Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg
Re the medical advice at the bottom on #18 -- none of the four links are peer-reviewed, and the one-peer reviewed study linked from inside on of those links is mouse research. This evidence comes no where near meeting the Hill Criteria of Causation
used to conclusively prove tobacco smoking as a whole is dangerous.
I had no idea coming in when people should and should not be using nicotine. And reading those last four links in #18, I still don't.
I realize that you were just responding to xg4bx, who also made a medical claim about nicotine. In general, I would question whether MobileRead is a good source of medical advice.
I would personally suggest http://www.cochrane.org/
as an alternate web-based medical information source. But, then, since you read it here, don't believe it
The first two links involve the same results. As far as I can tell the research isn't finished yet and the findings were only presented at the 56th Annual Meeting of the Biophysical Society. At the end of the article in the second link to the abstract of the presentation.
The third link gives information on how lethal nicotine actually is, and it's quoting a book. It also gives definitions of nicotine form a medical dictionary (it's poisonous), and from a dictionary of toxicology (one of the most toxic and addicting of all drugs and it is toxic by all routes of exposure including the intact skin). I don't know how far I would have to look to find a peer reviewed article of the discovery that nicotine is lethal, but there is a New York Times article from 1921
about a case where nicotine was the cause of death, so it's safe to say that 90 years ago people weren't confused about the dangers of nicotine.
As for the fourth link, yes, I know that at this point it is only proven that nicotine is carcinogenic to mice, and it will take a while until it gets to human testing. But this is far from "nicotine unto itself isn't harmful".