I Can't Get High - Why?

Not excatly sure, but there can be so many variables. Like you said it maybe tollerance, shit weed, not enough inhale.

 

Were they all in like the same time? If you space it out one or two hits aren't going to get you really high. Try it again without swapping pieces and weed and see how you feel.

 

Breathe it in.

 

Take at least 6-10 rips, make sure you inhale as much air as possible after inhaling the smoke, so that the smoke gets pushed to the back of your lungs. Wait like 5 to 7 seconds, then exhale slowly. If you don't get high off that, you need better weed.

 

You don't even need to hold it 5-7 seconds. After 2 seconds (the amount of time it takes to absorb most of the psychoactives in cannabis), you're only feeling dizzy from mild oxigen-deprivation.

To get used to inhaling, you can take a straw and suck up some fluid, except now you would inhale the fluid instead of swallowing it. That's all there is to it. Just think of the joint/bowl/bong as a straw and suck up some smoke in your mouth and then inhale it.

The first times I did get high, I was really disapointed. I thought cannabis would make me laugh crazily, think everything is funny and couldn't function anymore for 4 hours.
That's not entirely true; it's just a nice and chill effect. So don't expect too much of it, it'll only make that first high better.

Another tip: Try to spread the hits over a longer time. I get a much nicer high whenever I take the time to smoke a bowl instead of hitting it all in 1 minute. Just take a bag of weed, put on a Cheech and Chong movie and blaze away. If you don't feel anything, don't stop.

 

Good weed still does that to me even after smoking for years. After a T break and I obtain some dank, I get high and laugh crazily at random shit. I miss those highs.

 

Umm, so how come I can go 2 seconds without breathing and it doesn't make me dizzy? You're right, after 2 seconds he might technically have most of the psychoactives (depending on his heart rate) but that's only going to be around 75%. You really want to hold it in for 4-5 seconds so that you get like 95% of the THC. Holding it in for 2 seconds is like taking a .8 out of an 8th and just throwing it in the dirt.

How many times have you smoked?

 

No, I use science to back things up.

Breathhold duration and response to marijuana smoke

Marijuana smoking: effects of varying puff volume and breathhold duration.

Response to marijuana as a function of potency and breathhold duration.

You will absorb more cannabinoids up to the 10 second mark, but most of them will be absorbed almost immediately. Perhaps holding your hit for 3-5 seconds will net you some extra CNB, but if you are really worried about losing psychoactives, stop smoking the damn herb and start vaporizing, because you lose much more cannabinoids through pyrolysis and sidestream smoke.

Keep in mind that the amount of deposition of carcinogens is also growing when you hold your hit.

Combining these factors I come to the conclusion that it is best to hold your hit for a short amount of time; maybe 2-5 seconds.

More than the total amount of fucks I give about someones smoke-count.
Let's ask Darwin how many times he has evolved. Not one single time. Doesn't falsify his theory though, does it?

 

I don't think any person is immune. It took me 3 times to get high.... even though it was 15 years ago I still remember that. I'm not sure if I wasn't inhaling correctly or if it just took time for my body/brain to allow me to get high from bud..... but Just keep trying. Keep taking tokes until you get high!!! Make sure you are getting ALL the smoke entirely into your lungs and not just in your throat. Bong would be the best idea. Don't be afraid to take a big-ass hit and choke your balls off.

And someone said it only takes 2 seconds to get all the thc and other cannabinoids... but that is controversial... some say 3 seconds.... some say 5..... I usually hold in for around 3 seconds but who cares... as long as it all gets in your lungs and you keep toking until you get blazed, that's all that matters. btw I get higher quicker if I hold in my hits longer.... like 5 seconds +.

more carcinogens if you hold it in longer.... yes..... but less tokes to get where you want..... so it evens out. JUST SMOKE

 

You linked me to two .gov websites, and an article written by somebody who works for the Drug Abuse Research Center. Three biased ass links. Do you even realized you linked me to Government websites?

Holding your hit in past 2 seconds will not only net you extra CBN (not CNB) but THC and CBD as well. If I'm worried about losing psychoactives, vaping is one of the last things I'm going to do. You can make smokeable hash with all of the cannabinoids vapings leave behind. Also keep in mind that your lungs are constantly repairing themselves, you cough out those carcinogens. If you stop smoking, lung function will go back to normal (although it doesn't even change significantly in a daily toker).

Sorry, rather how long have you been smoking for?

 

Sorry, how stupid are you? I can't even comprehend the amount of fail present in your post.

The NCBI databases contain a shitload of information on genomes, genes, proteins, organisms, scientific studies, papers and books.

The PubMed database contains nearly all scientific studies and papers from the past fifty years and a growing number of studies done in the 1800s.

The studies and papers indexed in PubMed are often published in renowned scientific journals like Nature, Science, PLoS and much, much more. To get a place in one of these journals, your paper has to be peer-reviewed and will be analyzed by a commission from a journal. These scientific journals are not funded or controlled by the government. NCBI only takes the paper and puts it in its database (PubMed), just like Google does. You can even find the papers I mentioned with Google Scholar, another search engine that delivers scientific papers only.

The studies I showed you are peer-reviewed, checked by a jury and published in scientific journals. The researchers performed simple test basically everyone should be able to understand and their values and conclusions show I am right.

Apparently you have heard of the word carcinogen, but do not understand how they work at all. Besides, cells may be killed and DNA may be repaired when mutated, but it's also possible a cancerous cell is not killed or DNA is not repaired, which will result in a tumor. That's the actual danger of carcinogens. Keep that stuff out of your lungs as much as possible.

You child, do you still think this is about who was smoked the much weed? Bitch please, it's about the one that knows to deliver the right answer and knows how to back it up with evidence. Where are your credible sources?

ps. Would you believe my stuff if someone with a postcount of 6k+ would post this?

 

At least you can make smokeable hash from all the cannabinoids left behind. You will lose those cannabinoids with smoking through sidestream smoke and pyrolysis. Vaporizers like the Volcano deliver about the same level of THC compared to smoking devices (even a little bit more; significantly). Another link to back it up

I think with the ABV and the "smokeable hash" you can get alot more cannabinoids out of a gram of weed with vaporizers compared to smoking devices.

 

Keep trying man.

It can't be this difficult. haha

 

[quote name='"Candamile"']
Let's ask Darwin how many times he has evolved. Not one single time. Doesn't falsify his theory though, does it?[/quote]

Darwin ain't no Pokémon!

 

Ok, now that I have actually read the links you posted, the studies they did were completely ridiculous. The study done by the Drug Abuse Research Center had 8 subjects, LOL!!! On top of that, they had subjects hold the weed in for 0, 10, and 20 seconds? Well duh, I could fucking tell you that holding weed in for 10 seconds is stupid and a waste. I'm talking about the difference between 2 seconds and 5 seconds. It's also a bit hard to measure how "high" somebody is, even with things like heart rate and memory tests (there are only 8 subjects - who is to say one person's heart rate gets going fast when s/he smokes, while the other person's remains relatively constant? My friend's heart rate gets going faster when he smokes compared to me, so if I were in the 20 second group, and he were in the 0 second group, that would definitely fuck up the results). Honestly I can't take that study seriously because of the nature of it; 8 subjects, the intervals were way too large, and the way they measured the "high" was unreliable because people react differently to weed.

Once again, you have the same problem with the 2nd link. Not enough test subjects, the intervals were once again way too large at 0, 10, and 20 seconds, and the way they measure the "high" isn't reliable. Third link, once again the intervals are way too large, and they had 10 test subjects. What the hell is the point of doing random block testing if you have 10 subjects?

And the "tars" in weed are way less harmful than you think. Surgeon General Everett Cooper stated that at least 90% of tobacco smoking-related cancers are caused by the radioactive materials in the tobacco, not the tar that's in it. On top of that, there have been 0 cancers directly linked to marijuana. I don't think I need to go over the anti-tumor properties of marijuana, those are all over.

Your sources aren't credible, because they don't contain enough test subjects and the measurements were unreliable, while the variables were extreme. It's not about who has smoked the most weed, but I am going to lend a bit more credence to somebody who has been smoking for more than 6 months. Post count doesn't mean shit.

Not to mention that it's impossible to hold smoke in for 0 seconds. You literally can't hold smoke in for 0 seconds lol, it's gotta stay in your lungs for some amount of time. While the subjects (all 8 or 10 of them) were inhaling on the smoking device, they were also absorbing THC through their mouth, which would boost the psychoactive effects of the "0 second" test subjects (even though you can't hold your smoke in for 0 seconds). Your lungs are not the only part of your body that absorbs THC. Plus, when people inhale, some inhale the smoke all the way back into their lungs, while others don't. Peoples' different smoking methods that weren't controlled in these studies, even down to inhalation and exhalation, are going to mess with the final results.

I'll tell you what. Go find me a study with a respectable number of test subjects, and one that doesn't have unrealistic variables. If you have no differences between 0 second, 2 second, 4 second, and 6 second inhalations, then I'll believe you. Your studies do not lie obviously, but come on. 8 subjects? They measure the effects by heart rate and memory tests? That's some manipulation at the very least.

 

wow how about you both just calm down, both of you are right

 

what is marijuanas