Is nicotine by itself bad?

[Annie-Xmas]

Ed McBain, the late Grand Old Master of the modern detective novel, was known for thoroughly researching his books.

Poison wll tell you more about nicotine than you would ever want to know.

[Malthus]

I remember we did a series of experiments using a live frog heart in my anatomy & physiology class - it was attached to a device that measured its contractions and we painted it with various substances at various dilutions, to see their effects.

At the end of the scheduled series of experiments, we tried other substances while the heart was still alive - then, we tried nicotine. We started it at what we thought was a pretty weak dilution - I think it was 1:100.

The heart gave one last great shudder, and died.

[cjepson]

@Norse

Wet snuff is in widespread use in Scandinavia (or, more specifically, Norway and Sweden). Those boxes were previously covered with warnings about mouth cancer, but the warnings have been toned down now (to something along the lines of “is addictive and may be bad for your health”), allegedly due to the lack of hard scientific evidence for the carcinogenic effects of wet snuff.

I’m not claiming that chewing tobacco or dipping snuff is healthy, but AFAIK the scientific jury is still deliberating the specific issue of mouth cancer.

Wet snuff, or snus, is steam-cured (in contrast to all other chewing tobacco which is fire-cured). This causes it to have a lower level of nitrosamines. It does appear that snus may be less bad for you than other kinds of chewing tobacco, and it is not yet clear how much less bad. Note also that the snus that is now made for American consumption uses a different process than the traditional Scandinavian snus, so it may be dangerous to overgeneralize.

So:

(Any chewing tobacco other than snus) = (bad).
(Snus) ?= (bad).

[sitchensis]

@bouv

Is The National Cancer Institute a reliable enough cite?

Also note that they cited all of their direct references as well.

Did you actually read that crap

6. Is using smokeless tobacco less hazardous than smoking cigarettes?
   Because all tobacco products are harmful and cause cancer, the use of all of these products should be strongly discouraged. There is no safe level of tobacco use. People who use any type of tobacco product should be urged to quit. For help with quitting, refer to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) fact sheet Where To Get Help When You Decide To Quit Smoking, which is available at http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/tobacco/help-quitting on the Internet.

As long ago as 1986, the advisory committee to the Surgeon General concluded that the use of smokeless tobacco “is not a safe substitute for smoking cigarettes. It can cause cancer and a number of noncancerous oral conditions and can lead to nicotine addiction and dependence” (5). Furthermore, a panel of experts convened by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in 2006 stated that the “range of risks, including nicotine addiction, from smokeless tobacco products may vary extensively because of differing levels of nicotine, carcinogens, and other toxins in different products” (6).

This same argument would be blasted if it was talking about abstinence over protection in a sexual education debate.

I don’t support tobbacco use but come on, its a simple question. Is chewing safer than smoking?

[Andy]

A couple of years ago, for legitimate research purposes, I made 6-chloronicotine.
I got no more than whiff of it crossing the lab with an un-stoppered flask in hand and barely made it to my hood. I was propping myself up and trying to remain conscious. I found out later this stuff is about 20 times as toxic as Nicotine. Which explained a lot.