Tobacco project/research/video

[abstract]

found something PRETTY interesting tonight. Freebase nicotine.

let's start with a quote: "Ian Jones, a nicotine expert at Bath University, UK, adds: "Free-base nicotine is the most damaging form because it is the optimal configuration for binding to the nicotine receptors in the brain, heart and rest of the body. If the binding efficiency is increased, it means the concentration of nicotine at the receptors is higher and so it is very addictive." "The first few puffs are the most important in terms of addiction, because nicotine reaches the brain within seconds," Jones told New Scientist"

Disregard the addiction part, that's pure nonsense. See in the bold how freebase nicotine (needs further research) does a better job of attatching to the receptors in the brain that produce

aceytlcholine? A lot of websites are damning the freebase nicotine, which interestingly enough, the highest amount of freebase nicotine is found in american spirit cigarettes. They say

this makes it more addictive, which i cannot believe because i smoke american spirits and i crave them waaaaay less than the other brands with additives. They want you to think it's

"addictive" and therefore "bad for you", when we KNOW that nicotine is good for your brain! It seems they are using the term "freebase" to try and make it seem like it's as addictive as

crack, which is an unfair statement, because, again, I SMOKE THE STUFF. So we'll see what else turns up about this freebase nicotine!! :P

 

[Keit]

That's some interesting stuff you found there, Abstract! It is so great that you are doing this research. :)

I think that also Galahad did and maybe is still doing research in this area, especially the social aspect of it: anti-smokers and anti-smoking campaigns. Perhaps you can even combine forces, or Galahad can share some of his stuff too?

Take this article for example.

 

[abstract]

"The amount of freebase nicotine in cigarette smoke increases as the alkalinity, or pH, increases."

K, will someone please tell me why that is a bad thing? If american spirits have so much freebase nicotine but are additive free, then could they really be additive free? Since ammonia is ONE way to freebase the nicotine, but the OTHER way is how you cut the tobacco.

That's important: is the freebasing done by american spirit just something that happens naturally? or is it induced by chemicals as well?

And, we know that an alkaline environment in our bodies is a GOOD thing, as we need to avoid an acidic state. sooooo....comments? questions?

 

[abstract]

I think that also Galahad did and maybe is still doing research in this area, especially the social aspect of it: anti-smokers and anti-smoking campaigns. Perhaps you can even combine forces, or Galahad can share some of his stuff too?

I don't see why not. :)

 

[Al Today]

sooooo....comments? questions?

Yeah, go man go. Thank you for sharing your findings. I don't have data to share except for my absolute wonderment at the whole situation of "evil" tobacco...

 

[abstract]

It just seems like freebase nicotine is another scare tactic. It's obvious they wanna use the term "freebase" to compare nicotine to crack. NOW WHERE HAVE WE SEEN THIS BEFORE?

Harry anslinger (look him up) was the man who came up with the notion that anyone who smokes cannabis will become a heroin addict. (ironically, anslinger smoked cigarettes)

And of course, cannabis is lumped into schedule 1 with pcp, crack, etc. which is just plain wrong. So it seems like this "freebase" nicotine scare tactic is a way to compare it

to harder drugs, when it is NOT THE SAME THING AT ALL.

Even if you don't smoke, look, if they get away with this, you won't even be able to drink anything with caffeine in it ten years from now or buy vitamin c!!!!!!!

This affects everyone, not just smokers!!!

 

[1984]

Your research is very interesting, abstract. :) As a side note: I can't help but smile every time I hear about Obama smoking. MSM only mentions that he still smokes only when they absolutely have to - funny, the Obama's grow organic veggies too. Wonder what he knows? LOL!

 

[combsbt]

found something PRETTY interesting tonight. Freebase nicotine.

I'm unsure what you are referring to here when you say "freebase nicotine". Is it the same thing as vaporizing tobacco? I'm assuming it's something different because you say there's "more freebase tobacco" but vaporization just depends on how much you heat it. Nonetheless it's an interesting thing to check out too.

I don't trust these e-cigarettes because they have a capsule with some mystery fluid in it that also contains nicotine.

_http://www.electroniccigarettesinc.com/

This is how they answer the question on their website:

What is E-Liquid?

E-Liquid or nicotine juices is the solution that is contained within the cartridges and is eventually vaporized. The E-liquid is essentially where the vapor comes from in an electronic cigarette or personal vaporizer. We currently sell e-liquids that can be used to fill up cartridges for your Vapor King electronic cigarette cartridges or refill them when they run low. We have a variety of different flavors for different likings and they can even be mixed together to create your own personalized flavor. We currently stock both imported and American made e-liquid for the highest quality nicotine juice on the market. And YES our atomizers on the Vapor King are set up so you can drip your e-liquid directly onto the atomizer, bypassing the use of cartridges.

Doesn't really tell you what it is does it?

I found this posted on another e-cig site _http://www.bestecig.com/help.asp?id=17

1. The composition of Cartridge/e-liquid：Propylene glycol, pure water, glycerol, tobacco flavor, nicotine(from tobacco leaf)，and so on.

INGRENDIENTS CONTENT

TOBACCO ESSENCIAL FLAVOR，VIRGINIA <5%
TOBACCO ABSOLUTE，VIRGINIA <5%
TOBACCO ABSOLUTE，BURLEY <5%
ORIENT TOBACCO ABSOLUTE，TURKY <5%
NICOTINE （FROM TOBACCO LEAF） <1.2%
2，3，5-TRIMETHYLPYRAZINE <1%
2，3-DIMETHYLPYRAZINE <1%
2，5-DIMETHYLPYRAZINE <1%
2-ETHYLPYRAZINE <1%
2-ACETYLPYRAZINE <1%
4-（2，6，6-TRIMETHYLCYCLOHEX-2-BUTENE-4-ONE） <5%
4-（2，6，6-TRIMETHYLCYCLOHEX-3-BUTENE-4-ONE） <2%
LINAL0OL <2%
MENTHOL <2%
METHYL BUTYRIC ACID (2-) <2%
ROSE OIL,BULGARIAN,TRUE OTTO <2%
VANILLA EXTRACT <5%
OCTALACTONE(GAMMA-) <1%
UNDECALACTONE(GAMMA-) <1%
PURE WATER <30%
PROPYLENE GLYCOL <40%GLYCEROL <10%

And I think I'd be more comfortable just vaporizing the actual plant.

I'm not trying to promote any specific product but i'm posting this link if you're interested in seeing what kind of vaporizers are out there _http://www.herbal-smoke-vaporizer.com/
There are some as simple as a glass tube that you hold a lighter near, and other ones use a heat filament of some sort to automatically heat it.

I'm going to look into it more and see what the actual difference is in chemical composition of vaporized tobacco vs. combusted tobacco.

 

[combsbt]

_http://massmediaus.com/world-news/fda-and-health-experts-warn-against-use-of-e-cigarettes/

Yeah I definitely wouldn't trust the e-cigs and the mystery solution contained in the capsules.

The FDA’s Division of Pharmaceutical Analysis analyzed the ingredients in a small sample of cartridges from two leading brands of e-cigarettes. In releasing its information, the FDA did not identify the two companies, but said in one sample, diethylene glycol — a chemical used in antifreeze that is toxic to humans — was detected. Other samples detected carcinogens that are dangerous to those who smoke them, the FDA said.

edit: found the actual fda article _http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm173222.htm

 

[combsbt]

Here's some info on why vaporizing might be better.

_http://www.gotvape.com/vaporization-defined.php

Vaporization Defined In-Depth
Vaporization, also known as volatization, is a process by which the active elements of a substance are released through the application of heat without combustion. In other words, the substance is heated, but never burned.

This is an important distinction because when a substance is burned it becomes denatured. Denaturing means that a chemical change takes place and the molecular structure of the substance is actually modified. When denaturing is catalyzed by excessive heat this is known as pyrolysis. Pyrolysis is a major drawback to smoking a material.

When pyrolysis occurs, a molecular breakdown creates new elements that had not been present in the source material prior to combustion. The obvious example is, of course, tobacco. When smoking a cigarette, you seek the effects of tobacco's active element, nicotine. Through the process of smoking, however, you receive not only nicotine, but a handful of toxins and irritants, such as smoke and tar, which have been created by pyrolysis.

In contrast, because vaporization typically requires a temperature lower than a substance's combustion point, pyrolysis never takes place and the substance is never denatured. In other words, vaporization releases the active elements of a substance through a method by which pyrolysis cannot take place. Therefore, it produces a pure aerosol mist comprised only of elements naturally occurring in the source material.

And more here: _http://www.creacionsbernatroman.com/article/health-benefits-of-vaporization/

Combustion is also known to decrease and destroy a large percentage of the active ingredients contained in the tobacco plant material. Studies have shown that 25% to 50% of the active ingredients contained in the tobacco are destroyed during the combustion process. So not only does smoking create many unhealthy and unwanted side effects - a not insignificant part of which are caused by combustion - but a large percentage of the tobacco plant material's active, pleasure-inducing ingredients are lost in the process.

Conversely, vaporizing warms the plant material to a lower temperature at which combustion cannot occur. It releases the tobacco in the form of a warm vapor, rather than at a damaging high-temperature. The vapor itself is only slightly visible when exhaled, and it's odorless. Also, because vapor does not contain smoke, the natural flavors found in the tobacco are more noticeably present.

This is kind of frustrating because I can't find any actual studies but a lot of sites saying basically the same thing. However there are hoards of studies on vaporizing marijuana and they seem to indicate that the tar and many other carcinogens are not released because it is not being combusted.

 

[Mountain Crown]

Pleased to commend you for this service Abstract.

Keep that fire burning.

 

[abstract]

I'm unsure what you are referring to here when you say "freebase nicotine".

even im confused, ive never heard of it before either

 

[Nienna]

I'm unsure what you are referring to here when you say "freebase nicotine".

even im confused, ive never heard of it before either

Here's what I found doing a short google search. In this article, it is the comment at the bottom of the page tobaccotoxdoc that I find interesting.

If I buy a bottle of nicotine from a lab supply house, it is plain nicotine. The nitrogen atoms are not protonated. Pankow and others have called such nicotine, free-base nicotine to make the analogy with cocaine; however, it is a very bad analogy.

Mainstream cigarette smoke is generally acidic, especially when people puff harder and more frequently than the FTC smoking machines. The one main exception would be a 100-mm long cigarette with 80+% filter ventilation and smoked under FTC conditions. All of above fits with Jim Pankow’s theory of absorptive partitioning; but Pankow won’t believe his own theory as it doesn’t give the politically correct results. Indeed, Pankow, in his lastest work, admits that the amount of free-base nicotine in the smoke of a Marlboro is very, very small.

Pankow’s work has been funded by those who are trying to win court cases by attempting to show cigarette companies made special efforts (use of ammonia) to put free-base nicotine in cigarette smoke. We now know that the ammonia does many other things, but does not make free-base nicotine.

JHL

So what is protonation? Here is what Wikipedia says about it.

In chemistry, protonation is the addition of a proton (H+) to an atom, molecule, or ion. Protonation is possibly the most fundamental chemical reaction and is a step in many stoichiometric and catalytic processes. Some ions and molecules can undergo more than one protonation and are labeled polybasic. This is true of many biological macromolecules. Molecules which can be deprotonated are acids, or polyacids if more than one proton can be removed.

Upon protonating a substrate, the mass and the charge of the species each increase by one unit. Protonating or deprotonating a molecule or ion alters many chemical properties beyond the change in the charge and mass: hydrophilicity, reduction potential, optical properties, among others. Protonation is also an essential step in certain analytical procedures such as electrospray mass spectrometry.

Protonation and deprotonation occur in most acid-base reactions; they are the core of most acid-base reaction theories. A Bronsted-Lowry acid is defined as a chemical substance that protonates another substance.

Hope this helps. There is probably more out there about this, but this gives a fairly good idea of what it is, or so I think.

 

[abstract]

If I buy a bottle of nicotine from a lab supply house, it is plain nicotine. The nitrogen atoms are not protonated. Pankow and others have called such nicotine, free-base nicotine to make the analogy with cocaine; however, it is a very bad analogy.

It's a horrible analogy! It has nothing to do with crack cocaine. Oy, that's just so dumb! Anyway, so this freebase nicotine is just plain nicotine?

The nitrogen atoms are not protonated.

Soooo next question: is that good or bad????

Protonation is possibly the most fundamental chemical reaction and is a step in many stoichiometric and catalytic processes

What are stiochiometric and catalytic processes?

Stoichiometry (sometimes called reaction stoichiometry to distinguish it from composition stoichiometry) is the
calculation of quantitative (measurable) relationships of the reactants and products in a balanced chemical reaction. It can be
used to calculate quantities such as the amount of products that can be produced with given reactants and percent yield (the
percentage of the given reactant that is made into the product).

Catalysis is the process in which the rate of a chemical reaction is either increased or decreased by means of a chemical substance known as a catalyst.

So stiochiometry is like measuring a chemical reaction.

Catalysis is just a process where a 'catalyst' is used to change the speed of a chemical reaction.

Molecules which can be deprotonated are acids, or polyacids if more than one proton can be removed.

So freebase nicotine is un-protonated nicotine, which is pure nicotine, 100%, right?

So people have tried to show that ammonia was part of the process of freebasing nicotine? Is that it? and if so,

why would they try to demonize freebase nicotine if all it is is pure nicotine???????? It's hard for us to think of

nicotine as a bad thing, from what we know about aceytlcholine and that whole process. (no alzhiemer's for me, dude)

So maybe it's just a lame attempt to demonize nicotine without any real scientific basis?????

Unless I just TOTALLY missed something...



Edited to fix a broken quote.

 

[abstract]

Oh, and this tar business. I don't understand that either. What is tar? All i hear is tar, tar, tar when people talk about smoking.

ME TALKING TO SOMEONE ABOUT TAR:
"tar is bad for you"
"ummmm....why?"
"it's in cigarettes and it's bad for you"
"okay, what is it?"
"it's tar, it's very bad for you"
"i know, but what's in it?"
"it's tar and it's bad for you"
"where's your evidence"
"400,000 people die a year from smoking"
"AAAAAGHHHHHHHHH!"


EDIT:Okay, this site says tar is: "the term used to describe the toxic chemicals found in cigarettes." Okay, so "tar" is an umbrella term to describe the additives in cigarettes, because once again, tobacco by itself is not toxic or harmful. George orwell must be rolling over in his grave.

So they say "tar" and in the media act like it's something different from the other additives when it IS the additives. Therefore, natural tobacco would not have tar, yes???


additional EDIT: I have yet to see any scientific information about "tar". Lots of pages saying its bad, but nobody wants to tell you what it is.