5 ms·

"Caffeine addiction, or a pathological and compulsive form of use, has never been documented in humans." [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caffeine_depende

by Zikes 11y ago

"Caffeine addiction, or a pathological and compulsive form of use, has never been documented in humans." [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caffeine_dependence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caffeine_dependence

sophacles 11y ago
There are big problems with addiction studies in general - in this case because needing a cup of coffee to start your day is considered just fine, whereas needing a drink to start your day is considered pathological. Being grumpy because of lack of coffee is generally understood and sympathized with. Being grumpy because you haven't had a bump today is considered a cocaine problem and compulsive behavior. There is so much socialization and stigma around various substances, that terms like compulsive and pathological are hard to use objectively.
- Zikes 11y ago
  Starting your day with bacon & eggs is just fine, too, unless you ask the vegans.
  - sophacles 11y ago
    I don't understand what this has to do with my point. Are bacon and eggs addictive too? I was merely pointing out that there are known difficulties with the wikipedia statement, because "addictive" "pathological" and "compulsive" are words that have a level of social acceptance built into them, and the same behaviors towards one substance are pathological, while they aren't in another.
    - Zikes 11y ago
      Anything can be psychologically addictive with habitual use and what one might call an "addictive personality". Video games, work, porn, caffeine, bacon & eggs, all the same. Some of those things even have support groups, pills, patches, etc. Nicotine is addictive on a scale far beyond that. Comparing caffeine and nicotine is like comparing nerf and 9mm. That's my argument, and even though every single comment I've made on this thread to that effect has been downvoted into the negatives, I don't care. Apparently that's the hill I'm dying on today, and I'm just fine with that.
      - sophacles 11y ago
        This "nicotine is more addictive" concept is hard to understand for me. For the reasons I outline above. The timeline and severity of withdrawal symptoms aren't that different. The relapse to previous use levels isn't that different. A huge factor in how "bad" each is however seems to be in the responses to relapse. There's disapproval in people's responses to someone taking up nicotine again, but if someone is back to drinking coffee, there's at most a "oh drinking coffee again bob?". These factors in the consequences regarding a slip up or relapse make it hard to judge how "addictive" something is independent of the socialization of it. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rat_Park https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rat_Park
        Zikes 11y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substance_dependence#/media/File:Development_of_a_rational_scale_to_assess_the_harm_of_drugs_of_potential_misuse_(physical_harm_and_dependence,_NA_free_means).svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substance_dependence#/media/Fi... According to the above chart, tobacco, whose addictiveness is driven by nicotine, ranks above the following in dependence: meth, alcohol, steroids, ketamines, and barbiturates. It's only slightly trailing cocaine. Caffeine isn't even on the chart, but even if that were due to "sociological perception", I've no doubt that it would be at the bottom-left of that chart.
        sophacles 11y ago
        But you are now confusing tobacco with nicotine. The harm of tobacco is not driven by nicotine, even if the addictiveness is. Further, while the addictiveness of tobacco is primarily driven by nicotine, it is enhanced by MAOIs in tobacco as well by other substances: https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/tobacco/are-there-other-chemicals-may-contribute-to-tobacco-addiction https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/toba... Therefore the chart you link is not really that valid in terms of nicotine vs caffeine. In fact - many people who switch from tobacco to vaping report that it is a difficult switch. Part of it is that the act of vaping isn't the act of smoking, and it's a habit replacement problem. But other parts of that can easily be explained by the MAOIs (more studies are required of course). The other thing reported often, by people who switch to vaping then successfully quit all nicotine is that it's easier to quit vaping than it is to quit tobacco directly - this is probably due to just nicotine vs nicotine+ in tobacco. Finally - it is very hard to find studies on nicotine addiction independent of tobacco use. Seriously, until very recently, the way to get nicotine was via tobacco, so almost all claims about nicotine use are about tobacco use in general. The chemical pathways are understood, but the effects of just nicotine on long term dependence are all in the context of tobacco. Conversely the page on caffeine in wikipedia - under the heading "Reinforcement disorders" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caffeine#Reinforcement_disorders https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caffeine#Reinforcement_disorde... ) does discuss that the claims of caffeine not being addictive are pretty contested. Basically your points about nicotine are not quite as solid as you claim.

by Zikes 11y ago

sophacles 11y ago

There are big problems with addiction studies in general - in this case because needing a cup of coffee to start your day is considered just fine, whereas needing a drink to start your day is considered pathological. Being grumpy because of lack of coffee is generally understood and sympathized with. Being grumpy because you haven't had a bump today is considered a cocaine problem and compulsive behavior. There is so much socialization and stigma around various substances, that terms like compulsive and pathological are hard to use objectively.

Zikes 11y ago
Starting your day with bacon & eggs is just fine, too, unless you ask the vegans.
- sophacles 11y ago
  I don't understand what this has to do with my point. Are bacon and eggs addictive too? I was merely pointing out that there are known difficulties with the wikipedia statement, because "addictive" "pathological" and "compulsive" are words that have a level of social acceptance built into them, and the same behaviors towards one substance are pathological, while they aren't in another.
  - Zikes 11y ago
    Anything can be psychologically addictive with habitual use and what one might call an "addictive personality". Video games, work, porn, caffeine, bacon & eggs, all the same. Some of those things even have support groups, pills, patches, etc. Nicotine is addictive on a scale far beyond that. Comparing caffeine and nicotine is like comparing nerf and 9mm. That's my argument, and even though every single comment I've made on this thread to that effect has been downvoted into the negatives, I don't care. Apparently that's the hill I'm dying on today, and I'm just fine with that.
    - sophacles 11y ago
      This "nicotine is more addictive" concept is hard to understand for me. For the reasons I outline above. The timeline and severity of withdrawal symptoms aren't that different. The relapse to previous use levels isn't that different. A huge factor in how "bad" each is however seems to be in the responses to relapse. There's disapproval in people's responses to someone taking up nicotine again, but if someone is back to drinking coffee, there's at most a "oh drinking coffee again bob?". These factors in the consequences regarding a slip up or relapse make it hard to judge how "addictive" something is independent of the socialization of it. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rat_Park https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rat_Park
      - Zikes 11y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substance_dependence#/media/File:Development_of_a_rational_scale_to_assess_the_harm_of_drugs_of_potential_misuse_(physical_harm_and_dependence,_NA_free_means).svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substance_dependence#/media/Fi... According to the above chart, tobacco, whose addictiveness is driven by nicotine, ranks above the following in dependence: meth, alcohol, steroids, ketamines, and barbiturates. It's only slightly trailing cocaine. Caffeine isn't even on the chart, but even if that were due to "sociological perception", I've no doubt that it would be at the bottom-left of that chart.
        sophacles 11y ago
        But you are now confusing tobacco with nicotine. The harm of tobacco is not driven by nicotine, even if the addictiveness is. Further, while the addictiveness of tobacco is primarily driven by nicotine, it is enhanced by MAOIs in tobacco as well by other substances: https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/tobacco/are-there-other-chemicals-may-contribute-to-tobacco-addiction https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/toba... Therefore the chart you link is not really that valid in terms of nicotine vs caffeine. In fact - many people who switch from tobacco to vaping report that it is a difficult switch. Part of it is that the act of vaping isn't the act of smoking, and it's a habit replacement problem. But other parts of that can easily be explained by the MAOIs (more studies are required of course). The other thing reported often, by people who switch to vaping then successfully quit all nicotine is that it's easier to quit vaping than it is to quit tobacco directly - this is probably due to just nicotine vs nicotine+ in tobacco. Finally - it is very hard to find studies on nicotine addiction independent of tobacco use. Seriously, until very recently, the way to get nicotine was via tobacco, so almost all claims about nicotine use are about tobacco use in general. The chemical pathways are understood, but the effects of just nicotine on long term dependence are all in the context of tobacco. Conversely the page on caffeine in wikipedia - under the heading "Reinforcement disorders" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caffeine#Reinforcement_disorders https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caffeine#Reinforcement_disorde... ) does discuss that the claims of caffeine not being addictive are pretty contested. Basically your points about nicotine are not quite as solid as you claim.