Nicotine and Niacin

You will never convince me that inhaling anything other than clean air is good for you!

Yes,,,,yes we can....

"A few (biased) pro-smoking websites have implied that because nicotine is oxidized into niacin, smoking might actually deliver a small amount of an essential nutrient."

Baloney. WALOOB.

http://www.livestrong.com/article/481405-niacin-nicotine/

I will apparently undergo a similar problem with Nanny is US.

I smoke, but I no longer buy commercial cigarettes. I smoke cigars, and I hand roll my own using Beretta tubes, and a stuffing machine (hand crank). I buy N. Carolina burley at a local shop that used to be a tobacco shop exclusively, but is now a vape store mostly. I have a vape tube and juice, but I hate the thing.

I also buy some rich pipe tobacco from a local smoker place, and blend it in the cigarettes. (1) It makes the smoke smell really good, and makes me easy to find in the plant (LOL), and (2) I do not inhale it much, because inhaling this to lungs makes one cough really strongly. Not a good time. It has more or less weaned me off nicotine intake in the lungs. My lungs are clear. No nitrates (as in Phillip-Morris).

"My lungs are clear"

Not as clear as mine.

Now here you go bragging.

Probably. Did that once before.

However, also an observation - I live out in the country, & haven't had a cigarette since 1972 - nobody smokes in my house or my car.

Living out in the country and not smoking is no guarantee of clear lungs....

http://www.webmd.com/lung/lung-diseases-overview

Yes, no guarantee, but indicia.

City air is country air, PLUS smoke, CO2, CO, etc, etc, ..................

A monthly niacin fix must really keep a guy up on the vitamins....

Thanks for the thorough answer. I hope the OP didn't imply that I thought a niacin-deficient person should take up smoking. A lot of the pro smokers cited niacin as a supposed benefit with the caveat that they aren't industrial chemists, hence the post in this forum.

Not all vapor juice is created equally.

The product that I use doesn't include any propylene glycol, but rather it is vegetable oil based, and is produced in the Kommie State of Kalifornia.

Most of the propylene glycol-based juice is manufactured in China. God knows what else is in the juice....?

Something without propylene glycol is a start. Also, having a decent idea of what exactly is in what you are inhaling, would be good to know.

.

The other side, though, is that there simply isn't much reliable data, yet, on inhaling cetain things into your lungs regularly to this degree. Even if the substance is derived from something 'natural', there may be negative long term effects.

.

Something akin to lipopneumonia seems like a concern to me....but I am no doctor. Give it 10 years.

.

In the mean time, if you like nicotine, there are fairly safe delivery routes widely available. Patches and gum are widely available and probably far more safe.....as long as you don't inhale them.

Hey, all I'm trying to do currently is kick the habit, then dump the vape.

Propylene glycol is actually part of the metabolic pathways to produce fats, I think. Or maybe it is a precursor to sugar in plants....can't remember....it is a completely natural product. Not so with ethylene glycol.

Fungi of all kinds are 'completely natural', but that doesn't mean it would safe to introduce into my lungs. A dead cat is completely natural. Capsasin, ambergris, even pure water can be considered ''completely natural', but getting more than a little in the lungs can result in death.

Cannot and would not bother arguing that point. When I used to work in forensics (criminology laboratory at a state police agency), you would not believe the moldy nasty stuff people were calling "weed", much less some of the other junk they thought were drugs, up to in and including mercuric nitrate crystals being called "speed".

I was only stating what I thought the origins of propylene glycol were - and as usual I was totally mistaken. It is synthetic, manufactured through a heated hydration of propylene oxide (analog of ethylene oxide), using proton exchange catalyst, or alkaline catalysis. The byproducts have to be separated, and the finished FCC grade product is only 99.5% pure.

Makes me wonder why "vaping" makes me cough more than smoking....hmmm.

Granted none of this stuff, fungi, smoke, propylene glycol "vapor" mist, or much else is highly recommended for human inhalation.

Mercuric nitrate as speed! Wow, sure fire route to bad effects whether insulated, smoked or otherwise consumed....though I suspect attempts at smoking quickly revealed it wasn't the usual.

Propylene glycol (PG)is produced industrially in large quantities via acid or alkali catalylized hydrolisis of propylene oxide on water. This reaction also creates side reactions that produce small quantities of dipropylene ether and polypropylene glycols. In the body(or otherwise in nature) it is oxidized to Lactic and then Pyruvic acids, part of the natural metabolism cycle that others could explain far better. Ethylene glycol is produced similarly but the breakdown product of oxalic acid is FAR more toxic than the parent compound, somewhat similar to drinking methanol (as a side note, I believe the immediate consumption of quantities of dilute ethanol to swamp the NADH enzyme and force excretion of these compounds through the kidneys is used in both cases...!).

More recently PG has been the focus of production from glycerine, as that market was swamped by massive increases in biofuel production. This can be done through chemical or enzymatic means, so that could arguably be considered natural.

Now comes the fun part. Comparing PG to glycerine, a commonly used humectant for tobacco and toothpaste and stucturally the same as PG with an additional hydroxyl grouping; glycerine is a natural food component and sweetener, and could be considered the simplest sugar (glyceraldehyde, the immediate oxidation product, is the simplest carbohydrate). So it is an actual food component. But when it's burned under limited oxygen conditions one of the combustion products is called acrolein- an allylic aldehyde that is a component of some tear gases, and considered as toxic as formaldehyde, which also a known product of tobacco smoke. PG could also form acrolein, although it looks less likely from a structural point of view.

So the whole point of this is; natural or not, good for you or not, if you want to burn something under oxygen limiting conditions the byproducts are a whole different can of worms!!

Good comment.

"Propylene glycol is used as a humectant (E1520), solvent,^[8] and preservative in food and for tobacco products. It is also one of the major ingredients (10–92%), along with vegetable glycerin, of the "e-liquid" and cartridges used in electronic cigarettes (as well as liquid nicotine),^[9][10] where it is aerosolized in the atomizer.^[11] Propylene glycol is also used in various edible items such as coffee-based drinks, liquid sweeteners, ice cream, whipped dairy products and soda.^[12][13] Vaporizers used for delivery of pharmaceuticals or personal-care products often include propylene glycol among the ingredients.^[5] Propylene glycol is used as a solvent in many pharmaceuticals, including oral, injectable and topical formulations, such as for diazepam and lorazepam which are insoluble in water.^[14]"

^"Propylene glycol does not cause sensitization, and it shows no evidence of being a carcinogen or of being genotoxic.^[39][40]"

^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propylene_glycol}

However, limited human experience indicates that inhalation of propylene glycol mists could be irritating to some individuals.^[34] It is therefore recommended that propylene glycol not be used in applications where inhalation exposure or human eye contact with the spray mists of these materials is likely, such as simulated fogs for theatrical productions, or antifreeze solutions for emergency eye wash stations.^[35]

According to a 2010 study by Karlstad University, the concentrations of PGEs (counted as the sum of propylene glycol and glycol ethers) in indoor air, particularly bedroom air, has been linked to increased risk of developing numerous respiratory and immune disorders in children, including asthma, hay fever, eczema, and allergies, with increased risk ranging from 50% to 180%. This concentration has been linked to use of water-based paints and water-based system cleansers. However, the study authors write that glycol ethers and not propylene glycol are the likely culprit.^[36][37][38]

.

From the same article

'However, the study authors write that glycol ethers and not propylene glycol are the likely culprit."

Likely. Still largely an unknown as to long term effects of regularly exposing lungs to a concentrated mist.

Seriously, the lungs aren't built like the gut. There is no blow down valve. The gut has a regular efficient means to get rid of excess crap, the lungs have very limited and fairly inefficient means to clear excess crap. When in doubt, don't crap up your lungs.

By the way, this wouldn't be the first time an approved food additive was later found to not play well when inhaled. Check out 'Diacetyl' and 'Acetylpropionyl'.

Even if it were true that nicotine breaks down into niacin , you still have the issue of lung , mouth and throat damage . Skip the smoke and buy a bottle of niacin .

Like everything else the government has tried to ban, they've just driven it underground, raised prices and forced it out of the public eye.....and started an obesity epidemic in the process....now they want to ban anything that tastes good....It's the ultimate cluster f*** of unintended consequences brought about by the do-gooders run amok....Why can't they just concentrate on making the Hospitals safe, or is there no profit to be made there?

The gobmint can't afford to tick off the last batch of donors?

High cost of medical care = high taxes paid to gobmint.

Comparison of the first and second graphs suggests that education, public messages and taxes have put significant downward pressure on the percentage of smokers.

Utilizing the market and communication has a lot of appeal compared to outright prohibition. Don't you favor taxing high societal cost behaviors over outlawing such behaviors, in cases where the behavior primarily impact the one choosing to behave in that way?

Either you're an ex-smoker, or a Tax-'em-to-death DemoRat? LOL

Neither.

Just someone who sees the value and effectiveness of using the market rather than the penal system to encourage/discourage behavior, when possible.

Outright prohibition encourages profitable criminal circumvention and doesn't actually put an end to the behavior.

I would rather that there were less oversight, but that does not look even remotely likely in the near or intermediate term. For the oversight we do have to tolerate, in many cases, using the market to make undesired behavior expensive is preferable to throwing people in jail, on many levels.

Ah so only the wealthy can break the laws with impunity......doesn't sit well....

^{Doesn't sit well??? You seem to have tolerated it this far without much complaint...}

^{if you haven't noticed, that is the de facto system currently. The very rich can buy their way out of trouble. If it were above board, it might have a chance at being more equitable. I'm not completely against the idea of the a rich person buying their way off a murder charge, but the funds split between the victims family and the state, instead of the team of defense lawyers.}

The following uses the word "you" in the collective sense, not in the subject or object pronoun sense,

I say if you shoot a police officer, if you survive being arrested (which pretty much should not happen), your right to a speedy trial should be expedited to within 24 hours.

After the jury pronounces you guilty (judge should instruct the jury to take their time and come back with a verdict after their smoke break), you should immediately be escorted from the court room to the execution of your choice: guillotine, or wire hanging.

Just on duty? What about firefighters? EMT? Teacher? Postal worker? CPA?

What if the police officer was raping the mother of a jewish paraplegic 16 year old who had access to a handgun. The 16 year old shot and killed the officer when the officer would not stop. The jury and judge were clearly antisemitic during the rapid trial...does the kid still get garrotted?

What if you kill a cop by garrrotting, does that also qualify? ...or is it just shooting? If a cop shoots a cop and is then executed, how long is the chain of executions set in motion?

If killing is wrong, how can it be an acceptable form of punishment?

Misunderestimated once again. I suspect that if there is a criminal police officer, he will be caught - eventually. Sooner is better, as it always give a bad name to local law enforcement, etc.

I will go as far as to say, if someone murders someone, it is as if the entire world were murdered. End of story. A higher court will see to it, if none on this green earth.

Yeah. The righteousness of knee-jerk reactions is always so unfairly besmirched by dastardly attempts to contemplate beyond reactionary emotion.

I mean, how dare I try to rob you of your moral triumph for bringing swift justice against a wrong so bereft of detail/complexity it has almost no parallel in our real world, even though the words sound so similar to horrific acts that occur far too often.

.

Here is to over-thinking. It has it all over not thinking at all.

I think we all have become overly sensitized to P.C. speak.

The world has always been a violent place. It will end with a violence undreamt of by man, other than astronomer's predictions (and maybe detections), and it will end with or without mankind still inhabiting the planet.

Nothing is more inhumane than humanity's inhumanity to itself (and pretty much everything else that lives on this planet). Cruel and unusual punishment for crimes far beyond the pail of the usual criminal activity is probably fitting, in my humble opinion.

Deterrence of crime especially violent crime must begin at the street level, and moral codes have to be in place, otherwise there is no society, and no equal justice under the sun anywhere, just anarchy in the streets.

A few of these criminals being flayed, or drag-hanged behind a runaway horse through a cactus patch, or "rough cut" (send pm for explanation of that if you don't get it), might put an unforgettable image in the minds of would be perpetrators.

Life sentences just are no deterrent at all to crime. I think statistics proves it.

I disagree. I don't think skinning people and dragging them through the streets will make make for a better world, even as a government sanctioned deterrent.

There are several problems with the idea of swift horrible advertised retibution as justice.

First is that for certain people generally and for most people in certain extreme circumstances deterrents don't figure prominently into the decision making process.

Despite the vivid reality of: drive by shootings, HIV, lung cancer, and the prevelence of distracted drivers coupled with the threat of trauma induced tetraplegia; people, to this day, choose to join gangs, begin recreationally shooting IV drugs (or have unprotected sex with a prostitute), start or continue smoking cigarettes, or decide to take up motocycle riding. Consider that most of those things occur outside the ream of unable-to-even-speak consuming rage yet consequences fail to offer much meaningful deterrent.

"I'm cool", "it's fun", "I'm not scared", "They can't tell me what to do", "It feels good" and "I'll do it if I want"

are more hip than,

"Think of the consequences.I'm afraid of what might happen. No, I don't want any trouble. Count me out".

.

A second big problem is that human perspective, insight and judgement are reliably imperfect. We get it wrong regularly and though we are improving, we will likely get things wrong not infrequently well into the future. This alone is reason enough to eschew nonreversable forms of punishment. If the state puts a man to death, because he put an innocent person death and it is later found that the man was innocent, if would be difficult to maintain consistency and the illusion of an equitable system.

.

The third big problem is that the things we regularly observe/experience shape our norms. Abuse begets abuse. To a certain extent the actions of governing forces can have a tendency to be seen as models of correct behavior. Chaining the accused behind pickup trucks and dragging them on asphalt past people often enough is likely to desensitize people to violence.

.

There are more problems with knee-jerk we'll-fix-them solutions, but the three above should be enough.

No I am not a fan of ex-post-facto enforcement of law by financial punishment...

It's like somebody going around behind you waiting for you to develop habits, then saying ok now that we have you hooked we want you to stop immediately or face punishment, we have decided that even though for years it was legal and even

encouraged by society, now we find that we have changed our minds(^{because of some sad case}) and you must pay the price for our now perceived shortsightedness...

This is a law enforcement mentality that is against the people.....I might add that even though the percentage of people that will admit to smoking has declined over the years, the population has increased by the same percentage rate resulting in the same amount of adult smokers as there was 50 years ago....

If Prohibition and the war on drugs has proven anything, it's that the government thinks they can control the population with laws passed according to the politically correct mantra of the day...and it doesn't work....and it will never work....

Nobody is to blame for smoking, and nobody is to blame for alcohol, and nobody is to blame for drugs, they are all part of our cultural heritage...

We welcomed them in with open arms.....Just give the people the information that's available, and let them choose for themselves, that should be the government's role....

Change will take place gradually and naturally without vilifying anybody...Would you eliminate the entire healthcare system because they are causing so many deaths?

Places like NYC raised the tax of a pack of cigarettes so much, that illegal street vendors were buying smokes elsewhere, bringing them into the city, and selling them on street corners (like illicit drugs). Tax revenue from tobacco products in NYC decreased sharply.

As to drinking distilled grain alcohol, this arose mostly from (1) poor to dangerous water, (2) the need for medicinal spirits (while removing arrows from posterior), and (3) something to tick off the king.

Cause of death Doctor?

Well not sure as he was so healthy, ate well, excercised regularly. He was fit and we are puzzled? A shame though, he was only 47.

This John Doe doctor?

Ah, He was a smoker! A drinker, lived a bad life and died aged 87.

Do you still have freedom of choice?

If you follow all that silly advice you will not have a life to enjoy at all. But mayhaps, you can get it right on your rerun.

Some additional related news...

Ahhh! The sweet taste of cancer.