Reply #130: It is amazing. In studies of nicotine they use a low dose patch

[jbnow]

since it is most effective either semi-constant low dose or intermittent high dose. I don't want to give you more reading but studies found the patch effective in things like Tourette's, age related memory impairment, attention disorders and other things. They think these benefits are because nicotine functions like acetylcholine and also increases the level of other neurotransmitters

I started looking into this over a decade ago when I noticed a clear difference in some clients and it turned out they had started smoking (or returned to it). I was amazed by what I found. It made me so much slower to judge smokers...maybe our bodies have some wisdom. Don't get me wrong, not saying people should smoke or that all smokers are doing something good for themselves. Just that I know I don't know

I could write just as long about this issue with the fertilizer used. Researchers have petitioned the FDA the last 25 years but get no reaction. The super phosphate fertilizers do get radioactive elements in other foods too but it's far far safer because it washes away, just exits the body but it clings to the sticky tobacco flower and smoking it is a worst way to bring it into the body... anyway the researchers estimate 90 to 95% of the lung cancer is due to the fertilizer used. Crazy. I don't know anyone who has had lung cancer but it is wrenching that we might be doing it to them. I won't get into all that research! But that crappy fertilizer should be banned. Even if it is safer in foods radioactivity does not belong there. The European Union is facing looking at regulating this.

In the meantime I wish we did what Sweden and Norway do. A tobacco product called
snus It's a smokeless tobacco (in tiny tea bags, no spitting). We have that here but the US does not control or force companies to even report the amount of tobacco-specific nitrosamine (TSNA), a carcinogen tied to oral cancer. Their snus, which is not fermented, is under 2.8 parts per mil compared to 128 parts per mil in American brands. Studies have shown snus is not tied to oral cancer.

Some are against encouraging snus use because we should just say no, not encourage any use. But it is so, so much healthier than smoking as extensive studies bear out. And God knows it is safer for the non tobacco users. No second hand smoke. If even for them we should really push it as an alternative. Public health people should welcome it. (I love a smoker and ordered them the snus from Sweden myself)

Because like I said...cigarettes stink and I don't like them either.
When it comes to health this and statin drugs/coenzyme Q-10 can set me off on rants. There are just big issues around them... so pardon me!

Thanks for replying so I know my post was seen.