In the course of Human responses to the effects of the world, we have all seen the differences in how we react to the same situation. When my dog died I was upset for weeks, KoKo was a part of the family. After several years I ended up with two rescue bulldogs that were living under a shed, worm infested and starving. That was almost two years ago and if someone asks me about my family, Buddha and Ellie are mentioned as if I had 6 and not 4 children.
Then to others, their animal dies and they are off to the pet store the next morning. Neither of those is an incorrect response, they just are what they are.
Was online with a beautiful and passionate woman who had lost her mother to pancreatic cancer. Tobacco has multiple cancer inducing agents that have been blamed since the 50's for this action. That is a fact- yet still we know only the partial story of what are the mutagenic agents in tobacco and what factors cause variations in cancer vulnerability. We see 60 year smokers at 3 packs a day not succumb to cancer and 30 year olds with minor (if there is a term) tobacco use die of the disease. We are learning of genetic differences and family linkages to both extremes. So do we develop genetic markers to define who can smoke? Not a high research priority. Do we explore the markers that make people susceptible to cancer, tobacco or not related- I think so.
Remember the old Eagles lyric- "We are all just prisoners here of our own device".
There is a genetic mutation in some women that greatly puts them at risk for breast cancer, whether they use tobacco or not, we recommend very young in life bilateral mastectomy because we have elucidated the gene that is present in these women.
So with Lung and Pancreatic tumours. Nicotine has a different effect on tobacco induced cancers. In a recent study lung cancer patients were shown to have no increase in the growth rate when NRT (Nicotine Replacement Therapy) was administered. The tumors did not change in size, rate of metastases or growth rate. This is not true of Pancreatic tumors which rapidly proliferate if the person continues nicotine exposure in any manner.
Genetics arises again. Nicotine has a a binding protein with multiple forms, some of which respond to nicotine by enhancing tumor growth. Here nicotine acts as a promoter or accelerator of tumor spread. At this point I emphasize tumor spread not tumor production.
So here is the dilemma (one of them), frame of reference. Nicotine is likely to shorten the lifespan of pancreatic cancer patients if exposure continues after the tumor develops.
The conclusion of some given half the knowledge is that nicotine is a fervent carcinogen. Tobacco smoking is the probable carcinogen and the numerous mutagenic agents within leaf tobacco smoke (and some snuffs, SNUS..). Nicotine is the unfortunate agent that acts as an accelerator in the pancreas.
So there are two findings and NRT or another form of minimal chemical contaminated nicotine used by vapors (inhaled droplet based nicotine) can be called a serious health problem or one that seems to be minimally harmful.
Pick your agenda and you have a weapon to support NRT and vaping or information that shows it has a detrimental effect. It is a cyclic argument. A no real win.
My puppies, when they die will cause a different reaction in me than someone else
The argument begins and what to make of it. Tobacco is not nicotine, it contains nicotine. Nicotine is the primary agent in tobacco that is sought out by tobacco users. We also know that tobacco is harmful to the body and to bystanders. Nicotine is a stimulant and also has effects on blood vessel growth and apoptosis the programmed cell death, that is a normal component of the development and health of multicellular organisms. Nicotine inhibits this, prolongs cell life (wrinkles). Some of these effects are positive (cardiac revascularization), some unknown (apoptosis) and some problematic (pancreatic tumour growth).
Tobacco has been blamed for millions of deaths. Nicotine is blamed by association. This conclusion requires a new definition. People will continue to smoke. NRT's help- but not as officially prescribed. Many if not most use NRT's off label. More frequently, to block cravings when tobacco cannot be used or to replace tobacco permanently.
So now we come to vaping, the inhalation of liquid droplets vaporized by a heat coil and used as a vehicle to carry nicotine into the body. It mimics the behavioural use of cigarettes, yet has no real tar or additives other than PG/VG as vol/vol mixes and flavorings. It is now untaxed, less studied and unregulated. It is well tolerated and growing quickly. It has also been banned in several countries.
What is a person to think. Some say it is the safe smoke, Some would call them an adolescent entry level drugSounds like the 60's and THC.
Legislation against it is springing up, the word is out.
Remember nicotine is not considered a tumor inducer, it is a promoter in some circumstances.
Recently the FDA attempted to ban Nicotine vapor inhalers except as a delivery device for smoking cessation. Most vapors are former smokers who have adopted this mechanism for nicotine administration. The government judicial system removed this classification and made it z tobacco product.
It all cycles. Let us hope the sanity of the use of nicotine vapor is deregulated or at least fairly regulated.
Tlll the sky clears John More next post.
Then to others, their animal dies and they are off to the pet store the next morning. Neither of those is an incorrect response, they just are what they are.
Was online with a beautiful and passionate woman who had lost her mother to pancreatic cancer. Tobacco has multiple cancer inducing agents that have been blamed since the 50's for this action. That is a fact- yet still we know only the partial story of what are the mutagenic agents in tobacco and what factors cause variations in cancer vulnerability. We see 60 year smokers at 3 packs a day not succumb to cancer and 30 year olds with minor (if there is a term) tobacco use die of the disease. We are learning of genetic differences and family linkages to both extremes. So do we develop genetic markers to define who can smoke? Not a high research priority. Do we explore the markers that make people susceptible to cancer, tobacco or not related- I think so.
Remember the old Eagles lyric- "We are all just prisoners here of our own device".
There is a genetic mutation in some women that greatly puts them at risk for breast cancer, whether they use tobacco or not, we recommend very young in life bilateral mastectomy because we have elucidated the gene that is present in these women.
So with Lung and Pancreatic tumours. Nicotine has a different effect on tobacco induced cancers. In a recent study lung cancer patients were shown to have no increase in the growth rate when NRT (Nicotine Replacement Therapy) was administered. The tumors did not change in size, rate of metastases or growth rate. This is not true of Pancreatic tumors which rapidly proliferate if the person continues nicotine exposure in any manner.
Genetics arises again. Nicotine has a a binding protein with multiple forms, some of which respond to nicotine by enhancing tumor growth. Here nicotine acts as a promoter or accelerator of tumor spread. At this point I emphasize tumor spread not tumor production.
So here is the dilemma (one of them), frame of reference. Nicotine is likely to shorten the lifespan of pancreatic cancer patients if exposure continues after the tumor develops.
The conclusion of some given half the knowledge is that nicotine is a fervent carcinogen. Tobacco smoking is the probable carcinogen and the numerous mutagenic agents within leaf tobacco smoke (and some snuffs, SNUS..). Nicotine is the unfortunate agent that acts as an accelerator in the pancreas.
So there are two findings and NRT or another form of minimal chemical contaminated nicotine used by vapors (inhaled droplet based nicotine) can be called a serious health problem or one that seems to be minimally harmful.
Pick your agenda and you have a weapon to support NRT and vaping or information that shows it has a detrimental effect. It is a cyclic argument. A no real win.
My puppies, when they die will cause a different reaction in me than someone else
The argument begins and what to make of it. Tobacco is not nicotine, it contains nicotine. Nicotine is the primary agent in tobacco that is sought out by tobacco users. We also know that tobacco is harmful to the body and to bystanders. Nicotine is a stimulant and also has effects on blood vessel growth and apoptosis the programmed cell death, that is a normal component of the development and health of multicellular organisms. Nicotine inhibits this, prolongs cell life (wrinkles). Some of these effects are positive (cardiac revascularization), some unknown (apoptosis) and some problematic (pancreatic tumour growth).
Tobacco has been blamed for millions of deaths. Nicotine is blamed by association. This conclusion requires a new definition. People will continue to smoke. NRT's help- but not as officially prescribed. Many if not most use NRT's off label. More frequently, to block cravings when tobacco cannot be used or to replace tobacco permanently.
So now we come to vaping, the inhalation of liquid droplets vaporized by a heat coil and used as a vehicle to carry nicotine into the body. It mimics the behavioural use of cigarettes, yet has no real tar or additives other than PG/VG as vol/vol mixes and flavorings. It is now untaxed, less studied and unregulated. It is well tolerated and growing quickly. It has also been banned in several countries.
What is a person to think. Some say it is the safe smoke, Some would call them an adolescent entry level drugSounds like the 60's and THC.
Legislation against it is springing up, the word is out.
Remember nicotine is not considered a tumor inducer, it is a promoter in some circumstances.
Recently the FDA attempted to ban Nicotine vapor inhalers except as a delivery device for smoking cessation. Most vapors are former smokers who have adopted this mechanism for nicotine administration. The government judicial system removed this classification and made it z tobacco product.
It all cycles. Let us hope the sanity of the use of nicotine vapor is deregulated or at least fairly regulated.
Tlll the sky clears John More next post.
No comments:
Post a Comment