The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
Even if you're somebody who's never ingested nicotine, this absolutely has to be true because you have these nicotinic receptors, which is to say that acetylcholine that's naturally released without any external trigger within your brain and body, or I should say without any trigger from nicotine in particular is binding these nicotinic acetylcholine receptors and is creating these effects in your brain and body, just absolutely staggering.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
Now, those nicotinic receptors were named after nicotine, the compound, but they existed in the brain and body, not because of the existence of a tobacco plant, but because there are other chemicals in the body that naturally occur, namely acetylcholine that bind the nicotine receptor.