[HN Gopher] Smoking is associated with lower cognitive function ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Smoking is associated with lower cognitive function in older adults
        
       Author : geox
       Score  : 80 points
       Date   : 2023-01-28 14:45 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (news.weill.cornell.edu)
 (TXT) w3m dump (news.weill.cornell.edu)
        
       | earthbee wrote:
       | My mother has COPD from being a life long smoker. Because her
       | lungs aren't working 100% her blood oxygen is often lower than
       | optimal, I'm starting to be able to notice when her blood oxygen
       | is low because her sleep pattern gets weird and she starts making
       | silly mistakes in the tasks she's doing.
       | 
       | So that's one way smoking can be a cause of lower cognitive
       | function.
        
       | eloff wrote:
       | Even moderate alcohol consumption is also associated with
       | cognitive decline. It reduces your white matter (connections
       | between neurons.) My brain is my biggest asset, I would not do
       | anything to compromise it. I don't touch marijuana or street
       | drugs primarily for that reason. Yet I drink.
       | 
       | So I'm changing that. I'm doing a complete sober month, after
       | which I may go back to drinking occasionally, but only in social
       | activities (once a week or less) and a limit of 3 drinks. So far
       | I'm on track and I don't miss it anymore (the first week I did.)
       | It's not worth the downside to me.
        
         | latchkey wrote:
         | Just read this one today...
         | 
         | https://www.reddit.com/r/KitchenConfidential/comments/10my22...
         | 
         | Not just drinking booze, but how/what you drink. Imagine all
         | that sludge passing into your system and the effect it has on
         | you.
        
       | dr_faustus wrote:
       | The question is: are people stupid because they are smoking or
       | are they smoking because they are stupid.
       | 
       | From the press release, it does not seem that they took any
       | measures to establish causation (like comparing IQ tests from the
       | time before people started smoking). I would wager that people
       | with higher cognitive abilities might be more amenable to the
       | advice of their doctors.
        
         | mistermann wrote:
         | > The question is: are people stupid because they are smoking
         | or are they smoking because they are stupid.
         | 
         | I would argue that culture is a better root cause causal
         | explanation, with stupidity and smoking both being consequences
         | of that (though each with their own causal influence to some
         | degree).
        
       | tinus_hn wrote:
       | Correlation does not equate causation.
        
         | msla wrote:
         | People say this and refuse to see that correlations are also
         | extremely interesting and worthy objects of study.
        
         | lolinder wrote:
         | > "You still think I've gone cracked in the head," Ben said,
         | amused. "Listen, if tomorrow we pulled into Biren and someone
         | told you there were shamble-men in the woods, would you believe
         | them?"
         | 
         | > My father shook his head.
         | 
         | > "What if two people told you?"
         | 
         | > Another shake.
         | 
         | > Ben leaned forward on his stump. "What if a dozen people told
         | you, with perfect earnestness, that shamble-men were out in the
         | fields, eating--"
         | 
         | > "Of course I wouldn't believe them," my father said,
         | irritated. "It's ridiculous."
         | 
         | > "Of course it is," Ben agreed, raising a finger. "But the
         | real question is this: Would you go into the woods?"
         | 
         | -- Patrick Rothfluss, The Name of the Wind
        
           | TillE wrote:
           | I _love_ that whole scene and that passage in particular, one
           | of my all time favorites from NOTW. Rothfuss is an incredible
           | writer.
        
       | electric_dreams wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       | throwaway128128 wrote:
       | Tucker was right that smoking "frees your mind".
        
       | aliqot wrote:
       | I think this is a class thing coming out in the data. I don't
       | smoke but nicotine itself helps people think clearer, sharper,
       | it's a great thing
        
         | lupire wrote:
         | Does nicotine help for long duration (hours) after consuming
         | it?
         | 
         | Also smoking has a lot of non-nicotine garbage and poison.
        
           | aliqot wrote:
           | it has a short halflife similar to caffeine, so no,
           | unfortunately the effects taper shortly depending on dosage
           | and ROA
        
         | lifty wrote:
         | Depends how you consume it. I assume cardio vascular health
         | will have long term consequences on cognitive function so a
         | lifetime of smoking might have a negative effect in thinking.
        
           | Loveaway wrote:
           | Here's a tip: you can buy concentrated nicotine shots from
           | vape stores, mix 10ml with 5ml ethanol and 5ml water, add a
           | drop of menthol, and you got dirt cheap nicotine mouth spray
           | (Nicorette sells the same thing for an arm and a leg).
           | 
           | Purest, "healthiest" method of consumption I found. Not sure
           | if I'd call it a great thing though. It's still addictive,
           | and no matter what anyone says, I'm pretty sure nicotine is a
           | mild poison. Would advise anyone to stay clear of the
           | substance, unless you're already an addict and currently
           | smoking/vaping/snusing, then it's a great alternative.
        
         | koverda wrote:
         | Any sources on that?
        
           | vorpalhex wrote:
           | Nicotine is a wonderful anxiolytic (anti-anxiety)
           | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4439881/
           | 
           | There is no evidence that I am aware of that supports it
           | otherwise improving cognition, but for many people
           | anxiolytics will behave like nootropics (and indeed are
           | sometimes listed as one!)
        
             | guerrilla wrote:
             | Hmmmmmmmmm is that why I got much more anxious after
             | quitting... Interesting!
        
             | plusminusplus wrote:
             | ...in the 169 rats that were part of the study.
             | 
             | It further concludes:
             | 
             | > _High doses of nicotine or repeated exposure may also
             | promote anxiety_ (citing 3 studies)
             | 
             | > _low doses of nicotine have a similar effect to decrease
             | anxiety behaviours [...] whereas high doses of nicotine
             | promote anxiety behaviours_
        
           | prettyStandard wrote:
           | https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=nicotine+improves+memor.
           | ..
           | 
           | Obviously the query will bias the results, but I do believe
           | this is true.
           | 
           | But there is a big difference between smoking and nicotine.
        
         | isthisthingon99 wrote:
         | Foods have nicotine. Perhaps not as dense as cigarettes but
         | still
        
           | aliqot wrote:
           | thats where vapejuice nicotine comes from, tomato, eggplant
           | etc
        
         | lolinder wrote:
         | Nicotine could help you think sharper in the short term while
         | _smoking_ still does long-term damage to the brain. This study
         | was about smoking specifically, not nicotine consumption in
         | general.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | tristor wrote:
           | Luckily we have some good research on both. It turns out
           | smoking, of /any/ substance, is a net negative for a person's
           | health. It is unsurprising that there is long-term damage to
           | the brain, because in the short term when you smoke you are
           | causing a reduction in oxygenation, which no doubt has long-
           | term effects when done repetitively, nicotine aside.
        
         | eurasiantiger wrote:
         | Definitely. Lower class status is associated with smoking. It
         | is certainly the inhaled particulate matter that is causing
         | cognitive issues -- similar associations to cognitive decline
         | can be found with high PM2.5 exposure, irrespective of the
         | source (industry, traffic, cooking, woodsmoke, etc).
        
           | vehemenz wrote:
           | Yes, but the smoking demographic may experience higher
           | cognitive decline in general due to other lifestyle factors
           | not caused by inhaled particulates.
        
             | kaispowergoo wrote:
             | Can you elaborate on this?
             | 
             | What other lifestyle factors involving the smoking
             | demographic are you referencing?
        
               | vehemenz wrote:
               | Smoking is more prevalent on the lower end of the
               | household income scale, so any other lifestyle factors
               | that correlate with income (too many to list here) will
               | contribute to poorer health outcomes for the demographic
               | in general.
        
           | throwaway290 wrote:
           | Or just with oral breathing in general
           | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8228257/
        
         | pcthrowaway wrote:
         | Nicotine apparently results in higher cotinine levels (which is
         | the marker with which they found a link with lower cognition in
         | this study).
         | 
         | I wonder if there's something about the effects on the brain
         | over time that makes cognitive function worse over time, even
         | if it's helpful in the short-term.
         | 
         | It's also possible people are self-medicating.
         | 
         | If you tested cognitive function on people who have been
         | prescribed to adderall their entire lives vs. people who had
         | not, you might find lower cognitive function in the group with
         | ADD.. but that could also be due to the tests favouring
         | neurotypical people.
        
       | ineedasername wrote:
       | Smoking is probably associated with any number of other poor
       | health choices. Seems like the constellation of them as a whole
       | may be a reasonable cause, less so than any one of them.
        
         | lolinder wrote:
         | That's literally the purpose of this study: to control for two
         | other major health problems and see if the (already recognized)
         | correlation still holds.
        
           | ineedasername wrote:
           | And I'm saying there are many more, dozens of small choices
           | and more, that make up a bigger picture. I'm talking about
           | choices, not other medical conditions. Choices _can_
           | influence hypertension and diabetes but choices alone are not
           | always enough. Smoking is always a choice.
        
       | breck wrote:
       | Here is some constructive criticism for the authors:
       | 
       | - Do not put your article behind a paywall. If you want the best
       | scientists to look at your work they don't have much time to
       | waste fiddling with logins and paywalls and so your work won't
       | get analyzed by the people who could provide the most help. If
       | you want to "win" in science in the long run, put it in the
       | public domain. Or, to put it bluntly: #LicensesAreForLosers.
       | 
       | - You need to include a scatterplot up top. The importance thing
       | when you talk about "cognitive function" is the distribution, not
       | the average. If it lowers average cognitive function, but also
       | increases odds of a higher outlier or two, then perhaps the
       | tradeoff is worth it.
        
         | thfuran wrote:
         | >you want the best scientists to look at your work they don't
         | have much time to waste fiddling with logins and paywalls and
         | so your work won't get analyzed by the people who could provide
         | the most help.
         | 
         | Won't they mostly be using some university IP with
         | subscriptions to basically every journal and not see the
         | paywalls in the first place? At least that was my experience of
         | university.
        
       | 2devnull wrote:
       | Smoking is stupid. Am I missing the point?
        
       | taneq wrote:
       | [flagged]
        
         | throwanem wrote:
         | Shall I tell you, from the perspective of a former smoker,
         | about the categories that never-smokers seem to fall into?
        
         | mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote:
         | You left out a significant group: addicted, unhappy about it,
         | but unable to kick the habit.
         | 
         | Which is most smokers I know who have smoked for more than a
         | few years, including myself.
         | 
         | Smoking actually does have a lot of mental effects, either
         | directly or indirectly. For one it has a marked effect on
         | oxygen saturation which definitely can have cognitive effects.
         | 
         | Nicotine itself is very short-lived, and can temporarily
         | improve some cogntitive functions. But since the possibility of
         | smoking is highly variable throughout a typical active day,
         | this effectively leads to a sort of oscillation between short
         | windows of increased cognitive function and decreased function
         | due to beginning withdrawal.
        
           | cwmoore wrote:
           | This is helpful insight but describes behavior that falls
           | under both suggested categories.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | sph wrote:
         | > you have to be a bit dim to be smoking in your 60s
         | 
         | I just love people that have never been addicted in their life
         | to preach inane bollocks like this.
         | 
         | Surely, if people are addicted, they should just stop being
         | addicted. What's the problem?
         | 
         | Tell me, how do you categorize people that are not afraid to
         | voice their opinion about something they have absolutely no
         | clue about? Please educate yourself. Addiction is neither a
         | weakness nor a choice.
        
         | eurasiantiger wrote:
         | "Not that bright" could be a genetic predisposition manifesting
         | as cognitive issues.
        
       | xkcd1963 wrote:
       | Stating the obvious while using scientific words is associated
       | with useless work
        
       | callesgg wrote:
       | > Promoting smoking cessation may be a good way to preserve
       | cognitive health at the population level, irrespective of
       | diabetes and hypertension status, the researchers concluded.
       | 
       | Seams like that is a statement that can not be made solely based
       | on the stated connection. To me the initial thought that occurred
       | when reading was something like:
       | 
       | "yeah well smoking is dangerous. People with more cognitive power
       | are presumably better at reasoning themselves out of smoking;
       | Given the fact that smoking is known to increase the risk of
       | getting cancer."
       | 
       | If that description describes something that is a big factor in
       | determining a persons smoking habit, smoking would not
       | necessarily cause a cognitive decline as implied in the
       | recommendation.
        
         | dundarious wrote:
         | > Promoting smoking cessation _may_ be a good way to preserve
         | cognitive health at the population level, irrespective of
         | diabetes and hypertension status, the researchers concluded.
         | 
         |  _Emphasis_ mine. They don 't appear to claim anything
         | definitive. But given this new study, and others that claim
         | causal links with smoking leading to atherosclerosis, etc.,
         | it's quite plausible. Yet they don't go too far, and still do
         | the right thing and say _may_.
        
         | saiya-jin wrote:
         | Man, you clearly have no clue about addictions. Addictions work
         | with your emotions 100x stronger than you can muster your
         | reasoning against it. I'd say willpower is the only defense.
         | 
         | You are basically saying - if I am smart enough, I will reach
         | this tantric nirvana in lotus position and wave away these
         | pesky addictions forever (joking a bit but not that much). Not
         | based in reality, which is more like permanent weakness or
         | crack forms in your persona that you can never mend back to
         | original state, just with tons of continuous effort keep
         | working around it, till your last day. It gets a bit better
         | over time, but it takes literally decades and not that much.
         | 
         |  _Very_ smart people struggled with addictions, and failed for
         | their whole lives, even if they knew perfectly well how deep in
         | shit they were. Cigarettes are much worse due to smart
         | marketing of tobacco this lethal addiction was completely
         | normalized by society, and in many places still is, so its
         | extremely easy to access them in one 's close circles. That's
         | why roughly 95% of the tobacco addicts never succeeded with
         | stopping.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | beezlewax wrote:
         | Cognitive reasoning has nothing to do with addiction. Addicts
         | invent the most convoluted complex reasoning to not quit that
         | are also contrary to facts they are keenly aware of. Mental
         | gymnastics.
        
           | darkerside wrote:
           | Former smoker, and I agree with this.
           | 
           | More likely, people who smoke do function better cognitively
           | with a cigarette in their hand. They are nervous and
           | irritable without it. Their brains probably produce
           | insufficient dopamine when they aren't smoking.
        
             | Maursault wrote:
             | Nicotine has a positive effect on memory. But lower blood
             | oxygen levels and 300+ intentionally added carcinogens to
             | make smoking more addictive probably has considerable
             | adverse effect. People that hate smokers refuse to accept
             | that there is a massive difference between tobacco and what
             | is in cigarettes.
        
             | themitigating wrote:
             | People who are addicted to cocaine perform better at their
             | jobs if provided with it versus those who are in withdrawal
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | bee_rider wrote:
           | You have to smoke the first couple cigarettes to get
           | addicted, though...
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | ineedasername wrote:
             | Socioeconomic factors and other random circumstances are
             | going to impact exposure & normalization of the behavior.
             | 
             | Thought experiment: Take 1000 13 year olds of equal
             | cognitive capacity and place half in peer groups where some
             | smoke half in peer groups where none smoke. I'm guessing
             | there would end up being more of the first 500 that decide
             | to take up the habit.
             | 
             | There is also a difference between cognitive function and
             | reasoning capacity, the later also strongly influenced by
             | socioeconomic factors.
        
           | lo_zamoyski wrote:
           | Indeed. This is a matter of virtue. Being more "adept" can
           | lead to more elaborate rationalizations and evasions of the
           | truth to justify substance abuse or even deny that any abuse
           | is happening.
        
           | bluecalm wrote:
           | It's not like inventing most convoluted, complex reasoning to
           | delude yourself on a simple matter is a sign of high
           | cognitive capabilities. Quite the contrary.
           | 
           | An intelligent addict will say: I realize it's terrible but I
           | am losing the battle against the urges every day. Anything
           | more than that smells like low cognitive ability to me.
        
           | rcme wrote:
           | > Cognitive reasoning has nothing to do with addiction.
           | 
           | Citation needed. As the GP pointed out, we have a correlation
           | between addiction and lower cognitive function based on this
           | study.
        
             | guerrilla wrote:
             | No, there's no citation needed because there are plenty of
             | genius addicts and this study alone proves nothing. At the
             | absolute bare minimum this would have to replicate.
        
               | rcme wrote:
               | > there are plenty of genius addicts.
               | 
               | How many is plenty? And how does that compare to the
               | general population? The claim isn't that addiction and
               | intelligence are mutually exclusive. Rather, the claim is
               | that intelligence makes addiction less likely.
        
               | guerrilla wrote:
               | Almost all that I care about mid-last century anyway. I
               | mean give me a break, Einstein smoked. If you seriously
               | think addiction has anything to do with intelligence then
               | you've never been addicted and know nothing about it.
        
               | rcme wrote:
               | Here is a study that looks at alcoholics:
               | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6851852/
               | 
               | According to the study, alcoholics had a lower baseline
               | IQ _before_ becoming addicted to alcohol. So that does
               | seem to support that lower cognitive function is somehow
               | linked to becoming an addict.
        
               | themitigating wrote:
               | Could that also mean Einstein might have been even
               | smarter had he not smoked
        
               | irrational wrote:
               | That's no proof they didn't suffer cognitive decline.
               | Perhaps Einstein did suffer cognitive decline.
        
               | themitigating wrote:
               | I get what you're saying but best not to say "prove it
               | didn't.."
               | 
               | Better to note that since the study isn't claiming every
               | person who smokes suffer cognitive decline showing a
               | person who is a genius and smokes isn't a counter
        
               | Idk__Throwaway wrote:
               | A genius addict disproves the broader claim no more than
               | does "it was cold today, therefore global warming is a
               | hoax". The rule can be true yet still have notable
               | exceptions throughout history.
        
               | guerrilla wrote:
               | No, you're just intentionally ignoring the word "plenty."
        
               | Idk__Throwaway wrote:
               | There are "plenty" of cold days as well. Does that
               | disprove global warming?
               | 
               | Not only is "plenty" not an objective quantity, but even
               | an objectively large quantity is irrelevant if it's not a
               | large percentage of the whole. 100k geniuses with
               | addiction problems wouldn't disprove the rule if there
               | are 1b people with addiction problems who are of below
               | average intelligence.
        
               | themitigating wrote:
               | As he should. Plenty is extremely vague. It definitely
               | means more than 1, probably more than 3, but after that.
        
               | 8note wrote:
               | It's actually "genius" that's the problem. There aren't
               | enough geniuses to affect a trend on their own.
               | 
               | You could swap "plenty" to "every" and it would still
               | have the same problem
        
           | mistermann wrote:
           | Rare is the person who doesn't engage in mental gymnastics,
           | like post-hoc rationalization of sub-perceptual heuristic
           | predictions of what is true, sometimes accompanied by
           | proactive debunking of alternative perspectives.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | corobo wrote:
           | Can confirm anecdotally on this one. I had accepted the
           | logical reasons to quit a good year or so before I actually
           | got rid of them.
           | 
           | When I did manage to kick them it was after I read the Easy
           | way to quit smoking by Allen Carr which helped with the
           | mindset then admittedly I ruined the data by moving house and
           | starting a work from home job, therefore got rid of all of my
           | cigarette initiating habits in one go.
        
             | nohuck13 wrote:
             | Are your sure your anecdote confirms this?
             | 
             | The higher cognitive function that leads you to read books
             | about quitting could be exactly the mechanism the GP
             | describes.
             | 
             | If books can help you quit, less bookish people will quit
             | less, all else equal.
        
               | williamcotton wrote:
               | From what I remember, Easy Way even tells you to keep
               | smoking when you start the book and to stop reading if
               | you don't feel ready!
               | 
               | FWIW, I also credit that book with me finally quitting
               | the habit.
        
       | evo_9 wrote:
       | Smoking _cigarettes_. Should really be crystal clear on that
       | point.
        
         | TillE wrote:
         | Inhaling smoke of any kind is inherently bad for you, it
         | releases all sorts of carcinogens and other crap. Vaping is
         | orders of magnitude safer, and for weed edibles are of course
         | your best option.
        
           | mistermann wrote:
           | > Inhaling smoke of any kind is inherently bad for you
           | 
           | I think a solid argument could be made that lack of usage of
           | drugs (even just plain old marijuana at a minimum) causes
           | more harm than smoking, my thinking being roughly: drugs can
           | (at least temporarily) break through the mental state
           | established by cultural ~programming, cultural programming is
           | the underlying cause of many evils in the world, and many
           | such evils can increase dependence on addictive substances as
           | a coping mechanism.
        
       | dqpb wrote:
       | [flagged]
        
         | vehemenz wrote:
         | Look everybody, this guy is smarter than Bertrand Russell!
        
         | ineedasername wrote:
         | People are very rarely only or all one thing. People who smoke
         | make an idiotic decision about on specific behavior. How many
         | of your decisions have to be idiotic to make you an idiot?
         | Before you answer, how many of your actions have to be good to
         | make you a good person?
        
         | agolio wrote:
         | What if I told you that cigarette smoke imparts a flavor and
         | relaxing cognitive effect that some people enjoy in moderation
         | while being aware of the health effect?
        
           | resoluteteeth wrote:
           | Unfortunately it seems like it's almost impossible to "enjoy
           | in moderation"
        
             | 4RealFreedom wrote:
             | My family has a bi-weekly game night. Once every couple
             | months someone will bring cigars and almost everyone
             | partakes. Most don't smoke regularly. Seems like cigar
             | smoking actually is enjoyed in moderation more so than
             | cigarettes.
        
               | plusminusplus wrote:
               | Cigar smokers typically do not _inhale_ the smoke, unlike
               | cigarette smokers
        
             | snakeboy wrote:
             | I'm not sure how culturally-specific this is, but as a
             | foreigner living in France, I notice the majority of
             | smokers I meet are those who smoke exclusively while
             | drinking. So to that extent, they appear to have sufficient
             | will-power to resist most of the time, but the lowered
             | inhibitions and the mental association between alcohol and
             | smoke I guess are overwhelming.
             | 
             | I wonder what the tangible negative effects are of smoking
             | 4-5 cigarettes a week like this compared to 4-5 a day? I
             | also wonder to what extent this is a French phenomenon.
        
             | kaispowergoo wrote:
             | How so?
        
         | cwmoore wrote:
         | This may violate the HN policies about name-calling or shallow
         | dismissals, but is also either derogatory to actual idiots or
         | factually incorrect.
        
           | shrimp_emoji wrote:
           | > _factually incorrect_
           | 
           | Einstein smoked, so I would agree with this. ;p
        
             | cwmoore wrote:
             | Einstein is a strong counterexample, but to account for
             | changing times, there are some notable non-idiots more
             | recently:
             | 
             | https://josephcrusejohnson.blogspot.com/2017/10/morris-
             | chang...
        
             | DangitBobby wrote:
             | Not that I agree with OP but... I don't think Einstein
             | lived in a time where the harms of smoking were so well
             | documented.
        
               | eric_h wrote:
               | My mother was a cardiovascular pharmacologist and worked
               | with many people who knew at the time that smoking was
               | bad for your health (70s, 80s, 90s). She smoked for
               | decades, but she observed that the doctors and phds she
               | worked with that specialized in the heart and lungs were
               | more likely to be smokers.
               | 
               | She quit many years ago and is still around, thankfully.
        
               | guerrilla wrote:
               | but it was still inhaling smoke which we are clearly not
               | meant to do. That was OP's point. It wasn't that we
               | shouldn't smoke because of the things we've learned
               | since.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-01-28 23:02 UTC)