Bongs Confirmed Counter-productive by NORML

[melodious fellow]

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

melodious fellow Reviewed by melodious fellow on 10-17-2007. Bongs Confirmed Counter-productive by NORML I am pissed. My last purchase was a nice new bong. i don't like bongs much, but i wanted to be healthy and get good, big hits. apparently, bongs are worse for the health than all other moethods except vaping. also, they waste THC because a good bit is lost in the water. this was all pointed out in a thread called "so i just got really bored and stuffed a cig full of weed" by Zad515 link to NORML study: </title> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;"> <style> Rating: 5

[420_24/7]

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?

[purplekush989]

another reason to smoke blunts.

[Beefer86]

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!

[delta_9_fools]

:bonghit:

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

[dankus maximus]

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.

[lildicedan]

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