Are bongs/waterpipes counter-productive?

Are Waterpipes Counterproductive?

The study results are obviously discomforting to waterpipe enthusiasts, many of whom prefer the cooler, milder smoke they produce, and have naturally assumed it is also more healthful. Unfortunately, however, the study indicates that waterpipes may actually be counterproductive in increasing consumption of carcinogenic tars.

Nonetheless, it is still premature to judge that waterpipes are actually unhealthful, since they may filter out other, non-solid smoke toxins occurring in the gas phase of the smoke, which was not analyzed in the study. Noxious gases known to occur in marijuana smoke include hydrogen cyanide, which incapacitates the lung's defensive cilia; volatile phenols, which contribute to the harshness of the taste; aldehydes, which promote cancer; and carbon monoxide, a known risk factor in heart disease. Previous studies indicate that water filtration may be quite effective in absorbing some of these [Nicholas Cozzi, Effects of Water Filtration on Marijuana Smoke: A Literature Review, MAPS Newsletter, Vol. IV #2, 1993]. If so, waterpipes might still turn out to have net health benefits.

MAPS and California NORML are planning to undertake a second phase of the waterpipe study for the purpose of analyzing the gaseous phase of marijuana smoke.

In the meantime, the easiest way for most smokers to avoid harmful smoke toxins may be simply to smoke stronger marijuana. This strategy is apt to be more effective than any smoke filtration device. By simply replacing the low, 2.3% potency NIDA marijuana used in this study with high-quality 12%-sinsemilla, smokers could presumably reduce their tar intake by a factor of five while still achieving the same effect. Further improvements could be had by using pure THC or hash oil, which has been tested at potencies of 60%.

The notion that high-potency marijuana is less harmful directly contradicts official government propaganda, which maintains that marijuana has become more dangerous since the '60s due to increased potency. This claim appears to rest less on scientific evidence than on the desire to frighten the public. A careful analysis of government data by Dr. John Morgan has shown that the supposed increase in potency has been greatly exaggerated [American Marijuana Potency: Data Versus Conventional Wisdom, NORML Reports (1994)]. In any case, however, there is no good reason to presume that higher potency marijuana is more harmful, given the potential respiratory benefits of reduced smoke consumption. The hazards of excessive potency are purported to be an increased risk of acute overdose and greater susceptibility to dependency. However, both problems can be avoided if users adjust their dosage to potency. For most users, such hazards may well be outweighed by the benefits of reduced smoke consumption.

http://www.maps.org/mmj/vaporizer.html

I've read NORML studies that have concluded that a loss of THC does occur in water pipes. I believe hookahs turned up the most THC loss. I was surprised to see that joints actually yielded less of a loss of cannabinoids than bongs.

Regardless, you can't argue the power of the sheer volume of smoke that you get from an ice bong hit. In my world and yours. :p

BEACHGUY, you should look up something about vaporizers, there suppose to be the best way too smoke. And if so then people should promote them more. LOL Just a thought ;)

On the same token, I heard vaporizers also did surprisingly badly on the tests. I think it was on the same study. Not sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lateralus

I've read NORML studies that have concluded that a loss of THC does occur in water pipes. I believe hookahs turned up the most THC loss. I was surprised to see that joints actually yielded less of a loss of cannabinoids than bongs.

Regardless, you can't argue the power of the sheer volume of smoke that you get from an ice bong hit. In my world and yours. :p

---

how do you figure a joint would lose more cannabinoids than a bong? there's nothing to trap them, no water.


pipes and joints have to yield more than a bong, it's only logical.


and joints have paper added, so you're getting mroe than pot.


i like pipes and bongs :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stoner Shadow Wolf

how do you figure a joint would lose more cannabinoids than a bong? there's nothing to trap them, no water.


pipes and joints have to yield more than a bong, it's only logical.


and joints have paper added, so you're getting mroe than pot.


i like pipes and bongs :D

---

I don't figure that. I believed otherwise until I read the study.

Edit: Nevermind, I read it wrong. And so did you. :p

I said joints lose less THC. BUT, if you think about it, I don't see how it makes sense, since a joint is continually burning, and bongs tend to have less smoke escape the bowl.

ok, so i guess i was thinking too logically? lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by heavymetal101

BEACHGUY, you should look up something about vaporizers, there suppose to be the best way too smoke. And if so then people should promote them more. LOL Just a thought ;)

---

I've been posting shit about that all day.

HERE:

THC Transfer Rate

The MAPS-NORML study provides new information on the efficiency of different devices in delivering THC from marijuana to the user. Previous studies have shown that 60% - 80% of the THC burned in joints or waterpipes is lost in slipstream smoke, adhesion to the pipestem and bowl, pyrolysis, etc. [Mario Perez-Reyes, Marijuana Smoking: Factors that Influence the Bioavailability of Tetrahydrocannabinol, in C. Nora Chiang and Richard Hawks, ed., Research Findings on Smoking of Abused Substances, NIDA Research Monograph 99, 1990]. The percentage of total THC delivered to the user is called the THC transfer rate. The unfiltered joint scored surprisingly well in smoking efficiency, coming in second place with a transfer rate close to 20%. The portable waterpipe did slightly better, and the bong slightly worse. The other devices did notably worse. The vaporizers and electric waterpipe did especially poorly, with transfer rates less than one-third that of the top three devices. Thus, heavy smokers could literally be blowing most of their stash away with bad pipes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lateralus

I said joints lose less THC. BUT, if you think about it, I don't see how it makes sense, since a joint is continually burning, and bongs tend to have less smoke escape the bowl.

---

Unless a bong really does lose that much THC. I've only met a couple people who insist that methods of smoke consumption other than bongs get them higher.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lateralus

On the same token, I heard vaporizers also did surprisingly badly on the tests. I think it was on the same study. Not sure.

---

Well, the study is here, again, now!!!

see above

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lateralus

Unless a bong really does lose that much THC. I've only met a couple people who insist that methods of smoke consumption other than bongs get them higher.

---

It said that any filtration system will lose the potency of the active cannabinoids.

How does a vapouriser lose so much THC it just heats up the weed to the point when it realises the THC and then you breathe that in. I really dont understand because I use hardly any weed in mine and get royally stoned everytime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lateralus

I don't figure that. I believed otherwise until I read the study.

Edit: Nevermind, I read it wrong. And so did you. :p

I said joints lose less THC. BUT, if you think about it, I don't see how it makes sense, since a joint is continually burning, and bongs tend to have less smoke escape the bowl.

---

Hey, steamrollers go out as soon as you release the carb and suck in the smoke.
Except, a little bit, if you pack the bowl more than you actually need.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beachguy in thongs

I've been posting shit about that all day.

HERE:

THC Transfer Rate

The MAPS-NORML study provides new information on the efficiency of different devices in delivering THC from marijuana to the user. Previous studies have shown that 60% - 80% of the THC burned in joints or waterpipes is lost in slipstream smoke, adhesion to the pipestem and bowl, pyrolysis, etc. [Mario Perez-Reyes, Marijuana Smoking: Factors that Influence the Bioavailability of Tetrahydrocannabinol, in C. Nora Chiang and Richard Hawks, ed., Research Findings on Smoking of Abused Substances, NIDA Research Monograph 99, 1990]. The percentage of total THC delivered to the user is called the THC transfer rate. The unfiltered joint scored surprisingly well in smoking efficiency, coming in second place with a transfer rate close to 20%. The portable waterpipe did slightly better, and the bong slightly worse. The other devices did notably worse. The vaporizers and electric waterpipe did especially poorly, with transfer rates less than one-third that of the top three devices. Thus, heavy smokers could literally be blowing most of their stash away with bad pipes.

---

Well, I was almost right.

Hey, studies have the potential to be wrong, though. Let's hope to hear of more studies. :cool:

whaaaaat? vaproizers suck?!? since when???

Whoa, a lot happened while I was reading. ;x

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stoner Shadow Wolf

whaaaaat? vaproizers suck?!? since when???

---

Since they've figured out THC Transfer Rates.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lateralus

I don't figure that. I believed otherwise until I read the study.

Edit: Nevermind, I read it wrong. And so did you. :p

I said joints lose less THC. BUT, if you think about it, I don't see how it makes sense, since a joint is continually burning, and bongs tend to have less smoke escape the bowl.

---

hahaha good call :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lateralus

Whoa, a lot happened while I was reading. ;x

---

No shit, this is the craziest day since I've been here. A whopping four months.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beachguy in thongs

Since they've figured out THC Transfer Rates.

---

that cant be, unless THC is NOT, in fact, the high!


unless everyone who uses a vaporizor is just blowin' smoke when the ysay it gets them higher on less!

This sounds like bullshit more THC from vapouriser anytime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beachguy in thongs

Hey, steamrollers go out as soon as you release the carb and suck in the smoke.
Except, a little bit, if you pack the bowl more than you actually need.

---

Yeah, but you can do that with any smoking utensil. I pack onies in the bong a lot. Of course I got my trusty glass one-hitter, too.

So a hookah doesn't get you as high?? :eek: That's weird becuase we'll pack a bowl with about blunts worth of weed and smoke it in a hookah and we get stoned!!! A lot more higher than what we would have if we had 8 to 10 people smoking a blunt!!! Shit, I could swear a hookah gets me higher!!!

it doesnt make sense to me, that you could have no water in your bong (so it would be a pipe). and then when you add water, it somehow causes more tars?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stoner Shadow Wolf

that cant be, unless THC is NOT, in fact, the high!


unless everyone who uses a vaporizor is just blowin' smoke when the ysay it gets them higher on less!

---

The cannabinoids and their actions on the receptors are "the high".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lateralus

Yeah, but you can do that with any smoking utensil. I pack onies in the bong a lot. Of course I got my trusty glass one-hitter, too.

---

NO, you don't seem to understand.

It's the air-flow with the steamroller's. It equalizes everything so there's no air pushing the smoke out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NightProwler

it doesnt make sense to me, that you could have no water in your bong (so it would be a pipe). and then when you add water, it somehow causes more tars?

---

lol yeah that doesnt make a ton of sence really....


but it could be that when the smoke hits the water, the water has a sort of melding effect, perhaps morphing the particles together? meaning it's not smoke when you inhale, the particles grew whilst in the water...



hmm... now it makes sense :S crap...

This is getting too complicated for me at the moment. lol I need to check up on my reading! I'm fallen behind on this shit.

If I spent as much time studying Marijuana as I have studying this thread, the shit would be legal by now.

so why the fuck arent you spending that much time studying marijuana?!? :D

wow, this is the thread to be in!

When I go get my shit from my dealer he's so fucked up man, he gives me like 3 or more grams more!! :D and when I tell him he does he says he's meant too (and I know he didnt becuase he was "sideways" too many xanax bars) Then he'll give me even more and he'll take more off of the price. Great dealer huh!!?? :D My due has knocked off like $8 off whatever I buy. Thats some crazy deals

Sorry about gettin off your topic beachguy but I just wanted too say that!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stoner Shadow Wolf

so why the fuck arent you spending that much time studying marijuana?!? :D

---

I kind of meant, if I had as much power corresponding to the minutes I've spent on this thread, it'd be legal all over the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by heavymetal101

When I go get my shit from my dealer he's so fucked up man, he gives me like 3 or more grams more!! :D and when I tell him he does he says he's meant too (and I know he didnt becuase he was "sideways" too many xanax bars) Then he'll give me even more and he'll take more off of the price. Great dealer huh!!?? :D My due has knocked off like $8 off whatever I buy. Thats some crazy deals

Sorry about gettin off your topic beachguy but I just wanted too say that!

---

No, that's okay. My guy gave me an extra half-ounce for a few months.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beachguy in thongs

I kind of meant, if I had as much power corresponding to the minutes I've spent on this thread, it'd be legal all over the world.

---

haha makes more sense that way :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beachguy in thongs

NO, you don't seem to understand.

It's the air-flow with the steamroller's. It equalizes everything so there's no air pushing the smoke out.

---

I must be missing something.

I just ate 6 doughnuts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lateralus

I must be missing something.

---

Does this clear it up for you??? (lol) (lol w/shame)

ROFL!!! SHAME!!!


lmfao god... okay... hold on...



hahahahahahahahahaha


alright...


what is that pic supposed to be telling me/us? lol!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beachguy in thongs

Does this clear it up for you??? (lol) (lol w/shame)

---

Haha, very artistic way to illustrate (no pun intended) your point. I still don't see how a steamroller is supposed to somehow deliver more smoke to the lungs than say.. a one-hitter.