Vaporizer Review

[RIP ODB]

I just got my Vaporwarez vapor cannon in the mail today.

To those of you who haven't gotten the chance to vaporize, you should. It's a real pleasant tasting "smoke" and nice stone. Different, less lazy kind of high.

This thing works great, easy to set up, easy to use, and doesn't even look like paraphenalia (sp?) of any kind. They even threw in a free grinder.

So here I am, zooted and one happy individual. I know it's probably not as good as the Volcano (never used one) but it's still pretty damn cool.

If you are interested, check out vaporwarez.com.

thank you and good day. Also, here is a picture of Gary Dell'Abate.

RIP ODB Reviewed by RIP ODB on 11-30-2005. Vaporizer Review I just got my Vaporwarez vapor cannon in the mail today. To those of you who haven't gotten the chance to vaporize, you should. It's a real pleasant tasting "smoke" and nice stone. Different, less lazy kind of high. This thing works great, easy to set up, easy to use, and doesn't even look like paraphenalia (sp?) of any kind. They even threw in a free grinder. So here I am, zooted and one happy individual. I know it's probably not as good as the Volcano (never used one) but it's Rating: 5

[BlueCat00]

thanks RIP I want to get a smaller more portable vaporizer....

I have been looking. thanks for the review.

[beachguy in thongs]

Here's a vaporizer review:
http://www.maps.org/mmj/vaporizer.html

At the bottom, it explains the THC transfer rate. The vaporizer's transfer rates are less than 1/3 that of a portable water pipe, an unfiltered joint, and a bong. :stoned:

[tokosan]

would you say that using a vape is more efficient than, say, smoking bowls?

[BlueCat00]

thanks beachguy! Thats a big help!

[UIowaHawk17]

I have a little 40 buck one I bought a couple of months ago, its like a creeper high I guess in that it takes a bit for you to start feeling it(5-15 mins usually for me). I'm not really a fan of the taste, but it is great for use in dorms, apartments, ect. as it really doesn't smell. I still prefer smoking it, but a vaporizer certainly will get the job done and you use less bud than you normally would. But, the vaporizer more efficient compared to a pipe because you use less and it captures the THC mist in a bulb and you can just inhale at your leisure.

[RIP ODB]

would you say that using a vape is more efficient than, say, smoking bowls?

I would say so. I have vaporized 1/2 of what I'd normally load in my bong, and I'm probably higher.

And Beach Guy, did you get those facts from the old California NORML studies? Those are all old and only discuss the vaporizers they had like ten years ago.

[Reefer Rogue]

This is the Vape i got: http://shop.grasscity.com/shop/grass...ml?id=kdkqa9rR

The taste is to die for, the high is so clean. A great investment indeed.

[hihigh]

vaporwarez is a great vape...my friend has one in his dorm and we smoke from it a lot.


good buy man, when i have enough money ill get one eventually....it's just to tempting to spend it on weed though, lol.

[beachguy in thongs]

And Beach Guy, did you get those facts from the old California NORML studies? Those are all old and only discuss the vaporizers they had like ten years ago.

Sort of along those lines.
MAPS, in conjunction with California NORML, has been working for quite a few years to sponsor scientific research into the effects of vaporizers and waterpipes. We have conducted laboratory research testing the content of combusted and vaporized marijuana for cannabinoid and toxin levels but have been stalled since June 2003 waiting for NIDA to review a request to purchase 10 grams of its marijuana to continue our research.

We learned early on that waterpipes don't help filter out undesirable particulate matter, although waterpipes may help reduce certain water-soluble gases. In contrast, vaporizers do eliminate combustion products and address the Institute of Medicine's preference for non-smoking delivery systems for the medicinal use of marijuana. Furthermore, vaporizers are the only non-smoking delivery system that uses the marijuana plant, unlike marijuana extracts in spray, lozenge, drops, or pill form, and could conceivably be used in conjunction with material that patients grow themselves.

While the use of vaporizers in medical marijuana research is the most politically desirable route, since they don't involve smoking, we plan to include groups that smoke as well as vaporize marijuana in future studies. We would be surprised if there are significant differences in safety and efficacy for most patients and feel that this is an issue that needs to be resolved scientifically.

California's Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research (CMCR) approved Dr. Donald Abrams' Phase I vaporizer research protocol and grant application, amounting to slightly more than $137,000. The study will compare subjective effects, cannabinoid blood levels and carbon monoxide levels in exhaled breath in subjects on six different days, three days smoking 400 mgs of marijuana of either 1.7 % THC, 3.5% THC or 7% THC, and three days vaporizing 400 mgs of marijuana of either 1.7 % THC, 3.5% THC or 7% THC. This study will start enrolling subjects in Summer 2004.

On September 21 and 29, 2004, the first and second subjects were enrolled in Dr. Donald Abrams' FDA-approved study comparing subjective effects, cannabinoid blood levels and carbon monoxide levels in subjects who smoke marijuana or inhale the vapors of the same amount of marijuana from a vaporizer.

I guess that's why I post the links, so I have references.