Bowsite.com

Terry

Nicotinoids have been used as pesticides and insecticides because in higher doses it is simply a poison.

Note: the tars and chemicals that are related to the causes of cancer and lung damage come from the burning of the plant material, and not necessarily the nicotine contained within. It can be postulated from tobacco data that similar lung damage will be seen in marijuana smokers in the not too distant future as the same chemical challenges from the burning and inhalation of smoke is almost identical...only the chemical high is different.

Fun fact: the reason that coffee and chocolate go so well together is that they are almost identical chemically, differing by a single hydrogen bond.

Therein is the problem. After smoking for decades, the human body no longer manufacturers these needed chemicals as it has always received them from the external source. When you stop smoking, the body is not always able to begin making those much needed substances again, and the brain does not function well without having these substances.

It ain't just the nicotine...the body craves (honestly needs) those other substances to function properly, and without a source for them the body/brain doesn't function right.

If your body does begin to manufacture them (naturally) again, then that person can generally quit smoking without much stress once the nicotine is out of the system.

When science researchers are able to produce a supplement that provides those needed chemicals I believe people will find that quitting smoking will be difficult at all.

I'm waiting for the day...

.. ..

.. ..

Currently a non smoker, non chewer for 3 years. Once I quit for 9 years, and never lost the urge for a cigarette.

As a matter of fact, I want a Marlboro Red 100 right now !!!!

It is a constant daily fight for me.

Let me tell ya, nicotine withdrawals ain't no joke. I doubt they're as severe as heroin or opiate withdrawal though.

Btw, alcohol withdrawal is the only one that can kill a person.

This coming from my Pontificating Critical Groupie.....Priceless

Can someone supply scientific studies that show nicotine on it's own create a heroin type addiction?

Don't be so hard on him. It takes great courage to make a fool of yourself.

The Rock

NICOTINE: HARDER TO KICK...THAN HEROIN

The Rock

Dipped snuff from about 12 or 13 until I was in my 30s. Dipped alot, as in a few times went to bed with a lipload without noticing. That was tougher to quit, but chewed lots of gum to keep my mouth busy and it wasn't too bad. Again, maybe the snuff doesn't have the release or delivery that cigarettes do. I was lucky, I never could stand smoking a cigarette and never got into that. Had a few friends who did. Looking back there are but a few bullets I dodged growing up, but that was one of them.

Hijack over..... carry on.....

Are you addicted to nicotine gum or lozenges? Posted by DrMendelsohn on 18 September, 2014

Are you using nicotine gum or lozenges long after quitting smoking and find yourself unable to stop using them? It may be that you have transferred your nicotine addiction from the cigarettes to the gum or lozenge.

nicotine_gum.jpgHow common is addiction to nicotine gum or lozenges?

The risk of becoming addicted to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) such as nicotine gum or lozenges is very low, mainly because these products deliver nicotine much more slowly to the body than cigarettes and at much lower doses.

The recommended use of nicotine products is for 3 months, however about 1 in 20 users are still using them after 12 months. The risk of long-term addiction is lowest for nicotine patches (2 people per 100) and higher for nicotine gum and lozenges (about 8 people per 100). (1)

The risk of becoming addicted to the gum or lozenge is greatest in those who were heavier smokers.

Is long-term NRT use harmful?

No. There are no known health risks associated with long-term NRT use (except in pregnancy), although there is an ongoing financial cost. However, any drawbacks are far outweighed by the benefits of preventing a relapse to smoking. (2)

How can you stop using nicotine gum or lozenges?

There are a range of strategies for those who want to quit long-term gum or lozenges. In most cases this is easy, but it can be very difficult for some users. Counselling and support from your health professional will help.

Abrupt quitting Some people can simply quit abruptly, although you may get some cravings and withdrawal symptoms for several days, such as anxiety, irritability and difficulty concentrating. (3)

Gradual cutting down Set a quit date in the next few weeks and gradually cut down the number of pieces you use each day. Replace some of the pieces you are using with regular chewing gum. If you are using 4mg gum or lozenge, cut down to the 2mg strength.This method is usually more comfortable than abrupt quitting. (3)

Champix Champix (varenicline) is a powerful medication used to help smokers quit. It has also been shown to assist long-term gum or lozenge users to quit as well. Champix relieves cravings and withdrawals from qujitting and makes stopping nicotine products more comfortable. It is available on prescription. (4,5)

Nicotine patches Using nicotine patches and gradually reducing your gum or lozenge intake is another effective option. Once you have stopped the gum or lozenge, you can then gradually reduce the patch use, by gradually using smaller and smaller patch sizes (patches can be safely cut). Patches can be purchased over-the-counter.

References

1) Hajek P. Dependence potential of nicotine replacement treatments. Prev Med 2000

2) Etter JF. Dependence on the nicotine gum in former smokers. Add Behav 2009

3) Hurt RD. Cessation of long term nicotine gum use - a prospective randomised trial. Addiction 1995

4) Berlin I. Varenicline in stopping long-term nicotine use. Am J Add 2012

5) Garelik DA. Nicotine gum dependence treated with varenicline—A case report. Nicotine Tob Res 2010

Can someone supply scientific studies that show "" nicotine on it's own"" create a heroin type addiction?

Really wasn't aware that posting a counterpoint to a point or argument is somehow "pontificating". Oh for the days of GJ, Jim Johnson, Yax, Pabs, 'Fish.... Guys that could actually defend their position with their own thoughts and counter arguments, without stooping to trying to sound like an intellectual name caller. GTFU people.

A very nasty stink bait. See he caught the same mud eating fish again plus another.

See the whole idea of the CF is to toss things out for debate, discussion, opinions. If you can’t handle opposing thoughts, dissenting viewpoints, OR, can’t back up an argument without name calling, perhaps you should seek out a safer sandbox. Usually a cat comes along soon enough to cover the crap.

Hook line and sinker. Excellent tantrum Bowbender.

Can someone supply scientific studies that show "" nicotine on it's own"" create a heroin type addiction?

Show me clinical trial's demonstrating nicotine is as addictive as heroin. It should be fairly simple (you made the claim) with the skills you possess as critical pontoficator and pantie twister.

Can someone supply scientific studies that show "" nicotine on it's own"" create a heroin type addiction?

""Nicotine addiction and opioid addiction are the same in that they both have strong physical and psychological components.""

Can someone supply scientific studies that show "" nicotine on it's own"" create a heroin type addiction? It is evident my pontificating groupie can not.

Show a clinical study where ""Nicotine (remember no tobacco mumbo jumbo) addiction and opioid addiction are the same in that they both have strong physical and psychological components.""

State your point of the thread without all the "gotcha" verbiage and move on with the argument.

Objection sustained..... =D

""Can someone supply scientific studies that show nicotine on it's own create a heroin type addiction?""

He knows he can not provide any clinical studies showing this or his claim "" ""Nicotine addiction and opioid addiction are the same in that they both have strong physical and psychological components."" for there are no conclusive studies showing nicotine in fact is addictive on it's own .

When in fact there are science based science studies finding contrary evidence to what he blathers on about and developing studies concur.

"" Is nicotine 'addictive'? Probably not. No one can make definitive statements on this as there has never been any published research in humans. No clinical trial specifically to examine the potential of nicotine to create dependence in people who have never consumed tobacco has ever been published.""

""Nicotine, however, is a normal, natural part of the diet and everyone tests positive for it. Because nicotine is well-demonstrated to have prophylactic and treatment functions for neurodegenerative, auto-immune and inflammatory diseases and some cognitive function disorders, it is clearly an active component in the diet with positive and preventative functions - i.e. a nutrient.""

"" There are multiple published clinical trials investigating the positive effect of nicotine supplementation on such conditions, which by definition need to employ never-smokers. Without exception, all report that of the hundreds of subjects who had large quantities of pure nicotine administered to them daily for up to six months, no person ever exhibited the smallest sign of dependence: no withdrawal symptoms, or reinforcement, or continuation of use in any form after the trial finished.""

"" It is impossible to clinically demonstrate any potential for dependence for pure nicotine with never-smokers, no matter how much is given or for how long.""

""Neither is nicotine associated with cancer or any other disease. ""

The Rock

The Rock

Nicotine as an Addictive Substance: A Critical Examination of the Basic Concepts and Empirical Evidence by Dale M. Atrens

Dale Atrens received a B.A. from the University of Windsor, an A.M. from Hollins College, and a Ph.D from Rutgers University. He has held appointments at universities in North America, Europe, Asia and Australia. He is currently a Reader in psychobiology at the University of Sydney. He is the author of several neuroscience textbooks and a number of popular books on diet and lifestyle.

The present review is a critical analysis of the concepts behind and the empirical data supporting the view that tobacco use represents an addiction to nicotine. It deals with general aspects of the notion of addiction, while concentrating on specific problems associated with incorporating nicotine into current frameworks. The notion of addiction suffers from unprecedented definitional difficulties. The definitions offered by various authorities are very different, even contradictory. Definitions that reasonably include nicotine are so broad and vague that they allow many trivial things, such as salt, sugar, and watching television, to be considered addictive. Definitions that exclude the trivia also exclude nicotine. The addiction hypothesis, in general, is strongly shaped by views that certain drugs bring about a molecular level subversion of rationality. The main human evidence for this is verbal reports of smokers who say that they can't quit. On the other hand, the existence of many millions of successful quitters suggests that most people can quit. Some smokers don't quit, but whether they can't is another matter. The addiction hypothesis would be greatly strengthened by the demonstration that any drug of abuse produces special changes in the brain. It has yet to be shown that any drug produces changes in the brain different from those produced by many innocuous substances and events. The effects of nicotine on the brain are similar to those of sugar, salt, exercise, and other harmless substances and events. Apart from numerous conceptual and definitional inadequacies with the addiction concept in general, the notion that nicotine is addictive lacks reasonable empirical support. Nicotine does not have the properties of reference drugs of abuse. There are so many findings that conflict so starkly with the view that nicotine is addictive that it increasingly appears that adhering to the nicotine addiction thesis is only defensible on extra-scientific grounds.

http://www.forces.org/evidence/download/nicotine_addiction.pdf

Then the backslappers come along and tell him how smart and cunning he is.

It goes something like this:

KPC: "The sky is azure."

slade: "Typical KPC spinning and lying and pontificating again, everyone knows the sky isn't azure, it's BLUE!"

sleepy: "You got him there slade ol' buddy. That'll teach that critical thinking sucker!!"

KPC: "Umm slade...azure IS blue."

slade: "There he goes again, My critical pontificating fabulust groupie, spinning again..."

KPC: (thinking to himself) "Good Lord, our country is so screwed..."

KPC

Hilarious.

Unlike you www.forces.org looked at the Dale M. Atrens analysis.

You on the other hand chose your normal weaseling to critical pontificate. You had the chance to read the link and it's original source , But, as usual you puffed up and strutted around like petty banty rooster everyone knows you are.

The link is to the original work, but as usual you were to lazy to look and can not resist the bait when critical pontificating is what you live for.

So splain it to us rubes why the bias and wackiness of sage publishing and their associate editors who allowed this analysis to be published in the first place, after all everyone brilliant pontificator like you knows ""nicotine is addictive as opioids""

Here are the Associate Editors of the analysis that was published & you deemed wacky.

Ron L. Akers University of Florida, USA

J. C. Barnes University of Cincinnati, USA

Bruce Benson Florida State University, USA

Robert Booth University of Colorado, USA

Brian B. Boutwell Sam Houston State University, USA

Khanh Bui Pepperdine University, USA

Jonathan Caulkins Carnegie Mellon University, USA

H. Harrington Cleveland Pennsylvania State University, USA

John K. Cochran University of South Florida, USA

Eric J. Connolly Penn State, Abington, USA

Heath Copes The University of Alabama at Birmingham, USA

Dean A Dabney Georgia State University, USA

Spencer De Li University of Macau, China

Matt DeLisi, Ph.D. Ames, IA, USA

Abby Fagan University of Florida, USA

Chris Gibson University of Florida, USA

Christine E. Grella University of California, Los Angeles, USA

Joseph R. Guydish University of California, San Francisco, USA

Martin Iguchi Georgetown University, USA

John J. Kerbs East Carolina University, USA

Carmen Masson University of California, San Francisco, USA

Dan Mears Florida State University, USA

Zofia Mielecka-Kubien Karol Adamiecki University of Economics, Poland

Joseph L. Nedelec University of Cincinnati, USA

Michael L. Prendergast University of California, Los Angeles, USA

Helene Raskin White Rutgers University, Center for Alcohol Studies, USA

Michael D. Reisig Arizona State University, USA

Judith A. Richman University of Illinois at Chicago, USA

Paul Roman University of Georgia, USA

Joseph A. Schwartz University of Nebraska at Omaha, USA

Ben Steiner University of Nebraska at Omaha, USA

Eric Stewart Florida State University, USA

Chris Sullivan University of Cincinnati, USA

Steve Tibbetts California State University, San Bernardino, USA

Chad R. Trulson University of North Texas, Denton, USA

Michael Vaughn Saint Louis University, USA

L. Thomas Winfree New Mexico State University, USA

John Wright University of Cincinnati, USA

While you are at go ahead and pontificate about the work of Dale M. Atrens and the references he sited for his analysis .

References Acquas, E., Carboni,, E., Leone, P., & Di Chiara, G. 1989 SCH 23390 blocks drug-conditioned place-preference and place- aversion: Anhedonia (lack of reward) or apathy (lack of motivation) after dopamine-receptor blockade? Psychopharmacology, 99(2),151-155.

Alexander,B.K., Coambs, R.B., & Hadaway, P.F. 1980 Rat park chronicle. British Columbia Medical Journal, 22(2), 32-45.

Allis, S., Lafferty, E., McAllister, J.F.O., &and van Voorst, B. 1997 Sorry pardner - Big Tobacco fesses up and pays up $368.5 billion, but Congress must approve the deal. Time, 25-29.

Allsop, K.A., & Miller, J.B. 1996 Honey revisited: A reappraisal of honey in pre-industrial diets. British Journal of Nutrition, 75(4), 513-520.

Altman, J., Everitt, B.J., Glautier, S., Markou, A., Nutt, D., Oretti, R., Phillips, G.D., & Robbins, T.W. 1996 The biological, social and clinical bases of drug addiction: commentary and debate. Psychopharmacology, 96(4), 285-345.

Ambrosio, E.,Tella, S.R., Goldberg, S.R., Schindler, C.W., Erzouki, H., & Elmer, G.I. 1996 Cardiovascular effects of cocaine during operant cocaine self- administration. European Journal of Pharmacology, 315(1), 43-51.

American Psychiatric Association 1980 Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

American Psychiatric Association 1994 Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association.

Ando,K. 1975 Profile of drug effects on temporally spaced responding in rats. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 3(5), 833-841.

Ando,K., Hironaka, N., Yanagita, T. 1986 Development of cigarette smoking in rhesus monkeys. (National Institute on Drug Abuse Research Monograph 153) .

Ando,K., & Yanagita, T. 1981 Cigarette smoking in rhesus monkeys. Psychopharmacology, 72(2), 117-127.

Andrews, J.S., & Holtzman, S.G. 1987 The interaction of d-amphetamine and naloxone differs for rats trained on separate fixed-interval or fixed-ratio schedules of reinforcement. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 26, 167-171.

Angulo,J.A., & McEwen, B.S. 1994 Molecular aspects of neuropeptide regulation and function in the corpus striatum and nucleus accumbens. Brain Research Reviews, 19(1), 1-28.

Anonymous 1995 Indicators of nicotine addiction among women--United States, 1991-1992. Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report, 44(6), 102-105.

Anonymous 1996 Tobacco control: reducing cancer incidence and saving lives. American Society of Clinical Oncology. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 14(6), 1961-1963.

Anonymous 1997 Making the case for drug-addiction research. Foundation for Biomedical Research Facts, II(6), 1-1.

Ashton, H., & Stepney, R., 1982 Smoking: Psychology and pharmacology. London: Tavistock Publications.

Asin, K.E., & Wirtshafter, D. 1985 Clonidine produces a conditioned place preference in rats. Psychopharmacology, 85, 383-385.

Atkinson, J., & Enslen, M. 1976 Self-administration of caffeine by the rat. Arzneimittel-Forschung , 26(11), 2059-2061.

Ator, N.A., & Griffiths, R.R. 1983 Nicotine self-administration in baboons. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 19(6), 993-1003.

Ator, N.A., & Griffiths, R.R. 1987 Self-administration of barbiturates and benzodiazepines: A review. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 27(2), 391-398.

Atrens, D.M., & Curthoys, I.S. 1982 The neurosciences and behavior: An introduction. Sydney, Australia: Academic Press.

Balfour, D.J.K. 1994 Neural mechanisms underlying nicotine dependence. Addiction, 89(11), 1419-1423.

Balter, M. 1996 New clues to brain dopamine control, cocaine addiction [news]. Science, 271(5251), 909.

Becona, E., & Garcia, M.P. 1995 Relation between the Tolerance Questionnaire (nicotine dependence) and assessment of carbon monoxide in smokers who participated in treatment for smoking. Psychological Reports, 77(3 Pt 2), 1299-1304.

Bednar, M.M., & Gross, C.E. 1999 Aspirin reduces experimental cerebral blood flow in vivo. Neurological Research, 21(5), 488-490.

Benbow, E.W., Roberts, I.S., & Cairns, A. 1996 Fatal methadone overdose. Better understanding of body's handling of methadone is needed. British file:///C|/Library Downloads/jdi.htm (24 of 58) [09-Jun-2001 07:02:07] Medical Journal, 313(7070), 1479.

Beneke,W.M., Schulte, S.E., & Vander Tuig, J.G. 1995 An analysis of excessive running in the development of activity anorexia. Physiology & Behavior, 58, 451-457.

Benowitz, N.L. 1988 Pharmacologic aspects of cigarette smoking and nicotine addition. New England Journal of Medicine, 319(20), 1318-1330.

Benowitz, N.L. 1996 Pharmacology of nicotine: Addiction and therapeutics. Annual Review of Pharmacology & Toxicology, 36, 597-613.

Benowitz, N.L., Porchet, H., & Jacob III, P. 1990 Pharmacokinetics, metabolism, and pharmacodynamics of nicotine. In S.Wonnacott, M.A.H.

Russell, & I.P.Stolerman (Eds.). Nicotine psychopharmacology: Molecular, cellular, and behavioural aspects (pp. 112-157). Oxford UK: Oxford University Press.

Benwell,M.E., Balfour, D.J., & Khadra, L.F. 1994 Studies on the influence of nicotine infusions on mesolimbic dopamine and locomotor responses to nicotine. Clinical Investigator, 72(3), 233-239.

Benwell,M.E., Holtom, P.E., Moran, R.J., & Balfour, D.J. 1996 Neurochemical and behavioural interactions between ibogaine and nicotine in the rat. British Journal of Pharmacology, 117(4), 743-749.

Bergen, A.W., & Caporaso, N. 1999 Cigarette smoking. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 91(16), 1365-1375.

Berke, J.D., & Hyman, S.E. 2000 Addiction, dopamine, and the molecular mechanisms of memory. Neuron, 25(3), 515-532.

Bewley,S., & Bewley, T.H. 1992 Drug dependence with oestrogen replacement therapy. Lancet, 339(8788), 290-291.

Bhattacharya, S.K., Chakrabarti, A., Sandler, M., & Glover, V. 1995 Rat brain monoamine oxidase A and B inhibitory (tribulin) activity during drug withdrawal anxiety.

Neuroscience Letters, 199(2), 103-106.

Blum, K., Cull, J.G., Braverman, E.R., & Comings, D.E. 1996 Reward deficiency syndrome. American Scientist, 84(2), 132-145.

Boakes, R.A., & Dwyer, D.M. 1997 Weight loss in rats produced by running: Effects of prior experience and individual housing. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50B(2), 129-148.

Bock, B.C., Kanarek, R.B., & Aprille, J.R. 1995 Mineral content of the diet alters sucrose-induced obesity in rats. Physiology & Behavior, 57, 659-668.

There are 33 more pages of references Dale M. Atrens used for his analysyis at the link for you to critical pontificate about so have it and please let us know.

PS: Still waiting for those clinical studies of yours that prove "nicotine is addictive as opioids" and once again please don't spin, twist, deflect and bore us with your tobacco/cigarette blather.

The Rock

When I pressed him as to why he fed the horse tobacco he stated that it killed worms. Now if it kills worms it can't be too good for you.

Terry

.. ..

.. ..

I never saw any termite damage above ground, and never saw any evidence of termites above ground.

I also learned, while visiting a Museum, that wealthy Ladies, back in the 1800's, when packing for long trips, would layer cured tobacco leaves between their clothes, inside the trunks ( big suitcases for you millennials out there )

All my Great Grandparents lived til there 90's. Since then, not one in my family has made it that far. All my Great Grandfathers smoked and chewed their own tobacco.

So, in regards to tobacco, what has changed ?

Sure, it can't be good for you to inhale smoke constantly in your lungs, but what has changed ?

Is it the nicotine? Or maybe the pesticides? Or maybe other chemicals added to the tobacco?

Posted this before, and I'll post it again. Your body makes many of these chemicals on it's own, as they are needed for proper neurological function, but when the body starts getting them from cigarettes/chew, etc. it will stop producing them on it's own. If you smoke cigs long enough..and then quit, the body often does not begin manufacturing these chemicals again on it's own.

When quitting smoking, the nicotine addiction is the first bump, and most everyone can get over that hump. It's the other chemicals the body actually needs, and doesn't have, that drive a person back to smoking again.

All everyone ever talks about when discussing stopping smoking is the nicotine. Find a way to replace those other needed chemicals and quitting smoking will be much easier.