and have had since I was quite young, severe ADHD. You notice the difference. I was 20 places at once until I started smoking, then I was only 17 places at once. It wasn't a cure but any improvement was heaven sent.

 

[Kent C]

I'm a fan of nicotine and caffeine alike, but for no other reason than because I like the way they make me feel. If either one actually improves my cognitive abilities to any degree, I can't say I've ever noticed the difference.

How do they make you feel?

 

[msgnyc]

That's like testing how violent video games effects kids brains by studying them watching the movies hostile n saw or taking them to a gun range...

Studying the effects on the brain sex has by eating chocolate...

This is what they are paid for? XD

 

[Nate760]

How do they make you feel?

Mildly buzzed.