• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2020 Democratic Presidential Nominees

TownieDeac said:
ok but going back to this post

here's a good review https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4363846/

With the advent of nicotine replacement therapy, the consumption of the nicotine is on the rise. Nicotine is considered to be a safer alternative of tobacco. The IARC monograph has not included nicotine as a carcinogen. However there are various studies which show otherwise. We undertook this review to specifically evaluate the effects of nicotine on the various organ systems. A computer aided search of the Medline and PubMed database was done using a combination of the keywords. All the animal and human studies investigating only the role of nicotine were included. Nicotine poses several health hazards. There is an increased risk of cardiovascular, respiratory, gastrointestinal disorders. There is decreased immune response and it also poses ill impacts on the reproductive health. It affects the cell proliferation, oxidative stress, apoptosis, DNA mutation by various mechanisms which leads to cancer. It also affects the tumor proliferation and metastasis and causes resistance to chemo and radio therapeutic agents. The use of nicotine needs regulation. The sale of nicotine should be under supervision of trained medical personnel.
Click to expand...

The fact that we are 10 years plus into serious FDA regulation of Nicotine and it still isn't classified as a carcinogen shows the relative risk level compared to the other constituents in tobacco smoke is minute. You could literally classify almost anything a carcinogen under low enough tolerances.

Alcohol should definitely only be sold under the supervision of trained medical personnel under those standards. No more beer for anybody.
 
Last edited:
ChrisL68 said:
The fact that we are 10 years plus into serious FDA regulation of Nicotine and it still isn't classified as a carcinogen shows the relative risk level compared to the other constituents in tobacco smoke is minute. You could literally classify almost anything a carcinogen under low enough tolerances.

Alcohol should definitely only be sold under the supervision of trained medical personnel under those standards. No more beer for anybody.
Click to expand...

lol cool to know you're a nicotine truther, feel free to give it to your kids at an early age
 
TownieDeac said:
lol cool to know you're a nicotine truther, feel free to give it to your kids at an early age
Click to expand...

I don't smoke. I am just being unbiased about it's actual relative health risks in adults.

The vast majority of the scientific consensus indicates that nicotine isn't a carcinogen, or does that only matter when it is a position you support?
 
ChrisL68 said:
I don't smoke. I am just being unbiased about it's actual relative health risks in adults.

The vast majority of the scientific consensus indicates that nicotine isn't a carcinogen, or does that only matter when it is a position you support?
Click to expand...

I smoked for years. Loved it. I do trust my colleagues in cancer research when they say e-cigs are dangerous and plenty of research is suggesting nicotine may contribute to cancer in a way not previous studied.

I'm curious about how much you know about cancer pathology before getting into this.

I don't actually support prohibiting tobacco sales, just think we gotta get better about getting kids hooked so young.
 
I'll add this review suggests we can't come to a consensus on whether nicotine itself is carcinogenic: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5020336/

Seems like a thorough literature study. Surgeon General agreed in 2014. I don't think it's fair to say the vast majority of scientific consensus exists, much less that it indicates anything about nicotine and cancer.

Regardless, cancer isn't the only negative outcome of lifelong nicotine addiction.
 
I don't think kids should smoke either.

And there is literally no brain altering substance that you can partake in that doesn't have some long term health risks.

I still stand by my statement that a properly executed vaping system for delivering nicotine is safer on orders of magnitude over inhaling tobacco smoke.
 
Last edited:
Seth Bolton drops out.

Pete Buttigeig hanging on by a thread.
 
Even though scooped on Moulton, I'll still post this for the video, so you can hear him curse:

 
i have a pax era for vaping not tobacco and it's great truly what will science think of next
 
20+ candidates and this is a political chat thread with a smattering of Dem primary news.
 
PhDeac said:
20+ candidates and this is a political chat thread with a smattering of Dem primary news.
Click to expand...

A new thread is probably in order, this one is barely navigable
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top