Bongs Confirmed Counter-productive by NORML

If you read the study it seems to make sense, I'm not going to copy and paste it so you'll just have to go click on the link and read it yourself, but it basically just proves how inefficient smoking cannabis is, so we should all learn to eat it ;)

It also sounds like when this test was done, vaporizers weren't as popular as they are now. It would be interesting to test a popular vaporizer, such as the volcano, and see how it fares.

But I think the big reason people say they get higher from a bong than from a pipe is because you take harder and deeper hits with a bong than you do from a pipe. Hit too hard from a pipe and you'll suck down some ash, but a bong, hit as hard as you want and fill every inch of your lungs with some nice cool smoke. That, I think, is why people believe they are getting higher from a bong. I have noticed that I use considerably more bud with a bong than I do with my pipe, so I gotta say this study doesn't sound too far off base.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by melodious fellow

although it is kinda strange, expensive, and inconvenient, i may have to start vaping. and quit smoking.

granny, how damaged were your lungs after 40 years? can you post some details of your switch to vaping? thnx!

edit: i am still pissed that i just bought that new bong.

---

Dude you can get a sick ass convection hands-free vape for $70-90. You don't need to blow 100s to get a very effective vape.

THC is not water soluable. Therefore, how does the THC get lost in the water? I mean if you are putting some milk or booze in your bong, yeah, I suppose so...

Thats why drinking bong water doesnt do much but make you sick and look like an ass.

There have been plenty of studies in the history of science that have been fundamental flawed or just plain wrong. Just because its from NORML doesnt mean they are immune to being wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imitator

THC is not water soluable. Therefore, how does the THC get lost in the water? I mean if you are putting some milk or booze in your bong, yeah, I suppose so...

---

The THC is actually not soluble in water, but it doesnt matter so much. If the water can cool down the smoke until it be at a temperature lower than THC boiling point, it will condensate.

This process happens mostly at the surface of the smoke bubbles when they pass through the water, and thats why some of THC reaches our lungs... because even if the surface of the smoke bubbles passing through the water lose its THC, the middle of the bubbles are hot enough for allowing the THC to be gaseous. When the bubbles reach the surface of the water and collapse, the THC of its middle is released, and we smoke it.

Honestly, on the level;

If NORML says I shouldn't be enjoying my bong, NORML can go screw themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reefer Rogue

This study, is like someone telling me that the moon is not really the moon after centuries of calling it the moon. Infact, it is the moom, fuck that, it makes little difference, it's the moon.

---

yea, kinda like those idiots that told us the earth isn't the center of the universe and it isn't flat, either.... after centuries of believing so... wtf were they thinking.. blasphemy! :wtf:

They also said in the study that smoking stronger bud reduces the intake of all the bad fumes. In the NORML study they're using some weak shit, 2.3% thc, might as well be smoking hay! Considering that most people here are smoking a lot better than NIDA's shwag, it seems that people are getting a lot less of the toxic fumes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by melodious fellow

yea, kinda like those idiots that told us the earth isn't the center of the universe and it isn't flat, either.... after centuries of believing so... wtf were they thinking.. blasphemy! :wtf:

---

No, those comparisons don't work because they are HUGE mistakes. My point was that if the moon was actually the 'moom' one letter change and pretty much the same phonology (sound) it wouldn't make a difference. I would still call the moon, the moon. As i will still smoke my bong and get high. Experiance gains knowledge, forget NORML'S attempted rationalism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reefer Rogue

...As i will still smoke my bong and get high. Experiance gains knowledge, forget NORML'S attempted rationalism.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatish.ten

Honestly, on the level;

If NORML says I shouldn't be enjoying my bong, NORML can go screw themselves.

---

I don't think NORML's intent was to outlaw the bong or get people to stop using them. The intent was to see what the healthiest mode of smoking is. They uncovered some surprising information and are now just trying to make people aware.

The healthiest way to consume cannabis is by vaping it or eating it. I believe a bong is healthier then a joint/blunt/pipe and shall continue to do so. Good day and have a high one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reefer Rogue

The healthiest way to consume cannabis is by vaping it or eating it. I believe a bong is healthier then a joint/blunt/pipe and shall continue to do so. Good day and have a high one.

---

ah yes, be wary of the shitstem, for they will tell you many things. Seek deep inside and look for the truth, and you will see that the truth is dangerous. I can see you have steped back and re-looked the shituation, respect seen

Pardon the obvious......If your *THAT* health concious, then why are you smoking *ANYTHING*???

Eh i dont know, but when I use my bong (14 inch molino glass on glass straight shooter) i use less weed to get more high. If i take a bowls worth of mid grade and smoke it through a bowl, i wont get nearly as high as i would with a bowls worth of mid grade through the bong.

man when im hungry for a good hit, nothing will break me off like a tasty b-rip. i dont know what id do without them.

as far as the health aspects i think its bs. and i also dont think that it filters out the thc. thc isnt water soluble.

donny:bonghit:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bumclot

I don't think NORML's intent was to outlaw the bong or get people to stop using them. The intent was to see what the healthiest mode of smoking is. They uncovered some surprising information and are now just trying to make people aware.

---

Fair enough. :hippy:

"The reason is that waterpipes filter out proportionately more psychoactive THC than they do other tars, thereby requiring users to smoke more to reach their desired high"

Bullshit point #1. I get higher off of two big bong ripper than 8 pipe hits of the same weed. I can use less weed to get high.

"because water tends to absorb THC more readily than other, noxious tars."

Bullshit Point #2. Anyone should put some ground up weed in their gum and tell me if they get high or just eat it by themselves. It is NOT water soluable, and if it was, we could boil it in water and drink the tea. Heat will release some, but most wont be, especially at 212 degrees farenheit. It doesnt work like that.

Only 1 or 2 out of the many sources were from medical journals, the rest being subjective BS written by authors to sell a book.

Nowhere did they say how much weed was placed in the vape or the joint or whatever.


Dont worry folks, the proof is in what you all already know, that bongs are the most efficient way to get the highest possible given the same amount of weed(and many cases even less)

The study of medical effects on that link says that people whom have been smoking for less than 15 years have respiratory problems and no physical injuries(hitting yourself on the head cause your dumb etc lol), and those smoking more than 15 years have physical injuries and no respiratory problems makes it moot that bongs give you more tar over the long run right? If the more you smoke it, the less respiratory infections you have over time, doesnt that make the entire article BS?


I would not pay attention to anything that article says. Who knows, maybe zig zag or phillies made a "contribution" to NORML and then said "Hey we have some new evidence here, just pass it along to everyone and keep these millions"


Always question the FUCK out of everything.

The Beef

thnx for clearing that up beef. i was feelig really bad about the brand new bong i bought, but after reading your post i realized it shouldn't matter...my bong is nice and i will keep using it now. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beefer86

"The reason is that waterpipes filter out proportionately more psychoactive THC than they do other tars, thereby requiring users to smoke more to reach their desired high"

Bullshit point #1. I get higher off of two big bong ripper than 8 pipe hits of the same weed. I can use less weed to get high.

---

Remember that the time you take for each one is different. As faster you smoke, greater the effect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beefer86

"because water tends to absorb THC more readily than other, noxious tars."

Bullshit Point #2. Anyone should put some ground up weed in their gum and tell me if they get high or just eat it by themselves. It is NOT water soluable, and if it was, we could boil it in water and drink the tea. Heat will release some, but most wont be, especially at 212 degrees farenheit. It doesnt work like that.

---

As i already said in another post, the THC is not absorved by the water by dissolution, but by condensation. The water drops the temperature of the smoke, so the vaporized THC condensates.

And, remember that people tends to disregard everything that goes against their prejudices.

thnx for the reply Coelho. are you a scientists or just very smart lol?

i thought we had arrived at a final conclusion with Beef's last post, but maybe not.

this is getting quite interesting.

peace

Im M.S. in physics... and also a pothead! :stoned:

I would be interested in hearing your thoughts regarding the propaganda surrounding memory and brain cells and cannabis. My personal belief is that asphyxiation kills brain cells, not Cannabis. However, I am undecided regarding memory.

I cannot spell nearly as well as I used to...

peace

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coelho

As i already said in another post, the THC is not absorved by the water by dissolution, but by condensation. The water drops the temperature of the smoke, so the vaporized THC condensates.

---

maybe... use warm water?

another reason to smoke blunts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coelho

Remember that the time you take for each one is different. As faster you smoke, greater the effect.



As i already said in another post, the THC is not absorved by the water by dissolution, but by condensation. The water drops the temperature of the smoke, so the vaporized THC condensates.

And, remember that people tends to disregard everything that goes against their prejudices.

---

Yes THC may be "condensed" as it travels through the water. So consequently, a bong "takes" more hits to get the same high as a normal handpipe???.

I know there is something wrong with the article claiming you need MORE bong hits than bowl hits to get high.

But you dont have to have even hit a bong before to know that it takes fewer hits from a bong to get the same high than from an unfiltered handpipe.

I didnt mean any offense with my prejudices. However, it does say in the article that the LONGER you smoke marijuana, the FEWER respiratory illnesses the experimental group had.

So if you get fewer respiratory illnesses from smoking weed in the long run, it doesnt matter if the bong is statistically 30% "weaker" than a handpipe.

I will keep taking bong hits lol.

P.S. Coelho I am also obtaining my B.S. in Physics along with the Masters in abotu a year and a half. Its nice to know there are fellow stoners out there who are into physics like me.

Peace!

:bonghit:

I'll still take a bong over anything else any day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 420_24/7

maybe... use warm water?

---

Bingo.

thc vaporizes above a certain point, and will recondense below (think of boiling water and steam) so the colder your water is the more THC its sucking out.

so maybe norml was using super cold water? maybe had they used water at say, 70*celcius, then the results would have been different?

the test, as much as id love to believe otheriwse, seems done really fuckin poorly. just the fact that they only cite two scientific sources and whatnot is pretty depressing, and the fact that they didnt take something like water tempurature into account, especially with a material that is known to vaporise and recondense from tempurature change, seems like a BIG oversight on their part. Especially when some group of stoners on the internet can find flaws in their test.

as much as id like to believe in NORML as a legit organisation, this is kind of embarassing, and will definately make me think twice about citing information from NORML conducted tests when im in a debate.

drink the bong water i heard it can get you stoned lmao