Nicotine, tobacco, and addiction

[Phoneposting sorry for typos No.10488415]

This man, Dr. newhouse from this video: https://youtu.be/jLt04eIAHAQ , has made some pretty odd claims about nicotine. I see a lot of bulletproof fitness blogs talking about his studies on nicotine as a nootropic, which I of course take with less than a grain of salt. The guy himself is legitimate though, as any search on google scholar will show. There is also a scientific American article that uses his works as a reference. The main claim of his, that has been replicated in clinical studies and I am most perplexed about, is that pure nicotine is barely addictive, and dependence on pure nicotine could not be created with anyone in all studies with nonsmokers, even where they gave the equivalent to 18 cigarettes worth of nicotine daily to subjects for 6 months. The Scientific American article says "That same study, like many others, found that other ingredients in tobacco smoke are necessary to amp up nicotine’s addictiveness. Those other chemical ingredients—things like acetaldehyde, anabasine, nornicotine, anatabine, cotinine, and myosmine—help to keep people hooked on tobacco. On its own, nicotine isn’t enough", which first of all has some,dumb shit in it. Cotinine is a product of nicotine being metabolized, if you consume nicotine you will have cotinine in your system eventually, anatabine is pretty benign and also found in many other plants, like tomatoes, and nornicotine is basically the same as nicotine. Despite what ever journalist's who wrote this chemical illiteracy , I get what they are trying to say. The thing is, when tobacco is mentioned, it is typically mentioned in the context or smoking it. I was wondering, as an avid user of snus for 6 years due to being a scandoid, I have been able to give it up for months at a time, and then go back to having a portion in my lip for 12 hours a day without feeling much in the way of withdrawal, if any at all. Would smokeless tobacco be considered less addictive considering these studies?

[Anonymous No.10488430]

OCD post.
Nicotine is only as addictive as drinking coffee. Brainlets fell for the "muh super addictive" nonsense because low IQ people with behavioral addictions (same as pica, eating literal dirt) were habituated to smoking. They blamed the drug rather than an innate failing with themselves. Even tobacco isn't "addictive" in a psychological sense and the withdrawal symptoms are very mild, I'd argue more mild than caffeine withdrawal. Withdrawal Symptoms are a very mild headache and slight loss of focus, but end very quickly.

[Anonymous No.10488433]

>>10488430
>OCD post
OP that is, I cannot fathom why anyone would write that much without first alluding to what the hell he is getting at.

[Anonymous No.10488445]

>>10488430
>only as addictive as coffee
>only

"bruh I cannot get up in the morning without at least two mugs"
"haha I'm totally useless without a can of coffee in me"

How many times have you heard these or similar statements?

[Anonymous No.10488453]

>>10488433
I-I'm sorry. I dont have ocd, but you were close. Will nicotine help my autism?

[Anonymous No.10488491]

Pure nicotine has about a 3 day withdrawal period tops. I know from experience. I have cycled on and off nicotine for months at a time over the past 6 years. Quitting sucks but its completely doable over a weekend. I have to assume quitting smoked tobacco is a lot harder, given all of the bull shit products and support groups people need to go through to quit it. It's also possible these people are just latent schizophrenics using nicotine to keep their symptoms at bay, which is why quitting is hard for them, but thats another discussion to be had.

Quitting caffeine is much much harder.

[Anonymous No.10488527]

>>10488453
Sorry for projecting on to you. Your Longwinded post just reminded me of someone and it wasn't right to insult them or you.
But yes. Plausibly it could help. They prescribe CNS stimulants for autism to increase cognitive function. The same should apply with nicotine.