For those of you who might be interested.
1. Niacin can be administered in many different forms - ingested, inhaled, injected, put on the skin. However, of all forms of administration,
smoking is the most effective because it delivers the Niacin directly to the brain in under 7 seconds. The inhalation of smoke quite simply whomps
the hell out of any other delivery method developed by the medical and scientific community including intra-venous. (directly into the blood
2. Yes, smoking increases mucous production but mucous is a substance that our body produces in order to protect our respiratory system from the very
ultra-fine particulate. A smoker who is exposed to air pollution would have extra mucous to trap the particles and would then be able to cough the
particles out. The same thing happens to a non-smoker but it is theorized that the process is more effecient in a smoker.
Remember - there is no difference in the body's reaction if the smoke is cigarette smoke or wood smoke. Man has spent a millenia burning organic
material to heat their homes and cook their food. Exposure to this smoke, provoked the same body reaction - the increase in production of mucous and
a slower parastaltic wave in the respiratory action (parastaltic wave is simply a wave like motion of the mucous membrane that moves mucous out of the
lungs and into the throat where it could be coughed out.
This makes the respiratory system less "sensitive" to the presence of ultra-fine particulate (like pollen, cockroach poop, mites, bacteria and
viruses) and is perhaps the reason why asthma shot up as smoking rates went down and we stopped heating our homes by burning wood. Being regularly
exposed to smoke of any kind simply makes our respiratory system a little less sensitive. Asthma is a hypersensitive response to normal environmental
Think about who smokes the most - why its the lower classes. The ones who work in factories and dirty jobs who are most exposed to high levels of
environmental contaminants of course!
While the extra mucous may seem to "wind" smokers - that is a small price to pay for a healthy respiratory system and protection from the most
deadly forms of air pollution.
Of course - this is a theory and has not been proven
But then the idea that smoking CAUSES lung cancer is also a theory that is drawn from statistical analysis and cannot be proven either.
For more information on this subject. I offer this link to a court case that occurred in Scotland in 2005. It was typical smoker sues tobacco
company for causing lung cancer yada yada case. But what was interesting about this case is that there were 3 expert witnesses for the prosecution.
The most famous of these was Sir Richard Doll. This is the man whose study on smoking and non-smoking British doctors gave birth to the modern
anti-smoking movement. These 3 expert witnesses relied wholly on epidimiology to prove the smoking causes lung cancer.
The 3 expert witnesses for the defense discussed all the scientific knowledge available to support the theory that smoking causes lung cancer.
REad the decision of the justice NIMMO SMITH and the testimoney of all the witnesses yourself.
Its a very big long document but the judge's greatest criticism is specifically reserved for Sir Richard Doll.
Tired of Control Freaks