« Computer games could save your brain | Main | Carbon credits for the Joneses »

Nicotine 'sobers up' drunk rats

Cigarettes could slash blood-alcohol levels, making smokers drink more.

A new study helps to explain why smokers tend to have boozier nights out than non-smokers. The work, done in rats, shows that a heavy dose of nicotine can cut blood-alcohol levels in half. If cigarettes similarly lower intoxication in people, it could mean that smokers need to drink more than non-smokers to get the same buzz.

Read the story here.

Posted by Helen Pearson on July 24, 2006
Categories: | | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blogs.nature.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/913

Comments

I was unable to locate the Parnell et al., 2006 article. The journal citation took me to an article by Tokunaga et al. Does anyone know the correct citation for the Parnell paper?

Posted by: G. Dowling | July 25, 2006 03:05 PM

The beneficial effect of nicotine on nervous functions has been well recognized for some time. The effect is especially pronounced on schizophrenics, who manage to stay sane by chain-smoking. The reason this fact is not well recognized is that too many "politically correct" media treat it as "scientific blasphemy."

Posted by: Andrejs Baidins | July 26, 2006 01:13 AM

Hello - the editor here. Apologies, this reference should refer to p. 1408.

Parnell S.E., West J.R.& Chen W-J.A. . Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research, 30. 1408 (2006).

It isn't free access I'm afraid, but here's the link:

http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1530-0277.2006.00168.x

Posted by: nicola jones | July 26, 2006 06:36 PM

Yes, two vices in one. It’s that paradox of one bad thing following the other one. I really do not know how accurate is this study, but if it is true, it is a double damage to the body and mind.

Posted by: drug rehab | September 4, 2007 04:42 PM

Post a comment

Comments will be reviewed by staff before being published. You can be as critical or controversial as you like, but please don't get personal or offensive, and do keep it brief. Excessively long entries may be cropped. Remember this is for feedback and discussion - not for publishing papers or press releases.

We strongly encourage you to use your real, full name. Email addresses are required: this is just in case we need to discuss your comment with you privately. They won’t be published.


Please enter the numbers you see below - this helps us to cut down on spam. Note that attempting to post within 30 seconds of hitting ‘preview’ or ‘post’ can cause the system to think you are spamming the site. If you are having trouble with this system, you can instead e-mail a comment to 'inthefield at nature.com'.

Search