Taken together, results of the current and previous studies demonstrate considerable variability in EC nicotine delivery, device performance, and/or selleck chemical Belinostat cartridge and vapor nicotine content (Bullen et al., 2010; Eissenberg, 2010; U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2009; Vansickel et al., 2010; Williams & Talbot, 2011). One important potential benefit of EC regulation may be more consistent nicotine delivery, device performance, and cartridge and vapor content. Funding This report was supported partially by the National Institutes of Health (R01 CA120142 to TE and T32 DA007027 to ARV). Declaration of Interests The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. The sponsor had no role in the design and conduct of the study; or in the preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript.
The authors had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Acknowledgments The authors acknowledge, with gratitude, the hard work and dedication of the staff and students of VCU��s Clinical Behavioral Pharmacology Laboratory (Ms. Barbara Kilgalen, Ms Janet Austin, and Ms. Caroline Cobb) as well as the staff of VCU��s Bioanalytical Core Laboratory Service Center.
Though cigarette smokers are largely aware of the health consequences of smoking (Cummings et al., 2004; Schoenbaum, 1997) and often express a desire to quit, many continue to smoke. Though estimates vary, most reports indicate that more than 70% of current smokers want to quit, but only a very small minority stop smoking.
Given the public knowledge about the health consequences of cigarette smoking, individuals who continue to smoke are failing to delay the immediate gratification of smoking (rush of smoking and removal of withdrawal) for the delayed gratification of not smoking (improved health and quality of life). And one possible explanation for why smokers have difficulty delaying gratification is intolerance to delay (Allen, Moeller, Rhoades, & Cherek, 1998) as measured by temporal discounting. Temporal discounting refers to the decrease in the subjective value of an outcome as delay to the outcome increases; a sum of money delayed by 1 year is subjectively less valuable than the same sum of money available immediately.
Temporal discounting has received much recent attention in the area of addiction because drug use and abuse is a classic manifestation of a behavioral pattern that overweighs present outcomes in comparison to delayed ones. And research has confirmed that cigarette smokers (Baker, Johnson, & Bickel, 2003; Bickel, Odum, & Madden, 1999; Mitchell, 1999, 2004; Odum, Madden, & Bickel, 2002; Carfilzomib Ohmura, Takahashi, & Kitamura, 2005; Reynolds, Richards, Horn, & Karraker, 2004) and users of other drugs discount delayed rewards more than controls (see Reynolds, 2006; Yi, Mitchell, & Bickel, 2009 for reviews).
Related posts: