4 ms·

> avoiding definite inflamers like alcohol, cigarettes (tho some nicotine by itself might actually be good, cigarette not good), There is 0 evidence nicotine m

by csdvrx 3y ago

> avoiding definite inflamers like alcohol, cigarettes (tho some nicotine by itself might actually be good, cigarette not good), There is 0 evidence nicotine might be good, and lots of evidence it isn't.

keepamovin 3y ago
Quite an extreme statement. It’s important to remember these questions are often nuanced and could even be considered unsettled. Do you or anyone have any evidence of what you claim? I’m very interested in it. I guess I’m referring to how it’s neuroprotective specifically, thank you! :) I’ve seen the direct opposite claim made here too. If this is already a settled question as I think you’re suggesting, it would be super high value information content for you to post that conclusion, I reckon.
sebmellen 3y ago
Re: nicotine 1. https://peterattiamd.com/ama23/ https://peterattiamd.com/ama23/. In the U.S. Department of Health’s list of 69 potential and known carcinogens in cigarettes (https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/tobacco/cessation-fact-sheet https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/t...), nicotine is not one of them. If [the U.S. Department of Health] can’t even recognize nicotine is carcinogenic given their sensitivity for identifying carcinogens, the likelihood that it has any cancer causing properties is approaching…zero. 2. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3151730/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3151730/ There were sufficient effect size data to conduct meta-analyses on nine performance domains, including motor abilities, alerting and orienting attention, and episodic and working memory. We found significant positive effects of nicotine or smoking on six domains: fine motor, alerting attention-accuracy and response time (RT), orienting attention-RT, short-term episodic memory-accuracy, and working memory-RT (effect size range=0.16 to 0.44).
fragmede 3y ago
Good in what sense? it's has bad effects, but it's addictive because of what it does for its users. It's great at sharpening the mind and focusing and looked at as a tool like that, it's quite good at it. It's the smoke from smoking to get it that's a problem.
ffgjgf1 3y ago
Depends on your definition of “good” I suppose? It’s hardly that different from caffeine in that sense..
pmarreck 3y ago
You're actually completely wrong, and I researched this extensively since my mom was a lifelong smoker and actually died of COPD.

by csdvrx 3y ago

keepamovin 3y ago

Quite an extreme statement. It’s important to remember these questions are often nuanced and could even be considered unsettled. Do you or anyone have any evidence of what you claim? I’m very interested in it. I guess I’m referring to how it’s neuroprotective specifically, thank you! :) I’ve seen the direct opposite claim made here too. If this is already a settled question as I think you’re suggesting, it would be super high value information content for you to post that conclusion, I reckon.

sebmellen 3y ago

Re: nicotine 1. https://peterattiamd.com/ama23/ https://peterattiamd.com/ama23/. In the U.S. Department of Health’s list of 69 potential and known carcinogens in cigarettes (https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/tobacco/cessation-fact-sheet https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/t...), nicotine is not one of them. If [the U.S. Department of Health] can’t even recognize nicotine is carcinogenic given their sensitivity for identifying carcinogens, the likelihood that it has any cancer causing properties is approaching…zero. 2. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3151730/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3151730/ There were sufficient effect size data to conduct meta-analyses on nine performance domains, including motor abilities, alerting and orienting attention, and episodic and working memory. We found significant positive effects of nicotine or smoking on six domains: fine motor, alerting attention-accuracy and response time (RT), orienting attention-RT, short-term episodic memory-accuracy, and working memory-RT (effect size range=0.16 to 0.44).

fragmede 3y ago

Good in what sense? it's has bad effects, but it's addictive because of what it does for its users. It's great at sharpening the mind and focusing and looked at as a tool like that, it's quite good at it. It's the smoke from smoking to get it that's a problem.

ffgjgf1 3y ago

Depends on your definition of “good” I suppose? It’s hardly that different from caffeine in that sense..

pmarreck 3y ago

You're actually completely wrong, and I researched this extensively since my mom was a lifelong smoker and actually died of COPD.