In small doses, nicotine speeds up cell growth. In larger doses, it’s poisonous to cells.
How much is a "small dose"? Are we talking, levels which don't rise to "nicotine poisoning" levels? That would be a big fat "duh"!
Nicotine kick-starts a process called epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT). EMT is one of the important steps in the path toward malignant cell growth.
Epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) is a biological process in which epithelial cells acquire the characteristics of mesenchymal cells, including increased motility, invasiveness, and resistance to apoptosis. This process is essential for various physiological events, such as embryonic development, wound healing, and tissue regeneration. However, EMT is also implicated in pathological conditions, including cancer progression and metastasis. -AI
So it sounds like this EMT process could be considered a "neutral" process. It all depends on what else is going on before it begins.
Nicotine decreases the tumor suppressor CHK2. This may allow nicotine to overcome one of the body’s natural defenses against cancer.
Potentially the most damning finding, however...AI sure is handy:
"ChK2 (Checkpoint Kinase 2) is a protein kinase that plays a crucial role in the cellular response to DNA damage and the regulation of the cell cycle. There is some research indicating that nicotine may influence various signaling pathways and cellular mechanisms, but the specific interaction between nicotine and CHK2 is not extensively studied.
While nicotine itself is known to have numerous effects on cellular processes and can influence cancer biology and apoptosis, the direct inhibition of CHK2 by nicotine is not well-characterized in the literature. Some studies have suggested that nicotine can have a variety of effects on cell signaling, proliferation, and survival which may indirectly affect CHK2 activity or the DNA damage response."
So this article is another case of "selectively picking a study" to base claims on.
Nicotine can abnormally speed up the growth of new cells. This has been shown in tumor cells in the breast, colon, and lung.
Can or does? Again with the subjective language. Is this related to the aforementioned EMT process?
Nicotine can lower the effectiveness of cancer treatment.
not even relevent to the topic at hand as their Big Pharma "cancer treatments" are bullshit.
I find this article to be very weak. It seems like they're just trying whatever they can to make war on nicotine. I'd want something more concrete.
Finally, let's see what their sources are: Oh yeah a bunch of tobacco stuff
This is an abuse of language. Studies since around 2005 started calling cigarettes "nicotine". 2005 was when vapes (nicotine, glycol, and flavoring only) started to get big and all of the machinery had to start addressing the work around to their laws oj smoking.
You might want to do some further reading on the subject.
https://www.healthline.com/health/does-nicotine-cause-cancer#nicotine-and-cancer
Let's go through this:
How much is a "small dose"? Are we talking, levels which don't rise to "nicotine poisoning" levels? That would be a big fat "duh"!
Epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) is a biological process in which epithelial cells acquire the characteristics of mesenchymal cells, including increased motility, invasiveness, and resistance to apoptosis. This process is essential for various physiological events, such as embryonic development, wound healing, and tissue regeneration. However, EMT is also implicated in pathological conditions, including cancer progression and metastasis. -AI
So it sounds like this EMT process could be considered a "neutral" process. It all depends on what else is going on before it begins.
Potentially the most damning finding, however...AI sure is handy:
"ChK2 (Checkpoint Kinase 2) is a protein kinase that plays a crucial role in the cellular response to DNA damage and the regulation of the cell cycle. There is some research indicating that nicotine may influence various signaling pathways and cellular mechanisms, but the specific interaction between nicotine and CHK2 is not extensively studied. While nicotine itself is known to have numerous effects on cellular processes and can influence cancer biology and apoptosis, the direct inhibition of CHK2 by nicotine is not well-characterized in the literature. Some studies have suggested that nicotine can have a variety of effects on cell signaling, proliferation, and survival which may indirectly affect CHK2 activity or the DNA damage response."
So this article is another case of "selectively picking a study" to base claims on.
Can or does? Again with the subjective language. Is this related to the aforementioned EMT process?
not even relevent to the topic at hand as their Big Pharma "cancer treatments" are bullshit.
I find this article to be very weak. It seems like they're just trying whatever they can to make war on nicotine. I'd want something more concrete.
Finally, let's see what their sources are: Oh yeah a bunch of tobacco stuff
The American Cancer Society medical andeditorial content team. (2017, March 12). Harmful Chemicals in Tobacco Products.Retrieved from https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/tobacco-and-cancer/carcinogens-found-in-tobacco-products.html Cahill, K., Stevens,S., Perera, R., & Lancaster, T. (2013, May 31). Pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation: An overviewand network meta-analysis [Abstract]. Cochrane Database ofSystematic Reviews, 5:CD009329. How smoking causes cancer. (2016, August 4) http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/causes-of-cancer/smoking-and-cancer/how-smoking-causes-cancer McDonough, M. (2015, August). Update onmedicines for smoking cessation. AustralianPrescriber, 38(4), 106-111.Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4653977/ Pappas, R. S., Halstead, M. M., & Watson, C.H. (2016). Electron microscopic analysis of silicate and calcium particles in cigarettesmoke tar. International Journal ofRespiratory and Pulmonary Medicine, 3(1),3:039 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4858188/ Sanner, T., & Grimsrud, T. K. (2015).Nicotine: carcinogenicity and effects on response to cancer treatment — a review.Frontiers in Oncology, 5, 196 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4553893/ Trends in current cigarette smoking among high schoolstudents and adults, United States, 1965-2014. (2016, March 30) http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/tables/trends/cig_smoking/ van de Nobelen, S., Kienhuis, A. S.,& Talhout, R. (2016, July). An inventory of methods for the assessment of additiveincreased addictiveness of tobacco products. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 18(7), 1546-1555 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4902882/ What happens when you quit? (n.d.) https://www.nhs.uk/smokefree/why-quit/what-happens-when-you-quit
The article also says:
So, it's probably not the nicotine causing the cancer. And are these 70 cancer-causing chemicals coming from the additives they are using?
This is an abuse of language. Studies since around 2005 started calling cigarettes "nicotine". 2005 was when vapes (nicotine, glycol, and flavoring only) started to get big and all of the machinery had to start addressing the work around to their laws oj smoking.