...vaccines for drug, nicotine adiction

Status
Not open for further replies.

PhiHalcyon

Moved On
Mar 30, 2009
334
0
Well, it is already obvious that the FDA intends to introduce a nicotine-yield limit at some point; and then gradually lower that limit over time. I can remember asking myself over ten years ago - at a time when I was trying to quit - why this nicotine control and reduction scheme was not already being done.

And, yes, an ecig-like nicotine delivery product put under the same long-term nicotine-reduction scheme is precisely what is needed in order achieve quick and tremendous gains in human harm-reduction right from the beginning.
 

frankie1

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 7, 2009
796
660
Florida
Well here is my comment....let's see if they post it!

While we are waiting on this miracle vaccine, could we just use a bit of common sense as applied to harm reduction? Take a look at personal vaporizers. The addict gets their nicotine fix without the harmful additives of tobacco smoke. Then step down the nicotine and the addiction is nothing more than a habit, harmful to none. Might save a few million lives while trying to come up with a better solution.
 

Nestran

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Jul 29, 2009
256
1
58
Rhode Island
"
The vaccine is meant to stimulate the immune system to make antibodies against nicotine, blocking its rewarding effects and helping to prevent relapse in smokers trying to quit."

So the way I see it. the vaccine will not allow Nicotine to do what it does. you would be in withdrawal with no way out. Hmm, not something I want to experience.

Nestran
 

Our House

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 29, 2009
402
25
NJ, USA
More freedom reduction...made FOR smokers BY non-smokers.

"We just want to HELP you! You know, for your own protection." I hate when people do things "for your protection" by the way. As if it's not for THEIR benefit. Right.

Do people ever consider that others might actually want nicotine...or coffee...or to gamble...or shop. Sometimes we enjoy things that FEEL GOOD. Sigh.

What's next, caffeine vaccines? Fatty food vaccinations? Video game addiction vaccinations? Plastic surgery to implant fake smiles on our faces once they've sucked all the fun out of our lives???
 
Well, it is already obvious that the FDA intends to introduce a nicotine-yield limit at some point; and then gradually lower that limit over time. I can remember asking myself over ten years ago - at a time when I was trying to quit - why this nicotine control and reduction scheme was not already being done.

And, yes, an ecig-like nicotine delivery product put under the same long-term nicotine-reduction scheme is precisely what is needed in order achieve quick and tremendous gains in human harm-reduction right from the beginning.

We've been down that road before with 'lights'. If want people to smoke less tar and toxins, make the things stronger not weaker.

Since nicotine is not harmful, no need for any scheme for reducing its use. I completely disagree with that notion. In fact, it is outrageous!
 
Last edited:

Vocalek

CASAA Activist
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Frankie1, I see your comment. I am with Nestrain. This is the comment I left:

So, this vaccine will block nicotine's "rewarding effects". Does that include the rewarding effect of maintaining normal mood and cognitive funciton? Does that also include the rewarding effect of preventing the build-up of alpha-synoclean proteins in the brain in that cause Lewy Body Dementia? This vaccine sounds like a very dangerous approach. The 40% of smokers who are using nicotine to self-medicate could end up with totally untreatable depression, anxiety, and cognitive deficits.
 

PhiHalcyon

Moved On
Mar 30, 2009
334
0
Kin,

Yeah, I've learned a lot more about nicotine since then. Reducing the nicotine in cigarettes will just make those who smoke them smoke more of them. This is probably why PM was willing to agree to the regulation of nicotine-yields ... as long as requiring a nicotine-yield of zero was prohibited. It would clearly make more sense to ban cigarettes and approve the ecig - whether a nicotine-reduction scheme were to be later intended or not.

Should the long-term use of the ecig prove to not have any negative health consequences, then I would also agree that nicotine-yields be no more regulated than what is necessary to prevent whatever tragic or deadly consequences there may be associated with excessive nicotine consumption. Liberty is great, but so is responsibility.
 

SKing

Moved On
May 19, 2009
3
1
Colorado
  • Deleted by Misty
  • Reason: unregistered supplier

TaketheRedPill

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 27, 2009
865
1,030
Southern California
Volkow said drumming up drug company interest in vaccines for illicit drugs is a harder sell because of liability concerns, and the fact that drug abusers are stigmatized.


"Unfortunately, when it comes to treatments for drug addiction ... most of the investment goes to the government," she said.



and smokers aren't stigmatized? and pose no liability threat? why? because they have to ask for the vaccine??? hmmmmm.....fuzzy logic

TTRP
 

rothenbj

Vaping Master
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jul 23, 2009
8,283
7,704
Green Lane, Pa
i love it drugs you take to stop taking drugs............

hey wait minute.................????...............

You have to love it. I can see it now. 100,000K ex-smokers commit suicide so the FDA meets to insure that MakeAMint Pharmaceuticals and all the other BP copycat vaccine makers put a BlackBox warning on their packaging.

At the same time the die hard analog smokers are hit with another tax increase bringing the current price of a pack of cigarettes to $150.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread