5 ms·

What are the negative health effects of nicotine versus, for example, caffeine? I've always wondered how much "healthier" vaping really is compared to cigars an

What are the negative health effects of nicotine versus, for example, caffeine? I've always wondered how much "healthier" vaping really is compared to cigars and cigarettes, but I wouldn't know how to make an evidence-based argument. Googled it a few times with mixed results.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
wincy 5y ago
It’s not super helpful for aiding concentration. I tried it for a few months this year in my 30s, thinking it’d help with my ADHD. Never been a smoker. It didn’t help. Also any time I had it on me I’d find myself absentmindedly puffing on it. If you really are into nootropics just be real and get an Adderall prescription.
retrac 5y ago
Pure nicotine seems to be harmless except in overdose, the main side effect being a compulsive need to consume more nicotine. Whether the delivery mechanism in vaping, year after year, is harmless, is a different question. Anecdotally, I used a nicotine vape to quit smoking -- and they're wonderful for that -- but when I quit that as well, my chest went through a phase where it cleared out all manner of gunk not unlike when I quit smoking cigarettes.
- the_only_law 5y ago
  > Pure nicotine seems to be harmless except in overdose I think there’s also some sort of negative cardiovascular symptoms, but I would be unsurprised if caffeine had its own.
  - type0 5y ago
    Cardiovascular effects of nicotine are probably more dangerous than potential carcinogenic nature of smoking. edit: smoking is carcinogenic, but how much of it is because of nicotine I wouldn't know; a smoker might not live long enough to find out at what age the cancer develops if he drops dead because of the heart infarct.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - liamwire 5y ago
      I cannot imagine sincerely believing a statement that is so blatantly wrong. Moreover, there’s nothing ‘potentially’ carcinogenic about smoking, it is a known carcinogen.
    - loeg 5y ago
      > Cardiovascular effects of nicotine are probably more dangerous than potential carcinogenic nature of smoking. Have any evidence to support this novel claim?
    - Veen 5y ago
      This is contrary to everything I have read about the health impact of nicotine. Do you have suitable references to back up these claims?
    - stefan_ 5y ago
      Smoking is carcinogenic because it involves incomplete combustion of tobacco, the products of which are directly inhaled. Nothing to do with nicotine.
  - loeg 5y ago
    It's hard to separate the impacts of plain nicotine from the impact of cigarettes because the literature is almost entirely focused on smokers, and scientific writing sometimes conflates the two. That said, > Nicotine constricts blood vessels, including those in the skin and coronary blood vessels, but dilates blood vessels in skeletal muscle. Vasoconstriction of the skin results in reduced skin blood flow and reduced fingertip skin temperature. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4958544/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4958544/
    - dangom 5y ago
      Vessel constriction or dilation by itself is not necessarily a bad thing. CO2 is a potent vasodilator, but no one would claim holding/pacing your breath for swimming is a bad thing. Caffeine too has a strong vasoconstricting effect.
      - loeg 5y ago
        Sure, I was not trying to make the claim that constriction or dilation was a bad thing.
TedDoesntTalk 5y ago
I don't know the health effects of pure nicotine (say, in liquid form) vs caffeine, but one is certainly much more addictive than the other.
- capitainenemo 5y ago
  https://www.gwern.net/Nicotine#sn2 https://www.gwern.net/Nicotine#sn2 The vapes don't have the MAOIs, which could also be why my brother didn't find them very satisfying (apart from the THC vapes).
  - temp0826 5y ago
    There are "whole tobacco alkaloid" liquids (full-spectrum extract of tobacco vs. pure nicotine) available which contains a lot of the other stuff. Probably more addictive so I'd avoid it if your goal is to quit.
    - capitainenemo 5y ago
      I believe it. There's vapes for everything. Was just focusing on parent's nicotine addictiveness statement that gwern addresses.
- loeg 5y ago
  > I don't know the health effects of pure nicotine (say, in liquid form) vs caffeine, but one is certainly much more addictive than the other. Which one did you have in mind, and why do you say certainly?
  - TedDoesntTalk 5y ago
    Nicotine is more addictive than caffeine. I'm not going to find peer-reviewed, double-blind studies to back up my claim. I'm going to go with the anecdotes I've heard for decades and from personal experience.
    - 5y ago
nradov 5y ago
Dr. Peter Attia has a podcast with detailed medical information on the effects of nicotine. https://peterattiamd.com/ama23/ https://peterattiamd.com/ama23/

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

wincy 5y ago

It’s not super helpful for aiding concentration. I tried it for a few months this year in my 30s, thinking it’d help with my ADHD. Never been a smoker. It didn’t help. Also any time I had it on me I’d find myself absentmindedly puffing on it. If you really are into nootropics just be real and get an Adderall prescription.

retrac 5y ago

Pure nicotine seems to be harmless except in overdose, the main side effect being a compulsive need to consume more nicotine. Whether the delivery mechanism in vaping, year after year, is harmless, is a different question. Anecdotally, I used a nicotine vape to quit smoking -- and they're wonderful for that -- but when I quit that as well, my chest went through a phase where it cleared out all manner of gunk not unlike when I quit smoking cigarettes.

the_only_law 5y ago
> Pure nicotine seems to be harmless except in overdose I think there’s also some sort of negative cardiovascular symptoms, but I would be unsurprised if caffeine had its own.
- type0 5y ago
  Cardiovascular effects of nicotine are probably more dangerous than potential carcinogenic nature of smoking. edit: smoking is carcinogenic, but how much of it is because of nicotine I wouldn't know; a smoker might not live long enough to find out at what age the cancer develops if he drops dead because of the heart infarct.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - liamwire 5y ago
    I cannot imagine sincerely believing a statement that is so blatantly wrong. Moreover, there’s nothing ‘potentially’ carcinogenic about smoking, it is a known carcinogen.
  - loeg 5y ago
    > Cardiovascular effects of nicotine are probably more dangerous than potential carcinogenic nature of smoking. Have any evidence to support this novel claim?
  - Veen 5y ago
    This is contrary to everything I have read about the health impact of nicotine. Do you have suitable references to back up these claims?
  - stefan_ 5y ago
    Smoking is carcinogenic because it involves incomplete combustion of tobacco, the products of which are directly inhaled. Nothing to do with nicotine.
- loeg 5y ago
  It's hard to separate the impacts of plain nicotine from the impact of cigarettes because the literature is almost entirely focused on smokers, and scientific writing sometimes conflates the two. That said, > Nicotine constricts blood vessels, including those in the skin and coronary blood vessels, but dilates blood vessels in skeletal muscle. Vasoconstriction of the skin results in reduced skin blood flow and reduced fingertip skin temperature. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4958544/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4958544/
  - dangom 5y ago
    Vessel constriction or dilation by itself is not necessarily a bad thing. CO2 is a potent vasodilator, but no one would claim holding/pacing your breath for swimming is a bad thing. Caffeine too has a strong vasoconstricting effect.
    - loeg 5y ago
      Sure, I was not trying to make the claim that constriction or dilation was a bad thing.

TedDoesntTalk 5y ago

I don't know the health effects of pure nicotine (say, in liquid form) vs caffeine, but one is certainly much more addictive than the other.

capitainenemo 5y ago
https://www.gwern.net/Nicotine#sn2 https://www.gwern.net/Nicotine#sn2 The vapes don't have the MAOIs, which could also be why my brother didn't find them very satisfying (apart from the THC vapes).
- temp0826 5y ago
  There are "whole tobacco alkaloid" liquids (full-spectrum extract of tobacco vs. pure nicotine) available which contains a lot of the other stuff. Probably more addictive so I'd avoid it if your goal is to quit.
  - capitainenemo 5y ago
    I believe it. There's vapes for everything. Was just focusing on parent's nicotine addictiveness statement that gwern addresses.
loeg 5y ago
> I don't know the health effects of pure nicotine (say, in liquid form) vs caffeine, but one is certainly much more addictive than the other. Which one did you have in mind, and why do you say certainly?
- TedDoesntTalk 5y ago
  Nicotine is more addictive than caffeine. I'm not going to find peer-reviewed, double-blind studies to back up my claim. I'm going to go with the anecdotes I've heard for decades and from personal experience.
  - 5y ago

nradov 5y ago

Dr. Peter Attia has a podcast with detailed medical information on the effects of nicotine. https://peterattiamd.com/ama23/ https://peterattiamd.com/ama23/