4 ms·

Is nicotine itself dangerous? what about caffeine? I find this 2015 deep dive intriguing: https://gwern.net/nicotine https://gwern.net/nicotine

by ynniv 3y ago

bigbillheck 3y ago
> Is nicotine itself dangerous? Yes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine_poisoning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine_poisoning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Tobacco_Sickness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Tobacco_Sickness
- thallada 3y ago
  That is if you consume too much. Anything is poisonous in great enough quantities, including water. I'm assuming OP is asking about whether it's dangerous in normal dosages.
JauntTrooper 3y ago
Yes. Multiple studies have found nicotine promotes and accelerates tumor growth -- basically helping carcinogens develop into cancers faster. Nicotine itself likely causes a whole slew of negative health impacts on your cardiovascular, respiratory, renal and reproductive symptoms. Not to mention it's highly addictive. Worth a read: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4363846/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4363846/
- MostlyStable 3y ago
  There is also pretty decent evidence that it's not that dangerous: https://gwern.net/nicotine https://gwern.net/nicotine -edit- that write up is almost exclusively for adults. The affects on teens and children, with developing brains etc., is much less clear and if nothing else the precautionary principle would probably say that it's a bad idea. But for adults, I'm personally convinced that the balance of evidence is that nicotine itself is not particularly harmful when consumed in reasonable amounts. -edit- also realized that I linked to the same article that the top level comment linked. Considering that that post includes dozens of journal articles, linking one single research article without addressing any of the contrary ones isn't particularly useful. Beware the man of one study: https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/12/beware-the-man-of-one-study/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/12/beware-the-man-of-one-...
  - freedomben 3y ago
    Interestingly, I totally missed it in the parent but not yours. The first sentence makes a big difference! That source is excellent. Very fascinating indeed
- nick__m 3y ago
  If you read the article carefully it accelerate tumor growth but it's doesn't cause cancer it act synergistically with other carcinogenic: Through its tumor promoter effects, it acts synergistically with other carcinogens from automobile exhausts or wood burning and potentially shorten the induction period of cancers. That difference is subtle and past a certain age that difference is meaningless.
- theptip 3y ago
  This seems like a fairly weak review, it just presents links to other papers with a lot of “might”s. I don’t see any meta-analysis computing actual harm. Eg “nicotine and cancer”: > In addition, nicotine is a precursor of tobacco specific nitrosamines (TSNAs), through nitrosation in the oral cavity.[32,33] It is shown that nitrosation of nicotine could lead to formation of NNN and NNK. This effect of nicotine may be important… As Gwern noted, the cardiovascular risks are nonzero, but it doesn’t seem like there is evidence of a strong effect for increasing cancer. (Still room for a weak effect I suppose.)
- abecedarius 3y ago
  Thanks for linking this. I wish though that there were a more useful standard of summary: a list of a lot of "nicotine has a negative effect on X" and "associated with a negative on Y" that only tells you a sign, which some publication found statistically "significant". What matters for decisions is effect size and the probable range thereof. (Either sign has a prior probability of 50%, and you can expect publication bias.) Since I'm only curious I'm not doing all the work to try to figure that out; hope someone else has that kind of review.
- jessriedel 3y ago
  The evidence is fairly weak. > Although nicotine itself does not cause cancer in humans,[40] it is unclear whether it functions as a tumor promoter as of 2012.[104] A 2018 report by the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine concludes, "[w]hile it is biologically plausible that nicotine can act as a tumor promoter, the existing body of evidence indicates this is unlikely to translate into increased risk of human cancer."[105] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine#Cancer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine#Cancer In any case, it's crucial to distinguish between a weak tumor promoter which may have statistically minor impact on cancer rates (nicotine), and an unambiguous carcinogen that kills people by the bucketload (tobacco).
D13Fd 3y ago
It’s addictive, it costs money, and it makes you feel worse when you are not using it. I think that’s enough to say it’s harmful, although it’s every adult’s right to choose whether they want to use it or not.
- rblatz 3y ago
  The same could be said of coffee
  - ugjka 3y ago
    As someone who's been addicted to tobacco, there is no way I'm putting coffee in the same league
    - theptip 3y ago
      This thread is talking about nicotine, not tobacco. Very different.
      - ugjka 3y ago
        True, but from observing a dear one who is addicted to these pouches, they only drink coffee in the morning but pouches is an all day adventure and they buy one that is the strongest
        moon_moon 3y ago
        [dead]
  - soupfordummies 3y ago
    nicotine is much more addictive and much more expensive. Although I do agree that society definitely seems to turn a blind eye to caffeine addiction
okdood64 3y ago
From personal experience from vaping: it used to elevate my resting heart rate about 8 to 12bpm throughout the day. That can't be good.
- simmerup 3y ago
  That's likely the vape smoke rather than the nicotine. A studied on vapes showed that any smoke/irritant (including vapes) going through the air passageways stimulates the vagus nerve and cause a inflammation in arteries/increased heart rate/increased cardiac risks. Nicotine delivered without smoke didnt have the same effect
  - quickthrowman 3y ago
    Interesting. I have a high resting heart rate and I vape, maybe it’s time to switch to lozenges and patches. Thanks for the info!
heisenbit 3y ago
Few substances are as addictive as Nicotine. At the same time it is a potent substance with such a high impact on the human system that it is used as stressor for medical tests where the step response is measured. Overdosing is feasible with retail size quantities. Not safe and definitely not safe for teenagers.

Is nicotine itself dangerous? what about caffeine? I find this 2015 deep dive intriguing: https://gwern.net/nicotine https://gwern.net/nicotine

by ynniv 3y ago

Is nicotine itself dangerous? what about caffeine? I find this 2015 deep dive intriguing: https://gwern.net/nicotine https://gwern.net/nicotine

bigbillheck 3y ago

> Is nicotine itself dangerous? Yes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine_poisoning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine_poisoning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Tobacco_Sickness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Tobacco_Sickness

thallada 3y ago
That is if you consume too much. Anything is poisonous in great enough quantities, including water. I'm assuming OP is asking about whether it's dangerous in normal dosages.

JauntTrooper 3y ago

Yes. Multiple studies have found nicotine promotes and accelerates tumor growth -- basically helping carcinogens develop into cancers faster. Nicotine itself likely causes a whole slew of negative health impacts on your cardiovascular, respiratory, renal and reproductive symptoms. Not to mention it's highly addictive. Worth a read: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4363846/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4363846/

MostlyStable 3y ago
There is also pretty decent evidence that it's not that dangerous: https://gwern.net/nicotine https://gwern.net/nicotine -edit- that write up is almost exclusively for adults. The affects on teens and children, with developing brains etc., is much less clear and if nothing else the precautionary principle would probably say that it's a bad idea. But for adults, I'm personally convinced that the balance of evidence is that nicotine itself is not particularly harmful when consumed in reasonable amounts. -edit- also realized that I linked to the same article that the top level comment linked. Considering that that post includes dozens of journal articles, linking one single research article without addressing any of the contrary ones isn't particularly useful. Beware the man of one study: https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/12/beware-the-man-of-one-study/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/12/beware-the-man-of-one-...
- freedomben 3y ago
  Interestingly, I totally missed it in the parent but not yours. The first sentence makes a big difference! That source is excellent. Very fascinating indeed
nick__m 3y ago
If you read the article carefully it accelerate tumor growth but it's doesn't cause cancer it act synergistically with other carcinogenic: Through its tumor promoter effects, it acts synergistically with other carcinogens from automobile exhausts or wood burning and potentially shorten the induction period of cancers. That difference is subtle and past a certain age that difference is meaningless.
theptip 3y ago
This seems like a fairly weak review, it just presents links to other papers with a lot of “might”s. I don’t see any meta-analysis computing actual harm. Eg “nicotine and cancer”: > In addition, nicotine is a precursor of tobacco specific nitrosamines (TSNAs), through nitrosation in the oral cavity.[32,33] It is shown that nitrosation of nicotine could lead to formation of NNN and NNK. This effect of nicotine may be important… As Gwern noted, the cardiovascular risks are nonzero, but it doesn’t seem like there is evidence of a strong effect for increasing cancer. (Still room for a weak effect I suppose.)
abecedarius 3y ago
Thanks for linking this. I wish though that there were a more useful standard of summary: a list of a lot of "nicotine has a negative effect on X" and "associated with a negative on Y" that only tells you a sign, which some publication found statistically "significant". What matters for decisions is effect size and the probable range thereof. (Either sign has a prior probability of 50%, and you can expect publication bias.) Since I'm only curious I'm not doing all the work to try to figure that out; hope someone else has that kind of review.
jessriedel 3y ago
The evidence is fairly weak. > Although nicotine itself does not cause cancer in humans,[40] it is unclear whether it functions as a tumor promoter as of 2012.[104] A 2018 report by the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine concludes, "[w]hile it is biologically plausible that nicotine can act as a tumor promoter, the existing body of evidence indicates this is unlikely to translate into increased risk of human cancer."[105] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine#Cancer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine#Cancer In any case, it's crucial to distinguish between a weak tumor promoter which may have statistically minor impact on cancer rates (nicotine), and an unambiguous carcinogen that kills people by the bucketload (tobacco).

D13Fd 3y ago

It’s addictive, it costs money, and it makes you feel worse when you are not using it. I think that’s enough to say it’s harmful, although it’s every adult’s right to choose whether they want to use it or not.

rblatz 3y ago
The same could be said of coffee
- ugjka 3y ago
  As someone who's been addicted to tobacco, there is no way I'm putting coffee in the same league
  - theptip 3y ago
    This thread is talking about nicotine, not tobacco. Very different.
    - ugjka 3y ago
      True, but from observing a dear one who is addicted to these pouches, they only drink coffee in the morning but pouches is an all day adventure and they buy one that is the strongest
      - moon_moon 3y ago
        [dead]
- soupfordummies 3y ago
  nicotine is much more addictive and much more expensive. Although I do agree that society definitely seems to turn a blind eye to caffeine addiction

okdood64 3y ago

From personal experience from vaping: it used to elevate my resting heart rate about 8 to 12bpm throughout the day. That can't be good.

simmerup 3y ago
That's likely the vape smoke rather than the nicotine. A studied on vapes showed that any smoke/irritant (including vapes) going through the air passageways stimulates the vagus nerve and cause a inflammation in arteries/increased heart rate/increased cardiac risks. Nicotine delivered without smoke didnt have the same effect
- quickthrowman 3y ago
  Interesting. I have a high resting heart rate and I vape, maybe it’s time to switch to lozenges and patches. Thanks for the info!

heisenbit 3y ago

Few substances are as addictive as Nicotine. At the same time it is a potent substance with such a high impact on the human system that it is used as stressor for medical tests where the step response is measured. Overdosing is feasible with retail size quantities. Not safe and definitely not safe for teenagers.