The bong no good and waste of money.......EROWID facts

[Ars moriendi]

He's talking out his ass...

It took over a gram of pure thc injected into mice or rats to cause LD50

The human dose is usually 20mg per session on average and cooking can probably get you closer to 100+ but the stuff actuallly helps build a better immune system not harm your livers ability to process any sort of enzyme..

drinking while high mainly allows you to feel the poisoned feelings alcohol lays upon ya more so the prospect of upchucking sounds pretty good when that vile shit is eating ya up inside

You stand more chance fucking up your liver with drink alone.. MJ in contrast relaxes the body mind and has been shown to promote the 'rebooting' of malformed cells...IE types of cancer cells get and listen to normal healthy cell kill signals instead of reproducing

[infiniteawesome]

actually, yes, on further investigation, I have to say that ars is right about the whole alcohol in combination with cannabis section of my previous post.

I apologize, but my research is generally gotten mainly from books on the subject and erowid, and since the subject of cannabis is generally misinterpreted or laden with rumors, its hard to get a general consensus on the subject. This is particularly apparent with the supposed "increased safety" and "potency" issues that come with water pipes . . .

Once again, my apologies.

[Xenj]

THC is not water soluble.. I don't see how you can lose potency smoking with a bong. Anyway, bongs rock.

[InferiorWang]

because some THC becomes bonded to the particulate matter that gets filtered out.

A bong isn't really more efficient than a joint (iirc. it's been a while since I read it) but you get nice huge rips off of it. I still love my bong, even if it isn't as efficient as my bowl.

[Xenj]

That makes sense, quite unsure why I didn't think of that. I do get much higher off of a big bong rip (cool smoke=denser smoke=bigger hits.)

[Ars moriendi]

thermal transfer...kinda a building block of any design be it car or smoking device

why people don't catch on fast...I donno but its just a matter of hot stuff getting cold fast

its probably a double whammy because as you know a bubble has more surface space for its given size then a flat surface

add the inside of the bong the bubbles as they bubble (inside and out as i tbreaks letting the smoke hit even more cool or warm water

lotta surface space esp. with a diffuser so you stand to get higher off a joint even if its burning inbetween hits

It's still a solid hunk of mj swiss cheesed in a tube of paper... the resin collects but in a good way

You smoke more in a joint of the same gram weight because you're basically retaring the stuff with each hit

[da winksta]

first off, i saw alot of things wrong with that long post. but i dont really want to get into that.

i like bongs cus i can take many large hits, allowing me to get higher, with less of a headache (caused by harsh smoke)

but if i want to conserve weed, i use my bowl and take smaller hits, lightly burning the weed (trying not to destroy THC through combustion) then i use a flat lighter so i can put the side of it over the bowl. this traps the smoke in there, which puts out the cherry. then i suck whatever smoke remains in the pipe. and of coarse hold the smoke in for 5-7 seconds.

and IMO thats the most efficient way of smoking (other than i verry expensive high quality vap)

as for bongs filtering thc, i dont think its a big difference, but i do think a pipe is more efficient.

[UniXelation]

It's all a matter of opinion. Do you care more about a little bit of THC lost from the filtration or do you care more about being able to bigger, less harsh hits?

And dont even go into the health effects. Even if it was "less efficient" and "less healthy", does it even fuckin matter?

In my opinion bongs are the most efficient way of smoking weed, because it makes it the most pleasant, and that's what I care about. I can take huge rips and the high comes on stronger and i like to feel really, really high. Too bad I dont have any weed.

[fievelbud]

Not to beat a dead horse or bring this thread back up, but...... I'm new and just getting to this thread. First, I read the thread and all the arguments. Then, I went and read the results of the actual study performed. One key statement in the study is as follows:

The study focused on two key components of the smoke: (1) total solid particulates, or tars, which are noxious waste by-products of burning leaf like those from tobacco; and (2) cannabinoids, the chemicals distinctive to marijuana, including its major psychoactive ingredient, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), and its two commonest chemical relatives, cannabinol (CBN) and cannabidiol (CBD), which are only weakly psychoactive but may have medical benefits.

Then these:

"Surprisingly, the unfiltered joint outperformed all devices except the vaporizers, with a ratio of about 1 part cannabinoids to 13 parts tar.

Disappointingly, waterpipes performed uniformly worse than the unfiltered joint. The least bad waterpipe, the bong, produced 30% more tar per cannabinoids than the unfiltered joint.

This suggests that water filtration is actually counterproductive, apparently because water tends to absorb THC more readily than noxious tars. Like the waterpipes, the cigarette filter also performed worse than the unfiltered joint, by about 30%. Researchers speculate this is because cannabinoids are exceptionally sticky and adhere to other solids. Hence, any filtration system that picks up particulates is likely also to screen out cannabinoids.

This suggests that water filtration is actually counterproductive, apparently because water tends to absorb THC more readily than noxious tars. Like the waterpipes, the cigarette filter also performed worse than the unfiltered joint, by about 30%. Researchers speculate this is because cannabinoids are exceptionally sticky and adhere to other solids. Hence, any filtration system that picks up particulates is likely also to screen out cannabinoids."

Then as the study goes on they talk about vaporizers. The THC content of vaporizers was actually less than that of a joint. They tested 2 types of vaporizer, one had no water and the other had water. Now, from all the hoopla of this thread and study you would think the non water worked better. But, confusingly enough, even to them, the water one worked better even tho they believed, not tested, that it would work better without the water >.>

So, If you are so concerned about the minimal loss of THC and what not through your bong, smoke joints only or use a vaporizer with water since those are the 2 highest THC yielding methods.

I personally love my bong. But here's 2 more quotes that I liked from the study.

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.

In the meantime, the easiest way for most smokers to avoid harmful smoke toxins may be simply to smoke stronger marijuana.

I love that last one. and here's the link to the study: http://www.maps.org/news-letters/v06n3/06359mj1.html

Almost forgot this quote:

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.

[J Dylan]

Originally Posted by Wykid

this study was done in 95....show me a more recent one....and remember, studies DO have flaws.

agreed. And who cares what any study says? So maybe some THC molecules will get stripped in the cooling process, but most of us here at GC can agree that no matter what a study tells us is bad about bongs, we get stoned as fuck with them.

I have never felt I was wasting weed in ANY way with my bongs. I've smoked in every way there is to smoke. Vap, bong, pipe, bub, Gbong, cooking, etc.

Each method of consumption gives a different high, though. They aren't really all that comparable, in my opinion. But I know for a fact that a Gbong or a bong gets me the highest. If I performed an experiment in which I smoked .5g out of each of the above methods, BONG would be the winner. Guaranteed. That's just my opinion though, from first hand experience. No study can tell me that my bongs don't do what they obviously do for me.

But the bottom line here is, there's really nothing that can measure how fucked up you are. Its just you. You decide for yourself how you feel, no study can prove that you're less or more stoned than you think you are... it's all about you. Everyone's different, but I stand by my bong.

[pEtEy_p_ct]

yo are you takin what some toker-hatin website has to say seriously? ive never ripped a pipe that can even compare to a bong (although they are much more convienient at times).

[punkie]

bongs 0wn j00!

[punkie]

Originally Posted by pEtEy_p_ct

yo are you takin what some toker-hatin website has to say seriously? ive never ripped a pipe that can even compare to a bong (although they are much more convienient at times).

you're not serious, right? erowig.org is the best website out there for any research you want to do on most drugs. It's a huge resource that includes both sides of an argument for/against drug use. It's up to you to make your own choice, and that's the whole point of the site: to be used a a resource so you can know and understand your shit.

peace man.

[pEtEy_p_ct]

Originally Posted by punkie

you're not serious, right? erowig.org is the best website out there for any research you want to do on most drugs. It's a huge resource that includes both sides of an argument for/against drug use. It's up to you to make your own choice, and that's the whole point of the site: to be used a a resource so you can know and understand your shit.

peace man.

doesnt change the fact that bongs hit harder, thats not just some pleseabo or however you spell it.

[Ars moriendi]

^ placebo I donno why but I've always remembered this by thinking place bo

makes no sense but it works