Why can't they just leave us alone?

[DC2]

How do we undo decades of brainwashing?

Education is the only way.

I think that maybe they are so used to vilifying smokers that even anything that resembles smoking is grounds for attack.

Yes, there is definitely an element of that involved.
The ANTZ say that electronic cigarettes hurt their efforts to denormalize smoking.

What exactly are they attacking?

It's kind of a long read, but then it's kind of a long story...
Rampant Antismoking Signifies Grave Danger

 

[AngelsBreath]

I think that there are some people, whenever they get their minds set on something, no one on earth can change it. This is not going to go away, not ever, no matter how much we try to educate them. They have to have their 'cause'. We could quit everything and they would still blame their insurance rates on us or something equally ridiculous.

 

[Iffy]

I think that there are some people, whenever they get their minds set on something, no one on earth can change it.

Guilty to da 15mg 'degree'!

 

[generic mutant]

But that's the point of the teapot - you don't need evidence to the contrary, you just need lack of evidence overall. Despite what some people say during religious debates, absence of evidence is evidence of absence. I'm not denying these people got the results they did, but the key to a scientific study is reproduction. You can get hit by a truck while crossing the street, but that doesn't mean that every time you cross the street you'll get hit by a truck.

What I noticed on the abstract of the "nicotine promotes tumor growth" paper, is that most of the time it was nicotine plus something else. For example, nicotine plus "neovascularization". Remember those old logic questions on school tests? Like, if A = B and B = C, then A = C. That works in mathematics, but not in medical science.

Granted, and well put.

I'm not saying "run for the hills, nicotine will kill you!".

I'm saying "at the moment there is some evidence that in vitro, nicotine is carcinogenic". I was also pointing out that there's an epidemiological link (obviously the best form of evidence when the question is "will it harm you") between nicotine and cancer, though given DC2's link, I retract that.

All I'm saying is that in vitro evidence is probably enough to call nicotine "a suspected carcinogen". Hopefully it isn't (at least in vivo), and I hope future study reinforces the evidence that it is essentially as harmful as caffeine. I still think it's premature to say "It doesn't cause cancer", however, though if it does, it certainly appears that it does so at a very low rate.

 

[EddardinWinter]

Nicotine Patch May Improve Memory | TIME.com
Nicotine Patches Up Early Memory Loss In Study : Shots - Health News : NPR
Nicotine Improves Memory And Helps Brain Repair Itself
Nicotine improves brain function in schizophrenics | COSMOS magazine

I could go on for days with studies showing improved brain function, memory, etc. They do, particularly in ADHD minds (I am one of them). Now I don't want to get into a thread link-a-thon here, so lets just agree that while there MAY be some health downside to nicotine, there are LIKELY benefits to at least some of the population in treating brain disorders, elevating cognitive function, and reversing loss of memory.

 

[DC2]

That's why the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) was recently considering putting nicotine on it's list of performance enhancing drugs...
Nicotine could be put on list of banned substances
WADA Adds Nicotine To Monitoring List
Nicotine enhances performance: report | Other Sports | Fox Sports

 

[Papacrane]

Why can't everyone just leave us the hell alone? I quit smoking because I felt like a criminal doing it. I would go out and hide in the bushes if I was in public scared to death that I may "offend" someone. I felt like a criminal, they kept yelling "you're killing us with your second hand smoke" So I quit, I went to an e-cig, minding my own business, not "killing" anyone anymore. Now it's..."shame on me again" I'm nothing more than an addict, never mind that they can't push away from the table or live without their coffee or their diet drinks or their cell phones that are zapping the hell out of everyone, no, those are clean pure things and not bad for you. Really? Seriously? C'mon people, you are as addicted as I am, to your caffeine and your pie and your overeating or your cokes and all the other stuff that is bad for you. You are just holier than thou and think your addictions are ok. Right, keep on telling yourself that.

LEAVE ME ALONE

You enjoy your vices and let me enjoy mine dammit. I'm fed up with the lot of you looking down your nose at me while stuffing your faces with all the chemicals they put in that "healthy" food you eat and drinking your two pots of coffee a day. I don't walk on water but guess what...neither do you. LEAVE ME ALONE!

Rant over, stepping off my soapbox now.

AMEN!!!!!!!! I've got very strong political views and would love to rant on here why I think this crap is going on but i'll refrain since it might be out of bounds here....except that with a certain idealogy controlling us is a mission. JUST LEAVE US ALONE!!!!

 

[hazarada]

There isn't an argument in the world to which you cant reply "No, you!" or "Your mum!". Use these powerful retorts wisely.

 

[Seames5]

Hehe. I just grin and tell them bye. My nic, and two pots of coffee are my buisness. Now excuse me, need to top off my wine glass .

 

[zyglrox]

I could go on for days with studies showing improved brain function, memory, etc. They do, particularly in ADHD minds (I am one of them)

I can attest to this. I have pretty severe ADHD, though I've become rather high-functioning as I've gotten better at coping and found creative ways around the pitfalls.

Not only does the nicotine calm me down, but I'm also much more focused and organized when I administer enough of it. It's really sort of ideal when you consider the side-effects of the most commonly prescribed medications, which honestly just ruined me for a while. They work immediately (and boy do they!) but the dependance and crashes were baaaaaad. I could sorta function alright most of the time before I was on it, but once you're fully adjusted to adderall or ritalin, you ALWAYS have to be on it or you function well below your baseline, which is pretty low when you already have ADHD. Nobody should be taking something so closely related to methamphetamine in both structure and action every day. Nicotine, by comparison has no crash and can be much more safely administered as necessary throughout the day - all without the roller-coaster effect of stronger stimulants. The dependance is nothing compared to that of pharmaceutical grade speed. It's not as forcefully effective, but with good coping mechanisms and behavioral work, I've found nicotine to be pretty helpful... ...not as blunt and to-the-point as say, d-amphetamine, but still more effective than caffeine.

 

[AngelsBreath]

Ya know what, eventually these anti smoking radicals are going to be allowed to re-write the constitution.

Original:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Their version:
We the elite few of the United States, in Order to form a completely perfect Union, establish Justice for those we deem worthy, insure domestic Control, provide for the common defense of our radical beliefs, deny the general Welfare, and deny the Blessings of Liberty to only our Posterity but keep it for ourselves, do ordain and establish this New Constitution for the United States of America. Furthermore the word God shall never again be mentioned because WE are the people!

 

[MonkInsane]

OK, but what I'm saying is we've put people in a test tube, added Mickey, and they've had heard murmours, to stretch this analogy to breaking point. That's your preliminary evidence for Russel's Teapot.

If you want studies, just look:

nicotine oncogenesis - Google Scholar
nicotine carcinogen - Google Scholar
nicotine cancer - Google Scholar
nicotine angiogenesis - Google Scholar
nicotine pancreas - Google Scholar

I'm not going to start linking specific studies - that's pointless, because I'm not referring to a specific study. I'm simply saying "there are lots that assert that there is a link". I'm not an oncologist, and as I said I'm really not qualified to sift through them. It may be that the better metaanalyses point to nicotine not being carcinogenic. DC2's link is interesting, and I'll keep looking out for them. I thought there was an epidemiological link between nicotine and pancreatic cancer, though it seems I may have been wrong about that. But there's enough in vitro evidence that it may have an effect to make me very hesitant to say "It doesn't cause it" without a good deal of evidence to the contrary. I suspect there might be a bit of wishful thinking and confirmation bias going on (this shouldn't be taken as an accusation levelled at you specifically. I have no idea what you know).

Most of the search results there pertains to nicotine in tobacco(Cigarette smoke), And I also think we can all
agree that Vaping is 99% safer than smoking. Is nicotine bad for you - YES - but so is caffeine. Is Vaping 100% safe - no - but then again NOTHING is.

And allthough some studies there do state that nicotine is an antagonist in lung cancer cells you are far more likely to GET cancer smoking than vaping. If you allready have lung cancer and no longer smoke - do not vape, or vape nicotine-free!! If you still smoke and have lung cancer vaping would still be a better option than smoking (even better - vape nicotine-free liquid).

See:

Clinical Research: Electronic Cigarettes
Lab Reports: ecigarettes

Speciffically:

http://www.casaa.org/uploads/Gamucci_lab_test.pdf
http://www.casaa.org/uploads/DublinEcigBenchtopHandout.pdf
http://www.casaa.org/uploads/Study_TSNAs_in_NJOY_Vapor.pdf
http://www.casaa.org/uploads/RuyanCartridgeReport30-Oct-08.pdf
http://www.casaa.org/uploads/LibertyStixLabAnalysis072309.pdf

 

[Whosback]

That's why the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) was recently considering putting nicotine on it's list of performance enhancing drugs...
Nicotine could be put on list of banned substances
WADA Adds Nicotine To Monitoring List
Nicotine enhances performance: report | Other Sports | Fox Sports

Oh bugger, somebody check Lance Armstrong for a PV.

Seriously though nicotine is definitely one of those double edged substances, out there. Where it is addictive and there is at least suggestion that it may at the least help certain cancers grow. It does also show as having its benefits too. The problem is because of its link with cigs any negative report no matter how thin will sound like its written in stone to some people, where as anything positive or even that suggest its relatively harmless when compared to the greater mass of what we consume, will meet with doubt. After all cigs are bad for you so therefor everything possibly linked to them must be evil, you know that guy from the X files, apartment fires the 50s, evil things like that. It's just easier then reading and judging on your own.

 

[MonkInsane]

I can attest to this. I have pretty severe ADHD, though I've become rather high-functioning as I've gotten better at coping and found creative ways around the pitfalls.

Not only does the nicotine calm me down, but I'm also much more focused and organized when I administer enough of it. It's really sort of ideal when you consider the side-effects of the most commonly prescribed medications, which honestly just ruined me for a while. They work immediately (and boy do they!) but the dependance and crashes were baaaaaad. I could sorta function alright most of the time before I was on it, but once you're fully adjusted to adderall or ritalin, you ALWAYS have to be on it or you function well below your baseline, which is pretty low when you already have ADHD. Nobody should be taking something so closely related to methamphetamine in both structure and action every day. Nicotine, by comparison has no crash and can be much more safely administered as necessary throughout the day - all without the roller-coaster effect of stronger stimulants. The dependance is nothing compared to that of pharmaceutical grade speed. It's not as forcefully effective, but with good coping mechanisms and behavioral work, I've found nicotine to be pretty helpful... ...not as blunt and to-the-point as say, d-amphetamine, but still more effective than caffeine.

Same here, I have ADD, lost the H! LOL. It helps a helluvalot with concentration. And to keep me less figity and more calm. Hmmm, come to think of it, I may have lost the H in ADHD due to taking up smoking....

 

[AngelsBreath]

When I smoked analogs, I would be looking at a problem and trying to figure out a solution to it at work...the best thing I did was to walk out and have a smoke then it would hit me. Now I don't have to walk out, I just sit back, push the little blue button and it comes to me. hahaha!

 

[Richard75]

...you know that guy from the X files...

Imagine if the X-Files lasted another decade... I wonder if the Cigarette Smoking Man would have become the e-Cigarette Smoking Man. They would, of course, have to give him one evil looking PV... probably a Darwin.

 

[Reaper0329]

I've had the discussion that "everyone has their vice" numerous times. I've been assured I'm the only one. -_-

 

[kristin]

...the psychology of drugs & addiction. I learned that cigarettes are just as addictive if not more addictive than heroine. I was like...really!!! That's insane!

Yes, it's insane and 100% NOT TRUE. Just more ANTZ propaganda.

The consensus at the moment certainly isn't "nicotine is safe", just "nicotine on its own is massively safer than smoking".

When compared to smoking, smoke-free nicotine is called "safer." However, the health risks are SO LOW that other products with similar health risks are usually called "safe." If they can call the nicotine in gums and patches "safe" (as in the ANTZ saying we should use "safe and effective" pharmaceutical nicotine products instead of e-cigarettes) then the nicotine in e-cigarettes can also be called "safe."

All I'm saying is I think it's wrong (on the balance of the evidence I've read) to say "Nicotine doesn't cause cancer". There's a decent amount of evidence that it might, perhaps more that it promotes already existing tumours rather than causing them outright.

It may exacerbate existing tumors, but there are still only one or two inconclusive studies which admit they MAY have found a link and further study is needed. There is absolutely no conclusive evidence that nicotine CAUSES cancer. If there was, NRT products would have a black box warning and the FDA wouldn't have just changed the regulations of NRT to allow for longer use.

Additition: Nicotine present in analog cigs is also more addictive, or at least faster, because there are chemicals that speed the absorption of nicotine into the bloodstream as well.

More ANTZ propaganda. Fight the brainwashing!!

Oh, I believe nicotine is very addictive. Some of it a psychologically dependent on smoking, no doubt (like the oral fixation), but the neurological effects of nicotine are pretty well documented.

No, the ANTZ claim it is well documented, but in truth, it's not. Nicotine by itself is about as addictive as caffeine. Studies of patients treated with nicotine for 6 months shows no withdrawal symptoms. If it was so addictive (as her0in) then 6 months of daily exposure should certainly have addicted the patients. Also, studies of nicotine gum use show dependency in non-smokers is extremely rare. Add to that the ease in which so many vapers reduce their nicotine to zero and others who find "something missing" even at high nicotine levels and it's clear that there are other factors other than nicotine keeping many smokers smoking.

Granted, and well put.

All I'm saying is that in vitro evidence is probably enough to call nicotine "a suspected carcinogen". Hopefully it isn't (at least in vivo), and I hope future study reinforces the evidence that it is essentially as harmful as caffeine. I still think it's premature to say "It doesn't cause cancer", however, though if it does, it certainly appears that it does so at a very low rate.

There isn't anywhere near enough evidence to call it a suspected carcinogen. There is a small amount of evidence to say "it COULD be a suspected carcinogen under very rare circumstances but further study is needed." Countering that is the millions of snus users who are exposed to large doses of nicotine daily (actual adult humans, not rats or cells in a dish) and the epidemiology proves no increased risk of cancer. If nicotine caused cancer, there should be an epidemic of oral cancer in Sweden and there isn't.

 

[AngelsBreath]

Fantastic kristin!! That's all I have to say, flipping fantastic! Thank you so much for joining in the discussion.

 

[AngelsBreath]

I visited your page, those are absolutely stunning!! I LOVE pretty things and those are gorgeous!