Nicotine as a useful stimulant
gwern.net
gwern.net
Meanwhile, nicotine is a staple of my day-to-day. I quit smoking a long time ago, now I stick to Swedish snus and vaping. For a period I was chewing gum too. Definitely lots of ways to get it without smoking.
[1]: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/documentStore/m/a/u/mau01c00/...
Edit: > which means even smaller doses quickly restore it close to previous levels
Not for me it doesn't. I'm quite aware of how much nicotine I have in my system and what effect it's having.
Just passing it along since I tried 5-10 brands before settling on Thunder. To each their own.
Doesn't it cause oral cancer?
One thing that really makes a difference is that the vaporized nicotine is actually somewhat hot, like cigarette smoke, when you breathe it in. Standard pre-packaged e-cigarettes didn't cut it for me specifically for this reason.
You mean pre-packaged e-cigs provide a bad user experience with 'cold' vapor ?
Some of the off the shelf disposable / prepackaged e-cigs aren't powerful enough to have a strong vaporization of the solution. When you're refilling yourself, it becomes substantially cheaper (maybe a few dollars for a month of heavy usage?), and with the higher end kits you can program your voltage / amperage settings on curves for your preference as you in inhale.
Too hot, I found, with the first such device I tried - way hotter than cigarette smoke. With the one I have currently (a bottom coil design, I think it's called, though I'm not into the technical side of the things really) it's pretty accurate.
The name "vaping" is something of a shame, though, for something that's a much less harmful alternative for smokers -- it sounds to me like a combination of "vapid" and "gaping".
Nicotine levels also vary and can be customized.
[1] We have lovely billboards in SLC on 1 hour of hookah == 100 cigarettes, which is based on a poorly designed study by the CDC which measured volume of vapor in hookah as a comparative to "what if it was the same volume of cigarette smoke", as a paraphrase.
http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/tobac...
If I get a response, I'll have more time later to pick this apart.
Note many times the studies are based around "traditional" such as Tombak tobacco, which is placing the coals directly on the Shisha (tobacco), versus more standard practice (especially in US / hookah bars (across to Vietnam, etc.)) of tinfoil or steal as a heat diffuser.
I imagine e-cigarette smokers must get this stunned reaction quite frequently.
I did double take when I saw her e-smoking in the terminal though. ;)
[shameless plug]
I had so much success with the product that I actually started a company selling them. I found that the market was much too complicated for somebody like my parents to enter, so a partner and I focused in on one great product for new users. You can check it out... If anybody has any feedback / constructive criticism / questions, please reach out to me at sean [at] vapesecret.com
Does Swedish snus made in some way so that this doesn't happen? If so, I need to try it!
Note: If you want a good experience, import it. Do not try Camel snus. Also, you may want to try packets first instead of loose.
Funny way to put it, because human beings have been smoking something for as long as they've walked on earth, as evidenced by older cultures, so it's arguable what would be "natural".
Its obvious they had functional societies, which isnt possible when people spend all day using psycoactives, like Europe on heroin or Asia on opium days.
Do a little research beforehand, but the average cup of coffee has ~100mg caffeine. So 5x50mg caffeine pills for a week or two, and gradually decrease, and it becomes very easy to quit. I've done this successfully (and also chosen actively to get back on caffeine for performance/training reasons, which once lapsed, I then used the method again successfully).
Nicotine, in low doses, by itself (i.e. outside of tobacco, which contains MAOIs, which potentiate nicotine's effects), is not terribly addictive. I'll occasionally supplement it for a few days at a time, then stop. I would caution anyone supplementing nicotine NEVER to smoke tobacco, at the same time.
Patches are the most healthy way to consume nicotine. Nicotine + gums = all kinds of bad stuff. Still, there's some slight carcinogenic risk with long-term use of the stuff, so it's not a miracle drug. :(
I'm worried about if it will damage my oral health or anything though. Will it?
That said, when nicotine is exposed to oral tissues, it may be promoting:
-oral cancer
Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20338106
-gingivitis
Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20337880
-receding gums
Source: don't have a specific study handy, but this high-level review mentions it, and other issues: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2933534/
Keep in mind, these are all slight chances. If you do this regularly for years, it may be of concern. Every once in a while? No biggie.
Patch will get you around all of these, specific issues at least. There's still that whole 'carcinogenic, overall' thing.
I chewed nicotine gum for 3 months, 3 pieces a day. My hair is too short to notice any loss, but I was quite aware if just an overall deterioration of my mouth. Eroding gums, thinning enamel, and yellowing teeth color. Yuck.
I really suggest electronic cigs over gum...
0: http://www.askapatient.com/mobile/viewrating.asp?drug=18612&...
[1] http://www.gallup.com/poll/109048/us-smoking-rate-still-comi...
[2] Siegel, Ronald K (2005). Intoxication: The Universal Drive for Mind-Altering Substances. Park Street Press, Rochester, Vermont. ISBN 1-59477-069-7.
Apparently, there was an amazing study done relatively recently (last five years), in which they demonstrated that, in mice, exposure to nicotine during pregnancy results in higher rates of ADHD in the grandchildren (passed down through the female offspring exposed to nicotine in utero, not the males).
I can't find the study at the moment, but the findings would be monumental if they also apply to humans too.
MAOIs? True, they give withdrawal symptoms. But despite being a widely used pharmaceutical, to my knowledge no MAOI-only drug has seen anything resembling the abuse patterns of tobacco.
The hand-wavy "other compounds" that the article mentions and then doesn't describe? Anyone know what those would be?
So, sure- maybe nicotine isn't very addictive, yet it makes an otherwise non-addictive drug dreadfully addictive. Or perhaps the scientific truth of the matter, whatever it is, is simply complicated enough that someone who really wants one particular thing to be true can twist a bit of evidence around to support his case. Either way- stick to coffee.
Excuse me? I went to considerable pains to give the primary source citations & jailbreak the PDFs.
Well, yes, what exactly else would you expect papers to be about when someone claims that nicotine+MAOIs is different from just nicotine...? Presumably the papers are going to have titles like "Monoamine Oxidase Inhibition Dramatically Increases the Motivation to Self-Administer Nicotine in Rats".
The implication seemed to be that there were other things beyond MAOIs in tobacco that were (or helped nicotine to be) addictive; is that not the case?
Well, I don't know that it's not the case. There's a lot of stuff in tobacco, it wouldn't surprise me if there were other chemicals besides MAOIs with relevant psychoactive effects. But from the snippet you quote, I see why you might be reading that as a stronger claim than I intended. I'll amend that to '& possibly other compounds' so it's clearer.
Supported by the fact that some smokers use straws and carrots to help quit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monoamine_oxidase_inhibitor
"Monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) are chemicals which inhibit the activity of the monoamine oxidase enzyme family. They have a long history of use as medications prescribed for the treatment of depression. They are particularly effective in treating atypical depression."
Though there is admittedly a "citation needed".
The main reason they're not used is that better & more selective releasing agent/reuptake inhibitors exist, and MAOIs have potentially fatal interactions with a huge variety of different substances (including some cheeses, if memory serves)
We're definitely in agreement that MAOIs have a strong effect on the (heightened) levels of synaptic neurotransmitters (released by some nicotinic upstream signalling), giving a synergistic effect.
MAOIs are the last resort anti-depressants. There are two left on the US and they are extremely highly-regarded in effectiveness. They're more effective than the typical SSRIs of today but they are sadly not as prescribed today due to over-blown fears of interactions. It's a case of newer not always being better.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tranylcypromine
They work by preventing the breakdown of dopamine, serotonin, etc. therefore increasing levels in your brain.
In fact the gold standard for anti-anxiety is an MAOI, Nardil, which has additional inhibition leading to increased levels of GABA (the target of alcohol/benzodiazepines.)
In fact two medications in my daily mix with Nardil are on that list and it's such a pain dealing with ignorant pharmacists that see a warning on my their screen and refuse to call my doctor to confirm their combined safety, even though he's been practicing for 50 years (really.)
I urge you to read the various reports from real users confirming the safety even with the supposedly not safe to mix.
The problem is that most of the recommendations in the list were added before precise measuring of tyramine levels in foods was developed and list is one big CYA. To make matters worse is that nobody has made a significant effort to do real testing to define safe levels so most users are left to responsible trial and error.
I.E. read this about pepperoni, debunking the conventional "wisdom":
> BACKGROUND: Continuous refinement of the monoamine oxidase inhibitor (MAOI) diet has resulted in much reduced and simplified recommendations that attempt to balance safety and practicality. In the spirit of evidence-based practice, dietary restrictions should be based on carefully documented case reports and valid tyramine analyses. Residual concerns have focused on combination foods such as pizza and a variety of soy products. We determined the tyramine content of pizzas and a variety of soy products in order to refine dietary recommendations for use with MAOIs. METHOD: High-pressure liquid chromatography analysis of tyramine content was performed on a variety of pizzas, soy sauces, and other soybean products. A tyramine level of 6 mg or less was considered safe. RESULTS: No significant tyramine levels were found in any of the pizzas, including those with double pepperoni and double cheese. Marked variability was found in soy products, including clinically significant tyramine levels in tofu when stored for a week and high tyramine content in one of the soy sauces. CONCLUSION: Pizzas from large chain commercial outlets are safe for consumption with MAOIs. However, caution must be exercised if ordering pizzas from smaller outlets or gourmet pizzas known to contain aged cheeses. All soybean products should be avoided, especially soy sauce and tofu. Individualized counseling and continuous surveillance of compliance are still essential. >
Bonus:
Tranylcypromine enhancement of nicotine self-administration.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17412372
The monoamine oxidase inhibitor phenelzine enhances the discriminative stimulus effect of nicotine in rats.
Then I understood what I had missed all this time: I love nicotine, and the surprising thing is that without all the toxic stuff in cigarettes it's not as addictive as it's made out to be.
I often go hours without a portion of snus and completely forget about it, while I could not stay away from cigarettes for more than a couple of hours without getting restless.
Caffeine though you can prise from my cold dead mug.
Cigarettes are more insidious tobacco delivery vehicles, but cigars aren't exactly health supplements.
Nicotine supplementation, absent the tobacco, is an interesting subject worth further study and consideration. On its own, given Gwern's and other research, it seems no more dangerous or addictive than caffeine (for example).
If you want a way to take in nicotine with lower risk of addiction, get an e-cig.
There's not (m)any other molecules out there that do this, so it's quite a novel research target!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotinic_agonist#Drug_developm...
The development of nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonists began in the early 1990s after the discovery of nicotine’s positive effects on animal memory.[2][3] The development of nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonists has come a long way since then. The nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonist are gaining increasing attention as drug candidates for multiple central nervous system disorders such as Alzheimer's disease, schizophrenia, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and nicotine addiction.[24][25]
http://www.addforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=130036
<i>Interestingly enough, some pharmaceutical companies (like Targacept) have caught onto this phenomenon, and they have already started manufacturing nicotinic drugs (agonists of nicotinic receptors), which are to be marketed for the treatment of ADHD. They are trying to make nictoine more "safe"...
These so called nicotinic drugs, such as AZD3480 (Ispronicline), are still in the clinical trial phase. In fact, the drug is in phase trial II, which means that it has passed the so-called primary "safety test", and there were no alarming adverse reactions. See: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00683462.
These nicotinic drugs are a refreshing new technology, because they indirectly act on dopamine through the release of another neurotransmitter, acetylcholine. These drugs are much unlike classic stimulants, which act upon the dopamine reward pathway directly, increasing abuse potential.
I decided to put the last question to the test. For the past week, I weaned myself of the Ritalin, and I bought transdermal nicotine patches. Bear in mind that I have never smoked a cigarette in my life, and none of my immediate family members smoke! So, what I did was highly risky as nicotine has been dubbed as a "highly addictive" drug. ...
On these so-called "dangerous" 5 mg patches, not only was I able to focus better and sleep better, but my mood was much more stable. Also, the "come-down" is nothing like that which I experienced with psychostimulants (more specifically, Ritalin). Now, I am not saying that we should all start smoking. But, I'm saying that we should keep an open mind and to keep our therapeutic options open.</i>
Not sure if there are any mental benefits. I feel a bit more relaxed right after vaping. No ill effects whatsoever. I made a few week to month long breaks to see if there would be any addiction - there was none. I was able to stop at any time.
It's sort of like snacking for me, but without the calories. Definitely contributed to my weight loss.
Two years of off-and-on "smoking" has revealed that this cigarette replacement causes no addiction whatsoever.
I'm 26, I picked up smoking about 10 years ago (damn, that's a lot of time) and I have high blood pressure. That may also be due to genetic factors (both father, mother and grandmother with HBP).
While my BP is usually around 150/90, the three times I quit smoking for more than a week I return to normal values, around 120/80.
Just my N=1
However, the abstract of another of the articles, "Effects of Cigarette Smoking on Performance in a Simulated Driving Task" [2] states that the effect was only measured on minimally abstinent smokers.
Are any of the other studies measuring the beneficial effects of nicotine on non-users (and non-users only)?
My anecdotal experience when I quit (the first 2 times, couple of months each) as well as the first time I smoked was that the first couple of cigarettes had absolutely no effects, whatsoever.
So the last time I quit (about 2 years ago), I just kept at it. After about 3 months any previously observable decline in performance and ability to focus was gone. Most of it was gone in the first 3 weeks actually, with only slight remains of increased irritability persisting for 2 more months.
That makes me suspect that nicotine only has a beneficial effects on nicotine users (instead, lack of nicotine is what causes the opposite of the measured effect for users).
But even if such benefits exist, I feel that the they aren't worth it. The inability to function without nicotine, the constant drive to get more - it feels like slavery, and I'll never go back to that.
And I cringe when I read things like:
There is addiction but it’s drastically overestimated by
almost everyone and may been conflated with the habit-formation
capability
1. the nicotine desire phase - First 48 hours. Incredibly, painfully hard. Strong desire to place a sticker on me or just light a cigarette and make it all go away. This is what kept me a user for 7 years and helped me come up with various excuses just to continue.
2. The learning-to-live phase: A hard but somewhat joyful period where I would recognize the habitual desire to light up a cigarette associated with various activities.
The second phase had 3 different stages for every smoking habit I have developed. For example, at first I couldn't imagine drinking coffee without a cigarette.
Then after the first time it felt like I'm getting no joy from the coffee. The second time it felt okay, but slightly incomplete. Finally, the third time it was all good.
The awesome part was realizing that I just learned how to drink coffee without cigarettes. And it was super-easy: just do it 3 times. Joy! Repeat with all other problematic activities.
This happened with all activities that I associated with smoking. Removing the habits felt easy. Getting off the nicotine felt almost impossible. Luckily, the necessary time for the second one was much shorter (I still had tiny activity-induced cravings couple of months after I quit)
[1]: http://cercor.oxfordjournals.org/content/19/9/1990.abstract
I need to apologize a little bit here; I've been checking my article and it seems I inserted the wrong link for that citation. The one I actually wanted is http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02245346 'Smoking and Raven IQ', Stough et al 1994. Also paywalled, but I'm working on getting them. (My university access doesn't cover SpringerLink so I need to ask other people to get them for me.)
> Because in my experience its completely, totally wrong. I could clearly separate 2 phases that I went through when I quit:
Let me point out that your subsequent lines indicate you are talking about your addiction to tobacco, not to nicotine.
Yeah, but only for the second phase of the quit. I went half-way through the exact same first phase in a previous quit, by using patches for 2 weeks first.
Unfortunately most people have an extremely hard time (and most of the attempts to quit that I've observed have involved a lot of misery followed by a return to smoking).
Nisbett, R. E., Aronson, J., Blair, C., Dickens, W., Flynn, J., Halpern, D. F., & Turkheimer, E. (2012). Intelligence: new findings and theoretical developments. American Psychologist, 67(2), 130.
http://people.virginia.edu/~ent3c/papers2/Articles%20for%20O...
by a group of all-star IQ researchers who on the whole are optimistic about environmental interventions, lays out some of the current research and shows what is still unknown.
Absolutely; if you look at some of my other pages, you can see for yourself how little I think of most claims to improve intelligence...
I take this unreplicated study as being more evidence for the stimulating effect of nicotine rather than any genuine peak intelligence boost, in the same way that monetary payment can increase peoples' scores on IQ tests - you wouldn't say 'the promise of money makes people smarter', but rather, 'the promise of money "enables" people to work harder'.
FWIW, I think the Nisbett review is drastically optimistic in some areas (I've criticized it on HN in the past, although I can't quite seem to find a link to my old comment in Google), so the true picture for IQ interventions is worse.
It seems possible that stimulant medication could prevent common symptoms like weight gain, problems concentrating, and help ignore physical cravings for the first two or three weeks of quitting smoking.
Edit: sorry, somewhat off-topic.
http://www.gwern.net/Nootropics#nicotine
Where you seem to suggest that actually you experienced no measurable benefit from nicotine, but the placebo affect was strong. Have I read that correctly?
Yes. Reading the literature, I found no reason to not try out nicotine. I discuss my personal experiences in http://www.gwern.net/Nootropics#nicotine
> Have you been off nicotine longer than 2 months in the past year?
Why would I do that if I find it useful, as I do? But I have been keeping a log of nicotine use since June (to use it as a covariate in other self-experiments), which indicates I easily skip it for long periods: 03, 07 June 2013: 4mg gum; 22 June 2013: 2mg gum; 24 June 2013: 2mg gum; 1 July: 2mg gum; 9 July, 2mg gum; 20 July, 2mg gum; 20 August, 3mg gum; 5, 6 September, 1mg gum; 20 Sept, 1mg gum.
More generally, I received my current batch of nicotine gum (96x4mg) back on 28 December 2011, or 640 days ago; I still have 2 pieces left over, so that means I've been using the nicotine at an average rate of (94 * 4) / 640 = 0.6mg/day. (This includes the August-November 2012 period where I was taking gum every other day for a dual n-back experiment.)
That is, assuming a 1-pack-a-day smoker of a 0.6mg / cigarette brand ...
Okay, I guess - I wish you the best of luck, and your usage seems well controlled. Though, the withdrawal I went through when I quit - I wouldn't wish it to my worst enemy. So I hope you don't mind if I say "be careful" (even though I can already see that you are :)
IIRC, the effective dose of a smoker is going to be both quantitatively larger due to more efficient absorption through the lungs and also qualitatively different due to the much faster absorption.
Also, I should mention that in the experiment, half the days were placebos, so that's at least 5 pieces of gum which were allowed to dry out, reducing the average a little bit.
It's not healthy, it's filthy.
These issues fixed, you might have presented coherent argument.
I think we're seeing some of this now, with the greater attention being paid to e-cig products.
I would chalk this this one up as a case of capitalism working [for the general good [this clarification shouldn't be necessary but it always is]].
Well, once tobacco has been socially stigmatized and huge taxes placed on it, anyway. I'm not sure nicotine gum/patches/e-cigs existed before the War on Smoking. I expect you could buy purified nicotine oil from chemical suppliers, but it'd be up to you to figure out how to use it (and do so without killing yourself).