Can spitting tobacco impede muscle gains?
- 10-05-2008, 08:39 AM
- 10-05-2008, 03:30 PM
i really dont think so, it may affect motivation or somethin......but not muscle gain as fare as i know
- 10-05-2008, 03:59 PM
Nicotine is the main ingredient of concern in smokeless tobacco. It is estimated that a normal, 30-minute dip of smokeless tobacco delivers the same amount of nicotine as 3-4 cigarettes. Nicotine affects the brain and central nervous system and changes neurotransmitters levels regulating mood, learning, alertness, and ability to concentrate.
Nicotine can also increase heart rate, constrict blood vessels and reduce circulation. Nicotine can act like a stimulant or a sedative, and causes the release of endorphins, which provide a tranquilizing effect. Finally, nicotine is considered more addictive than crack or alcohol.
If nicotine wasn't bad enough, there is a cocktail of other harmful chemicals associated with smokeless tobacco including: polonium 210 (nuclear waste), formaldehyde (embalming fluid), and arsenic. According to the American Cancer Society, chewing tobacco users are 50 times more likely than non-users to get cancers of the cheek, gums, and inner surface of the lips.
PM for a link if you'd like to read more.
10-05-2008, 04:07 PM
I wonder how they get polonium to taste like peach....mmmm...*spit*
10-05-2008, 04:11 PM
I dunno, but im on maybe a tin every two weeks, hope to be off it soon... im a fan of the citrus myself tho..
10-05-2008, 04:56 PM
When done regularly, yes it will.
An occasional dip here and there, say a couple a month, I don't really see that hurting anything.
10-05-2008, 05:02 PM
10-05-2008, 05:25 PM
10-05-2008, 05:41 PM
I have known many guys that smoke or dip and still have great muscle gain. Overall I don't think they felt very effected by it.
On a positive note once they started workoing out their need to smoke or chew greatly decreased. So the compounding effect was they did less and less and their gains got better.
In short it effects you but if you use exercise as a way to fill a vice then your heading in a good direction.
10-05-2008, 07:10 PM
I average a tin a week. Used to go through 1 a day, especially when I was working drilling rigs up north.
Only side effect I've noticed so far is having to buy whitening toothpaste
10-05-2008, 08:25 PM
im a can a day guy...fairly built..i have a pinch before the gym. if i dont i feel like i cant function. also, the majority of my can goes from 7am-3pm( at work in the paper mill)
10-08-2008, 09:28 PM
10-10-2008, 01:47 PM
10-10-2008, 02:08 PM
10-10-2008, 04:39 PM
10-10-2008, 10:47 PM
10-10-2008, 11:15 PM
10-11-2008, 09:02 AM
The polonium 210 gets into the chew in two ways:
1. Tobacco naturally pulls it in via the environment.
2. polonium 210 is a constituent of the super phosphate soil which the tobacco plants are grown in.
Palonium 210 is the same substance that was used to kill the Russian spy a while back, it does not take much.
If you are using tobacco products know that they kill at least 400,000 Americans each year (that is a mild estimate.) Good luck trying to quit, because there does not seem to be anything as addictive.
10-11-2008, 12:20 PM
10-12-2008, 09:45 PM
I've got a good friend in the higher ups (started in the lower) of a drilling rig up north. He still eats the s!!! snuff like he works hard during the day or something.
10-12-2008, 09:56 PM
10-14-2008, 06:44 PM
found this interesting. credit goes to dashforce at the M and M forum
Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 2004 Sep 1;15(5):252-63.
Smokeless tobacco and oral cancer: a review of the risks and determinants.
Rodu B, Jansson C.
The available epidemiologic studies indicate that the use of
chewing tobacco and American moist snuff is associated with
minimal risk for oral cancer, while the use of Swedish moist
snuff is associated with no demonstrable risk. In comparison,
some studies have reported elevated risks for dry snuff use,
and these studies may have influenced the perception of the
entire SLT category in past evaluations. For example, in 1986
the US Congress passed the Comprehensive Smokeless
Tobacco Education Act, which mandated placement of an oral
cancer warning on all SLT products. One year later, IARC classified SLT products as carcinogenic to humans, based almost
entirely on epidemiologic studies. In the 17 years since these
two actions occurred, the number of relevant epidemiologic
studies has nearly doubled. The new body of epidemiologic
evidence suggests that these actions may now be seen as too
broad. It may be time for these agencies to re-examine the issue
of the risks of specific forms of SLT use.
Similar Forum Threads
- By Weightman in forum BulkingReplies: 6Last Post: 06-11-2010, 08:03 PM
- By David Dunn in forum General ChatReplies: 18Last Post: 08-07-2008, 12:46 PM
- By pumpforlife in forum SupplementsReplies: 5Last Post: 09-21-2007, 10:31 PM
- By arena in forum SupplementsReplies: 2Last Post: 04-25-2007, 12:01 AM
- By kincaiddave in forum Male Anti-Aging MedicineReplies: 20Last Post: 02-03-2007, 07:19 PM