It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Niacin may also be used for purposes not listed in this medication guide.
Niacinamide has been used safely for at least 60 years, primarily to treat arthritis, but also as a treatment for Alzheimer's. Studies on mice concluded that niacinamide improved cognition. A human study has not yet been completed. Anyone over 60 with a family history of Alzheimer's and who fears getting the disease might want to consider taking niacinamide as a precaution. For those already suffering from Alzheimer's, niacinamide offers hope.
Can Niacinamide Cure Alzheimer's Disease?
originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: amurphy245
just as the the op stated,they found that nicotine is /can be a effective and beneficial drug. smoking is one of the fast and a effective way to deliver the drug. if big pharma wants to make and patent it they have to have people quit smoking, so they will sale the drug.
would you pay $ 75.00 for a 30 pills, if you could get the same benefit from a $6.00 pack of smokes? i wouldn't.
Almost half of lung transplant patients were given the lungs taken from heavy smokers, with one in five coming from donors who had smoked at least one packet of cigarettes a day for 20 or more years. Despite this, new research shows that those people given the lungs of smokers were just as likely to be alive up to three years after transplantation as those who had organs from non-smokers. In some cases, they had improved survival rates. "Donor lungs from even heavy smokers may provide a valuable avenue for increasing donor organ availability," says André Simon, director of heart and lung transplantation and consultant cardiac surgeon at Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Trust. "Our findings provide for the first time real world figures for the perceived risk of implantation of lungs from donors with even a heavy smoking history, and they show that such donor lungs may provide a much-needed lease on life to the critically ill patient whose chances of survival diminish with every day or week that passes by on the waiting list.
Results show that one-year and three-year survival figures were about the same for all three groups. Those with lungs from non-smokers even fared slightly worse in terms of one-year survival. A total of 77.7 per cent with non-smoking donors' lungs were alive after the first year, compared with 90.8 per cent with smokers' lungs. There were also no differences in a number of other measures, including overall effectiveness of the lungs, the amount of time spent in intensive care, and the length of time in hospital.
So tell me....where is all this damage in the lungs of smokers?
originally posted by: TiredofControlFreaks
a reply to: andy06shake
Anti-smokers have tried to make you believe that tobacco smoke is a poison while inhaling the smoke from a BBQ is fine. There is very very little difference between different types of smoke. Including the smoke from cooking food.
Everyone smokes but only some people smoke tobacco
Tired of Control Freaks
Stop reading anti-smoking propaganda and then pretend to be a smoker.