Paradoxically, nicotine has some medical use in e.g. displacing viral debris and autoantibodies from nAChR (nicotinic acetylcholine receptors) due to having highest affinity to these receptors, which seems to help with (long) Covid; "smoker paradox" in lower covid-related hospitalizations.
A molecule can be socially and medically associated with a very harmful delivery mechanism, while still having specific biochemical effects that are worth studying on their own. Ant that's interesting
I was expecting to see a longer list of medical uses, but the wiki says that nicotine has performance impacts on cognition, improving fine motor motion and memory.
They changed how they make chewing tobacco (aka moist snuff) about 20 years ago and it has less of the cancer causing stuff (Nitrosamines) in it, its now closer chemically to snus - I’ll point out that Scandinavian countries have some of the highest use of oral tobacco in the world, yet last I looked some of the lowest incidences of oral cancer per capita.
The function of if tobacco causes cancer has as much to do with processing (it used to be cured by wood fire at a higher temperature which is where much of the carcinogenic properties came from) and the byproducts that processing creates, particularly Nitrosamine, its now cured differently in a process which is closer to snus, and somewhat safer.
Nicotine addiction (which I have) should be about harm reduction first, cigarettes are the only product that I can think of if used as commonly used will kill you or dramatically shorten your life, and it probably wont be cancer, it’ll be COPD, heart disease, or other cardiovascular issues - which are the same issues firefighters get from repeated smoke exposure. Breathing the byproducts of combustion is what’s really awful (and deadly).
It's a serious concern and switching to synthetic nicotine products may prolong your life. All tobacco products are highly carcinogenic. Contrary to what was said earlier it is not really about the smoking (though of course that makes things worse).
Nicotine products aren't safe; they are highly addictive and may exacerbate tumors that are already there. But they're far less addictive than tobacco products and they probably won't kill you.
I don’t think this really holds up, for example helium itself is chemically inert and not toxic. The main risk from inhaling helium is probably oxygen displacement at a push.
Millions of people have been using inhalers to control asthma too, this well studied and agreed to be safe. This is just off the top of my head.
The HN guidelines say "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says". The way I understand it is that different people on the thread often have different ways of thinking about the topic, and we shouldn't dismiss something because it's not what "we" were talking about. In this case, it was obvious to you that the parent was talking about smoking tobacco, right? So you can either engage with it, or not, but there's no need to reject someone's comment for not adhering to what you decided is the topic.
For context the Cell paper published several weeks before [0][1] provides a more bird's eye view (multi-omics etc.) the Nature paper here is very hands on providing x-ray crystal structures etc.
The glucose part is especially interesting: the missing step wasn't just an unknown enzyme, but a transient intermediate that basically disappears by the end
I get what you mean, but "more addictive stimulant with a stronger cognitive kick" is one of those product requirements that starts to sound less appealing the longer you think about it
It's also great for totally messing up your brain chemistry and your reward wiring. Wouldn't touch it myself.
I'm sure if you did it once or twice a year it'd be fine but let's be real, anyone who's willing to take it in the first place (outside of having a genuine medical reason like narcolepsy/ADHD) will want to take it a lot more than that.
Besides, in the long run - measured over weeks or months - these absolutely will not give you a productivity boost anyway comparable to sorting out your sleep/exercise/diet/mental health.
ADHD stimulants promised a lot in terms of motivation -- but only made me do the thing I already wanted to do instead of work... more.
So instead of plugging away on house work or chores or my employer's boring work, I was building compilers and databases from scratch at 3am, unable to sleep.
And then I checked my blood pressure. Oops.
Also seemed directly implicated in a loved one of mine acquiring an eating disorder.
Sad! It mush have been something amphetamine-based. Ritalin, from experience, makes me visibly grumpy, because everything is wrong! Everything should be properly fixed! The desk should be cleaned. The code should be reviewed, bugs fixed, tests expanded and enhanced. That ticket is annoyingly obvious, it should be done in 10 minutes, dammit. Well, more like an hour, but now it's fixed for real. The chair squeaks, it's insufferable, where are my hex bits? Etc, etc.
It wears out quickly enough though, maybe in 3 hours.