LOL... so your argument is baseless and fact-less, and you believe anyone cares?
They actually do imply there is some dependency related to nicotine, but they have a very strange test for it:
"Rates of dependence on the nicotine replacement therapies were judged by how many persons were still using 3 weeks after the trial ended "
I always thought the measure of dependence is not the mere fact someone uses something in order to derive some benefit from it. The measure is in what happens when you take it away from them.
If you gave me Devil Dogs during the course of a study, and I kept buying them on my own after the study was over, it might just be because I like them. A lot. But it would not be proof of a dependency, by any definition I'm aware of. (and I did not see anything to the effect that the NRTs were or were not made available, for free, after the study, for whatever that might matter)
My understanding (of it and other thinking on it) was that nicotine in and of itself is not exactly the issue but the way it is delivered and what else it is combined with that has dependency implications.