back to article Tobacco field bacteria offers hope for buzz-kill smoking therapy

Help may soon be at hand for those who have tried and failed to quit smoking, thanks to a bacterium that guzzles down nicotine. Chemistry boffins reckon the organism may hold the key to a future anti-smoking therapy. An enzyme from the Pseudomonas putida bacterium – originally isolated from soil in a tobacco field – consumes …

  1. Caff

    higher dose

    If the nicotine never reached the brain would this not simply result in people smoking more in an attempt to get a hit?

    1. Ralph B

      Re: higher doe

      Yup. Came here to say the same. Doubtless this is the "unexpected consequence" that Big Tobacco is hoping for.

    2. Tachikoma

      Re: higher dose

      Nah, I quit smoking years ago with Zyban, which I think was recalled/rebranded after people taking it started slashing their wrists. That blocked the reward associated with smoking, so yeah initially you would be puffing away like mad to get your fix, but after a few days you just lose interest in smoking as you essentially go cold turkey while you are smoking.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: higher dose

        You can still get Zyban in many countries as Wellbutrin but its usually prescribed more for the anti depression effects. But yeah it made quitting trivial for me as well.

      2. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

        Re: higher dose

        after a few days you just lose interest in smoking as you essentially go cold turkey while you are smoking

        Though I have no data from methodologically-sound, statistically-significant studies to support this, I suspect that some patients using a hypothetical treatment based on this newly-isolated enzyme would share your experience. And some others wouldn't.

        Because - despite what some posters in this thread seem to believe - people differ.

        But far be it from me to contradict all the addiction specialists among the Reg readership who have come here to declare that reward-blocking treatments can't possibly work.

    3. lee harvey osmond

      Re: higher dose

      I suggest, yes they would.

      After a short period they would conclude even they could not physically and/or financially smoke fast enough to saturate the enzyme.

      The truly desperate would then turn to unlicensed providers of other substances, looking for something else the enzyme couldn't process but which would stimulate the brain. This -- either the drug dealers, or the substances they might offer -- might or might not end happily.

      A generally similar state of affairs involving the protagonist's liver transplant is a significant plot element in Neuromancer (William Gibson, 1984).

    4. Wzrd1 Silver badge

      Re: higher dose

      Why, this will work great! As well as Naloxone for opiod addiction.

      Oh, wait...

  2. Manolo

    Not likely

    Enzymes are proteins and proteins are: 1) digested in the gut, 2) too big to pass the membranes between the gut and the bloodstream when not digested.

    This means the drug would have to be given as an injection, which limits its patient acceptance.

    Secondly, introducing proteins of non-human origin in the bloodstream will result in the production of antibodies or even a severe allergic reaction.

    I don't see this hitting pharmacy shelves anytime soon.

    1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

      Re: Not likely

      I'd suggest that if they have managed to reproduce the enzyme in the lab, then it's likely quite a small example. The next step in drug development is to isolate the active site, and replicate it in a non-protein molecule, something small enough to cross the gut-blood barrier, and stable enough to survive the harsh environments of the stomach and upper intestine. Proteins make bad therapeutics because they are broken down into amino acids in the stomach, and because they cannot cross into the bloodstream. The hard part of drug development is to make a molecule that is hardy enough to survive the gut, small enough to reach the bloodstream, non-toxic enough to not have serious side-effects, and stable enough to not go poof as soon as it reaches the liver. Ones that target processes in the brain also have the unenviable task of getting across the blood-brain barrier which usually means that they have to be very small indeed, or target certain channels.

      1. Manolo

        Re: Not likely

        Indeed, the part of losing the protein properties whilst maintaining the enzymatic activity is incredibly hard. I cannot think of one example where that succeeded and is clinically used.

        Crossing the blood-brain barrier would not be necessary for this enzyme, it could break down the nicotine in the systemic circulation with no need to enter the brain.

        1. Grikath

          Re: Not likely

          "it could break down the nicotine in the systemic circulation with no need to enter the brain."

          I bloody well hope not, it will enter the lymbic cycle though...

          Now that will be fun... think about it... supplying a body with a non-localised dose of nicotinoid-degrading enzymes.

          Nicotinoids are rather widely used in our bodies, and we synthesise it ourselves..I can already predict the possible, no probable, side-effects in live trials.. : hyperactivity, muscle spasms, muscle cramp, heart failure, systemic shutdown of the gastro-intestinal tract...

          But hey... let's forget basic physiology and inject some of this stuff in mice... maybe it would work, and the anti-smoking grants will be setting us up for the next couple of years...

          1. Manolo

            Re: Not likely

            While I did study anatomy, physiology, pathophysiology, biochemistry and toxicology I have no clue what a "lymbic cycle" is. Neither does Google, it suggests I might be searching for an Olympic cycle.

            As for nicotinoids being used and synthesised in our bodies, I think you heard the bell toll, but don't know where the clapper is hanging.

            Basically, our parasympathetic nervous system has two types of receptors: the muscarinic and nicotinic receptors. The substrate for both is acetylcholine, a neurotransmitter. An enzyme that is specific for nicotine would not interfere with acetylcholine, as their chemical structures are quite different. Acetylcholine is broken down by esterases, while no ester bond is present in nicotine.

            1. Wzrd1 Silver badge

              Re: Not likely

              I agree, it's not like we have a limbic system either. </sarcasm>

              As for our bodies making and using nicotine, that's as wrong as is possible. Nicotine is a plant alkaloid that is not generated by animals. There are nicotinic receptors, but those receptors are bound by either acetylcholine or nicotine, however that nicotine is never produced by the body.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Fingers crossed

    As someone who has tried and failed many times to break this damn addiction, including patches, gum, e-cigarettes and cold turkey, this despite understanding the fact that the justifications coming from my inner addict are complete bollocks, I hope this or something else comes along to help smoking cessation.

    It is bloody difficult to give up. You can give up for months on end, and the inner addict will tell you that just one won't hurt. It will - before long you'll be back into it as much as ever. In my experience, just one relapse will reawaken the demon and you need to be constantly aware of this.

    Don't ever start smoking, dear reader, you deserve better. It is much harder to stop than you realise.

    The nicotine itself might not be that dangerous (still there is no definitive conclusion - I see people claim it's as harmless as caffeine and also people claim it is carcinogenic), so in theory an alternative nicotine delivery system ought to be a reasonable compromise. However, NRT has astonishingly low quit success rates, so clearly it is not just the nicotine that smokers are addicted to. In any case, NRT as a long-term strategy for dealing with nicotine addiction is far too costly. It's cheaper to smoke roll ups than use NRT patches for a week. If you don't pay tax on the baccy, you can probably smoke for a month for the cost of one week's patches.

    If e-cigarettes turn out to be as safe as users hope then at least there will be something for smokers to switch to, but it is too early to say so. Right now, we think we know that e-cigs are less harmful than tobacco, but for some reason they seem to be demonised rather than viewed as a device with a useful part to play in stopping smoking. I suppose I should not be surprised - harm reduction does not seem to be a popular choice when dealing with any drugs.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      I have just quit e-cigs

      I managed to quit smoking once before when I lived in Boston MA. Smoking outside in sub zero temperatures was an added incentive to quit and honestly I had no urge to start again.

      It was actually cannabis that made me return to smoking, because although I hate tobacco & nicotine I utterly adore getting stoned and would never willingly give it up. Pipes etc... were always too harsh for me.

      Last October I switched to an e-cig (not the disposable kind). Until then I had been literally chain smoking roll-ups for 18 months :/

      In January I completely quit the tobacco after getting a herbal vapouriser for the other thing.

      When I gave up smoking the first time, there was a noticeable improvement in my breathing within a month. However, using the e-cig, exclusively for 6 months I didn't notice any improvement at all.

      6 days ago my clearomizer broke and I had always promised myself that I would try to get off the vaping before my kit broke. The reality is I was still puffing away on 18mg strength e-fluid and it was becoming an almost constant habit, like the smoking had been.

      The first 3-4 days the nicotine cravings were terrible, but since Thursday it has been much, much better.

      I have given away my remaining e-fluids, batteries & chargers and thrown out anything I couldn't give away. I have been socially drunk twice this week and not begged anyone for a fag or a go on their vapouriser.

      What the vapouriser did for me was break all the habitual ritual associated with smoking roll-ups, while still providing me nicotine. So when I went cold turkey last Sunday I still had the nicotine craving, but not all the associated habitual stuff.

      Final plus point, my lungs are already feeling better in just a week.

      So I think if used as a tool to give up smoking e-cigs can be really effective. The trouble is I know lots of friends who use them in addition to smoking and others who no longer smoke but are happy to keep vaping. They actually enjoy it!

      From my personal experience, I'm pretty sure vaping is not 'safe' but can be a useful tool to quit smoking.

    2. BlartVersenwaldIII

      Re: Fingers crossed

      > You can give up for months on end, and the inner addict will tell you that just one won't hurt. It will - before long you'll be back into it as much as ever.

      Breaking this step was the most important factor in me being able to successfully stop smoking and break the habit (until you actuall try it it's very difficult to prepare for - there are dozens of triggers for wanting a cigarette). I've had good results with patches - except in extremely stressful situations they completely obviated the need for nicotine for me (but of course smoking isn't just about the nicotine). But of course six months later you do indeed get the little demon on your shoulder saying "you've quit now! Just having one won't get you re-addicted!" and your stupid lizard brain believes it because deep down it still looooooves nicotine.

      I think I was on about my sixth quitting attempt before I had prepared myself for this step inevitably occurring, and on this occasion was able to avoid it (despite it being the festive season when alcohol is prodigiously available and the number one trigger for a relapse for me at least).

      e-fags for me, for whatever reason, didn't work very well. Hit of nicotine very quickly sure, but as Bernard Black would put it they felt like "children's booze"; all the same actions as smoking but without that sensation of smoke hitting the back of my throat that I'd come to know and love - they just left me craving a "real" cigarette. But I'm well aware they've been great for some people, and in my utterly unqualified medical opinion if you're quitting smoking for the health benefits then it's several orders of magnitude more important to stop the delivery mechanism of inhaling burning leaves than it is to stop partaking of nicotine entirely.

      Have never really understood why e-fags have come to be demonised so much, although I found this article to be disturbingly plausible.

      BTW, if you don't get them on prescription a money-saving tip for patches - buy the super-strong 21mg ones (the sort that if I wear my head is spinning and I'm feeling nauseous half an hour later despite the fact that they're supposedly calibrated for people like me that smoked ~15 a day) and chop them in half to get yourself twice the amount of ~10mg patches for the same dosh. I also found that after the first three weeks or so I could wear the same patch for a few days without getting the creeping-spiders-gimme-nicotine-NOW feeling; probably merely psychological placebo but it worked for me. And always buy patches in bulk if at all possible and always carry a spare one with you and keep a pack at work also - I've lost count of the number of times the chemists ran out of my nicotine patches or I forgot to put one on in the morning; making NRT more easily accessible than the cigarettes was a big step forward for me.

      Haven't so much as touched a cigarette in about 18 months now and hoping I can go the distance. Still wear patches on occasion though - I find nicotine does wonders for my concentration (and acts as an effective antidote to caffeine, which ruins my concentration). If raw nicotine does have any serious effects when it's not combined with carbon monoxide and tar I'm not aware of any and I'll happily label myself a nicotine addict for the rest of my life.

      YMMV, my two pence, etc etc. Not trying to preach or say mine is the One True Way or anything, just offering what is I hope some helpful advice. Best of luck in your endeavours.

      1. Robert Helpmann??

        Re: Fingers crossed

        Assuming this drug works as intended, it will need to be a lifetime therapy in order to be successful. Nicotine addition, like many other forms of addiction, is both physiological and psychological in nature. Stop smoking cold turkey and you feel like crap for a couple of weeks but you will be through the physiological side of quitting after that. The real problem is that smoking is a behavior. It can be displaced by another behavior, but once it is acquired, it will be on the menu for the rest of the addict's life. The joke is that millions of people have quit smoking millions of times and there's the rub: if you put the addict back in the same set of circumstances that were previously associated with smoking, the odds are extremely good that it will happen again.

        This potential drug will therefor only be useful in preventing relapse in as much as it prevents the addict from ever experiencing the rewarding sensations given through smoking. In order for that to work, it will always need to be in the person's system.

        While I am not saying this would not be worthwhile for people who are affected by this horrible addiction, but I can definitely see that it would be worthwhile from the perspective of drug companies as it would give them a nice steady revenue stream.

        1. Wzrd1 Silver badge

          Re: Fingers crossed

          "Stop smoking cold turkey and you feel like crap for a couple of weeks but you will be through the physiological side of quitting after that."

          My father quit smoking cold turkey, a week to the day after he quit, he had a heart attack.

          The heart attack was essentially inevitable, it came during the withdrawl period and thankfully wasn't as severe as it could have been later.

          Incidentially, a 90% occlusion was noted in his right descending coronary artery. Balloon dilation was attempted and the balloon was left in place, pending bypass surgery. Recovery was uneventful and he survived for another quarter century.

          With absolutely no interest in smoking at all.

          That's OK, I smoke enough for the two of us. Thankfully though, it's a mild brand, Lucky Strike.

    3. John Sanders

      Re: Fingers crossed

      ""but for some reason they seem to be demonised rather than viewed as a device with a useful part to play in stopping smoking.""

      Because of ignorance my friend, pure and sheer ignorance.

      E-cigs may not be completely harmless, something that it is not completely know yet, but all evidence points in the direction that they cause very little harm.

      E-cigs allow the user to regulate-calibrate the nicotine dosage (when using a proper device, not the toy ones that look like cigarettes) in such an effective manner that the majority of smokers after a while do not want to go back to cigarettes. It takes a while to get used to it (like everything requires some practice), but once you get used to the system and learn how to mix the liquid:

      Suddenly one does not stink, can use it indoors (One's home), a noticeable recovery in taste capability, less irritation in the mouth throat, lots less coughs, and after a while you begin experiencing better lung capacity, all while still getting a satisfactory "smoking experience".

      And yes you still have a nicotine addiction problem to deal with, but suddenly you have a much healthy way of coping with it, and it doesn't taste like dirty cardboard.

      On top of that a lot of people are finding that stopping from e-cigs is way easier than with normal cigarettes, perhaps those extra chemicals the tobacco companies put in cigarettes to enhance nicotine absorption in the lungs also make more difficult to quit (who knew)

      Tobacco companies do not want to lose their captive customers, the young do not find vaping attractive or fascinating like they do with smoking, and governments fear what they can not tax.

      It is a complex theme, and I think the big public is being robbed of the debate (like with anything controversial these days).

      1. phil dude

        Re: Fingers crossed

        @John Sanders: "It is a complex theme, and I think the big public is being robbed of the debate (like with anything controversial these days)."

        This +100000.

        The elephant in the room is:

        a) some things are so dangerous, perhaps they should not be for sale.

        b) some things are dangerous because they are NOT for sale.

        c) some things on sale are dangerous because they are widely misused.


    4. Wzrd1 Silver badge

      Re: Fingers crossed

      I was just reaching the tapering down phase with the patch when one of my Privates decided to authorize his own leave.

      By the time he received the message that he was to be at the unit five minutes ago, I was puffing away like a madman - while wearing the patch.

      Well, at least that kept me from killing him twice.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Its already here

    >Help may soon be at hand for those who have tried and failed to quit smoking

    It's called vaping and it is about to be heavily regulated practically out of existence. Far be it from me to suggest that the people most affected (financially) by people switching to vaping have had any say in this legislation. Tobacco companies (lost revenue from sales), pharmaceutical companies (lost revenue from sales of NRT) and the government (lower revenue from taxes) simply have our best interests at heart.

    1. Elmer Phud

      Re: Its already here

      But isn't vaping just pandering to the nicotine addiction and also the physical/ritual addiction too?

      It's almost as if people don't like to use the word 'addict'.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Its already here

        The only reason why nicotine has such a bad reputation is because it has historically been associated with smoking. The thing is, people smoke for the nicotine but die from the tar and carbon monoxyde produced by the combustion (of any plant, it's not specific to tobacco). Nicotine itself, in isolation from those combustion byproducts, has about the same toxicological profile as caffeine. And yet, there's no such crusade to stop people from consuming caffeine, why?

        So, the miraculous solution would be to deprive the smoker of the nicotine and keep the deadly tar and CO? When one sees the success rate of quitting cold turkey (or taking up vaping without nicotine for that matter), how can anyone sane really believe that this will work?


        Back to "pandering to the nicotine addiction and also the physical/ritual addiction"... If the goal of "public health experts" really was to improve the public's health, the focus would be on tar and CO, not on nicotine (which, again, is relatively benign at the levels consumed by a smoker / vaper / NRT user). They would be encouraging combustion-free, harm-reduced products like smokefree tobacco (eg. snus) or vaping, even if that means pandering to (comparatively quite harmless) addictions.

        The fact that they focus on the nicotine addiction instead of the deadly products shows, in my opinion, that this whole crusade has little to do with the public's health, and is a mere ideological war against smokers and nicotine users (read: sinners).

        The hard truth is that smokers are ready to hurt both themselves and their wallets just to get nicotine. Quit rates using "approved" methods are shamefully low in spite of the massive anti-smoking witch hunt campaign. That means that unless we find and promote a compelling alternative to nicotine intake, people won't massively quit, they'll just continue smoking. Guess what: we already have such an alternative, it's vaping.

        Unfortunately, "public health experts" are hell bent on fighting their ideological war on nicotine, they won't admit that it can never be won. And depriving the smokers of the very thing they crave, as this article suggests, won't do any good either.

        1. This post has been deleted by its author

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Its already here

        @elmer isn't red b*ll pandering to a caffeine addition...I have no issue being called a nicotine addict, just that I'm not a smoker. The point of these blocker style cures, is that with nicotine there is nothing to cure, it practically harmless as is caffeine. The issue is and always has been the nicotine delivery method. If they could brand nicotine as cool beverage, smoking would have been a thing of the past long ago. Vaping is just a cleaner and less harmful delivery method for what is an almost harmless recreational drug. If you could vape coffee (and you can), should that be blocked or banned.

      3. Wzrd1 Silver badge

        Re: Its already here

        "It's almost as if people don't like to use the word 'addict'."

        Let's see, I'm a caffiene and nicotine addict.

        That said, many do feel a stigma attached to addiction and hence, avoid the term. This is especially true in the United States, where the social view is that addiction is a character flaw.

  5. Trigonoceps occipitalis

    At the Risk of Being Sanctimoneous

    The only friends that have successfully kicked the nicotine habit have gone cold turkey, ie decided to give up using will power. Vaping, patches, gum etc provide the habitual drug you have not really decided to go without. Of course, tobacco substitutes of what ever form are probably better than puffing away, chewing or sniffing but if you are addicted a return to the demon weed is always an option.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: At the Risk of Being Sanctimoneous

      I agree. Having forced myself to suffer through the (apparently mostly self-inflicted mental) agonies of stopping smoking many times, and recently becoming a secret smoker who can only grab the occasional ciggie when there is nobody about, it's apparent to me that you can never have just one fag. Despite stopping in the past for months and months, I felt like I was owed a cigarette - I viewed it as a treat I'd earned. This was always my mistake. The little voice would wait until I was at my most unguarded, and then would somehow make me manufacture a situation in which I could justify having a ciggie. You can't even tell at the time - your brain is incredibly good at hiding what it's doing from you in these situations.

      Each time you don't smoke for even a day, the next one gives you a head rush and if it's been longer than a day, you feel sick as well. You take this as confirmation that you are no longer an addict and you can have another any time you want. What you don't realise is that you have reawakened your nicotine dependency and slowly but surely it will find ways to justify you having another. In what seems like no time at all, you'll be smoking full time or as much as you can get away with, and every minute in between stolen cigarettes will be miserable.

      You might recognise a bit of EasyWay NLP in there, but I have come to this realisation under my own steam and Allen Carr's book merely restated what I deep down knew to be true - you are not really going to be missing out on anything, all the perceived benefits of smoking come from satisfying the addiction, all you're doing is extending it. What the book is doing to me is making clear that I don't need nicotine, nicotine needs me to keep using it. It is completely within my power to stop using it, so long as I do stop using it.

      I am about to have another go at stopping, but although I know it to be true, I don't yet 100% believe the programming so I am going to read the book again first. All I want is to be free and be happy that I am free. I'm not scared of the week or so of nagging need, after all being a secret smoker I've gone through it every weekend for a year. I can do it no problem. My downfall at the moment is that I don't really believe that I'm never going to need another. The fear of never being allowed to have another is stopping me.

      The change that needs to be made is that I just need to realise that I am not being deprived of a sweet ciggie, I am releasing myself from the self imposed chains. Also, I really need to get it through my thick skull that the next intake of nicotine is going to restart the chain.

      No more nicotine is the only way to stop smoking for good, anything else will ultimately catch you in a weak moment (your subconscious can recognise it better than your conscious self) and you will have either a fag or a pull on an e-cig or a lozenge or whatever. Even using just willpower and not recognising that you don't gain anything from it is a recipe for disaster. I do truly believe that the only people who have successfully stopped smoking for good are those who have recognised this.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: more than willpower

        As I posted above before seeing this post.

        I quit tobacco in January for vaping and I have just quit vaping last week. I have had 3-4 days of terrible cravings, but the last few days, even when drunk, have been easy.

        The vaping helped me break all the habitual, muscle memory, situational stuff that comes along with 32 years of smoking roll-ups, while still getting my nicotine fix.

        It has been much easier than expected.

        In the past I have tried to quit multiple times and it was orders of magnitude more difficult,

  6. Fraggle850

    It won't work

    I've been a lifelong smoker and have given up a number of times using different techniques over the years. Simply stopping tobacco from providing nicotine to the brain will not work. I'm not stupid (some may beg to differ) I know how nicotine interacts with my neurochemical state and I know ex-smokers who still crave fags many years after having given up. I suspect you'd need to be on any resulting drug for a decade or more.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Allen Carr.

    I'm a 30 year smoker but there is a resonance in his words that I know will eventually help me to stop.

    and that is that those 8 hours you sleep without smoking or feeling uncomfortable or in need of a cig make that difference. Why is it that while you are awake we feel the need to smoke?

    Sure, his books are N.L.P. and I usually reject such obvious attempted brainwashing however he makes some good points, so if you want to stop give both books a try, it may not make you stop but it will get you thinking imho. It has with me and soon I'm going to stop for good without any regret or the bullshit ten years from now I'll feel like smoking, I still remember when I didn't smoke (stupid remember everything memory) so I can look back.

    If you do stop then I wish you good luck, I'm going to need it but only for the first 48 hours.

    1. Wzrd1 Silver badge

      "and that is that those 8 hours you sleep without smoking or feeling uncomfortable or in need of a cig make that difference."

      What 8 hours? I've been known to get up, have a cup of coffee and a smoke, then go right back to bed and sleep well.

  8. Henry Wertz 1 Gold badge

    So somewhat like anabuse?

    So I guess somewhat like anabuse for liquor? (This makes it so if a drunk tries to keep drinking they get sick.)

    1. Wzrd1 Silver badge

      Re: So somewhat like anabuse?

      "So I guess somewhat like anabuse for liquor?"

      Nope, it's like like Naloxone (Narcan) for heroin addiction. No sickness at all, only neutralizing the nicotine in the bloodstream.

  9. Graham Marsden

    "at 98 degrees Fahrenheit"...

    ... This is the 21st Century calling...

    1. phuzz Silver badge

      Re: "at 98 degrees Fahrenheit"...

      I had to go look it up as well. About 36.6 degrees C or 310 Kelvin for those of us born after 1950.

      1. Wzrd1 Silver badge

        Re: "at 98 degrees Fahrenheit"...

        One can always tell when a US citizen speaks, both by the use of language, abuse of language, poor punctuation and finally, by units of measure.

        Having traveled a great deal and worked in medical science, I'm familiar with the global standard measure.

        Stones. Miles. Hmm, the US doesn't use stone measure, but shares the mile with the UK. ;)

        Seriously though, it would be nice if we in the US would join both the rest of the world and the twenty first century. Regrettably, I suspect the only kilo anything in the US will remain a kilo in illicit drugs.

        Some years ago, I was abroad and went to purchase meat for sandwiches. I asked for a kilo of several different meats and cheese. The poor clerk suggested 100 grams, maybe 250 grams.

        I explained that I was having a party.

        Boy, but I *know* that the poor man's arm was tired!

  10. Zmodem

    nicotine does nothing anyway, unless you have`nt had a smoke for 10 hours and the tabacco is real dry

    then if its rolling tabacco is not as bad, and just like the forest and jungle fire humans have been breathing for millions of years, and why cancer is more in high population cities with more car fumes

    its all where do you passive smoke at, your all still drying, smokers have built up a defense and live til they are 90 -> 110

    1. Zmodem

      rolling tabacco only adds some chemicals to stop it drying out, real tabacco adds aload of extra chemicals to get you addicted

      rolling tabacco is easy to give up, and takes a pint of water when you need a smoke, then you kind of forget after a day, the water kills the darkness of nicotine passing through your kidney

  11. Crunchy2k

    The reducing nicotine therapy has a >90% failure rate under the best clinical conditions. So, as a stop smoking aid this would be a failure. Injections don't cut it for many people.

    On the otherhand, this enzyme would work well with neo-nicotinic pesticides. One could still use the very effective neo-nicotinic pesticides and then remove them with this enzyme before using bees. It would also make for a good pre-consumer wash as long as it isn't infectious.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon