Is Nicotine not as Addictive as 'they' say it is ?

[Vapeon4Life]

That nicotine is as addictive as many hard drugs has been a mantra we have been hearing for yours - So I did some research:

If the data contradict the theory, throw out the data: Nicotine addiction in the 2010 report of the Surgeon General
"
Abstract
The reports of US Surgeon General on smoking are considered the authoritative statement on the scientific state of the art in this field. The previous report on nicotine addiction published in 1988 is one of the most cited references in scientific articles on smoking and often the only citation provided for specific statements of facts regarding nicotine addiction. In this commentary we review the chapter on nicotine addiction presented in the recent report of the Surgeon General. We show that the nicotine addiction model presented in this chapter, which closely resembles its 22 years old predecessor, could only be sustained by systematically ignoring all contradictory evidence. As a result, the present SG's chapter on nicotine addiction, which purportedly "documents how nicotine compares with ...... and ....... in its hold on users and its effects on the brain," is remarkably biased and misleading."

"..... In the present commentary we address the model of nicotine addiction presented in Chapter 4 of the report. Specifically, we challenge conclusion (2) which states that "nicotine is the drug that causes addiction". We will show that this model could only be sustained by systematically ignoring all contradictory evidence. As a result, the present SG's chapter on nicotine addiction, which purportedly "documents how nicotine compares with ...... and ....... in its hold on users and its effects on the brain," is remarkably biased and misleading......."

If the data contradict the theory, throw out the data: Nicotine addiction in the 2010 report of the Surgeon General | Harm Reduction Journal | Full Text

 

[MLEJ]

Oh, those pesky facts.

Nicotine, absent tobacco, is mildly addictive. Somewhat less addictive than caffeine, substantially less addictive than modern, genetically manipulated wheat, much less addictive than processed sugar.
Nicotine, consumed in the amounts delivered via smoking and vaping, is harmless to generally healthy adults.
But those facts don't advance the agenda.

If the data contradict the theory, throw out the data. If the data don't advance the agenda, lie.

Seen the latest about second-hand vapor? It's the same as the anti-smoking agenda of years past: 11 studies -- if i'm remembering the number correctly -- were published in peer-reviewed journals showing no significant health impact of second-hand smoke. Diffused, cool tobacco smoke being quite different from hot smoke inhaled directly, you see, and harm being different from discomfort or annoyance. Then, one study was published claiming hundreds of thousands of deaths were caused annually by second-hand smoke. That study was repudiated in subsequent literature for both its method and its analysis. The EPA published a report based only on that one, flawed study, ignoring all else, and THAT became the basis for public policy. It's now common knowledge that second-hand smoke is deadly, except it's not.

The second-hand smoke strategy was laid out by the UN WHO in the late 1970's. Thus the studies in the 1980's. Your body, your choice; other people's bodies, regulation. But the results didn't suit the agenda so the results were ignored.

vaping's turn now.

 

[pt91]

Oh, those pesky facts.

Nicotine, absent tobacco, is mildly addictive. Somewhat less addictive than caffeine, substantially less addictive than modern, genetically manipulated wheat, much less addictive than processed sugar.
Nicotine, consumed in the amounts delivered via smoking and vaping, is harmless to generally healthy adults.
But those facts don't advance the agenda.

If the data contradict the theory, throw out the data. If the data don't advance the agenda, lie.

Seen the latest about second-hand vapor? It's the same as the anti-smoking agenda of years past: 11 studies -- if i'm remembering the number correctly -- were published in peer-reviewed journals showing no significant health impact of second-hand smoke. Diffused, cool tobacco smoke being quite different from hot smoke inhaled directly, you see, and harm being different from discomfort or annoyance. Then, one study was published claiming hundreds of thousands of deaths were caused annually by second-hand smoke. That study was repudiated in subsequent literature for both its method and its analysis. The EPA published a report based only on that one, flawed study, ignoring all else, and THAT became the basis for public policy. It's now common knowledge that second-hand smoke is deadly, except it's not.

The second-hand smoke strategy was laid out by the UN WHO in the late 1970's. Thus the studies in the 1980's. Your body, your choice; other people's bodies, regulation. But the results didn't suit the agenda so the results were ignored.

Vaping's turn now.

Is there some data that genetically manipulated wheat is addictive and more so than nicotine? I have never heard that.

 

[Vapeon4Life]

Vaping's turn now.

What the 'the war on tobacco' {and now vapes} has morphed into is a full scale "Inquisition" - Just as biased as the Inquisition of the Middle Ages - If it looks like smells like or in any way shape or size resembles tobacco smoking, it is bad and must be stamped out
- As they burned witches and heretics at the stake,
evidence is created to suit the Inquisition !

 

[MLEJ]

Is there some data that genetically manipulated wheat is addictive and more so than nicotine? I have never heard that.

There is data that it's addictive. Wheat is an opiate | Dr. William Davis
How addictive relative to nicotine hasn't been studied, far as i know; my assertion was based only on my own observations & culled from reading. Same with sugar. (i work in the food industry.)

 

[pt91]

There is data that it's addictive. Wheat is an opiate | Dr. William Davis
How addictive relative to nicotine hasn't been studied, far as i know; my assertion was based only on my own observations & culled from reading. Same with sugar. (i work in the food industry.)

Sugar I get as there is a "high" so I guess carbs at a lesser level. I have never been a sugar or carb person.
Does the US grow and use a lot of gmo wheat?

 

[MLEJ]

Does the US grow and use a lot of gmo wheat?

Pretty sure the mutant wheat is what every commercial producer is growing in the US.

Sugar I get as there is a "high" so I guess carbs at a lesser level.

Apparently, this engineered wheat acts somehow on the same part of the brain as opiates.

New government mandates:
WARNING: THIS PRODUCT CONTAINS SUGAR. SUGAR IS A HIGHLY ADDICTIVE CHEMICAL
Wonder how Hershey, Kellogg's, or PepsiCo would react.
WARNING: THIS PRODUCT CONTAINS CAFFIENE. CAFFIENE IS A HIGHLY ADDICTIVE CHEMICAL
Have to print that one in big, black letters on every coffee mug and teaspoon.