Comment by gwern

12 years ago

> The hand-wavy "other compounds" that the article mentions and then doesn't describe? Anyone know what those would be?

Excuse me? I went to considerable pains to give the primary source citations & jailbreak the PDFs.

4 comments

gwern

Reply
maxander  12 years ago

Its possible I've missed something? I don't have time to read all the papers you cite, but from titles/abstracts they all appear to be talking about the effects of MAOIs. If there are separate substances in play I've somehow managed to read your article and completely miss any mention of them.

  • gwern  12 years ago

    > Its possible I've missed something? I don't have time to read all the papers you cite, but from titles/abstracts they all appear to be talking about the effects of MAOIs.

    Well, yes, what exactly else would you expect papers to be about when someone claims that nicotine+MAOIs is different from just nicotine...? Presumably the papers are going to have titles like "Monoamine Oxidase Inhibition Dramatically Increases the Motivation to Self-Administer Nicotine in Rats".

    • maxander  12 years ago

      Perhaps I wasn't very clear; in your article, you contrast the apparent non-addictiveness of pure nicotine with, to quote directly, "the addictiveness coming from MAOIs & other compounds present in tobacco." And it is precisely the latter part of the phrase "MAOIs & other compounds" that I was asking about when I said "other compounds."

      The implication seemed to be that there were other things beyond MAOIs in tobacco that were (or helped nicotine to be) addictive; is that not the case?

      1 reply →