• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion


    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

Bong or Joint - which is better for you?

phase_dancer

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Mar 12, 2001
Messages
6,179
I've always believed there is merit to filtering smoke through a water filled pipe, but recently I have commented on the ability of bongs to transmit disease. While sharing bongs will always carry such risks, there has been quite a bit of convincing research done on the benefits of using water filtration. It's nothing new, but it may settle or even raise some arguments about which is better/worse for your health.



Effects of water filtration on marijuana smoke: a literature review.


Nicholas V. Cozzi, Ph.D.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A drug derived from marijuana, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), formulated in sesame oil and encapsulated in soft gelatin capsules (Marinol(R); Roxane), is currently available as a prescription drug for the treatment of two diseases or conditions. It is indicated for the treatment of nausea and vomiting associated with cancer chemotherapy, and for the AIDS wasting syndrome.

The marijuana plant in smokeable form is available to ten patients in the United States for disorders such as glaucoma, spasticity, and the wasting syndrome. Each of these drug delivery systems, oral capsules and smokeable plant, has advantages and disadvantages, and each may be appropriate in particular circumstances. However, a drug delivery system that combines the rapid and reliable onset and ability to easily titrate an ingested dose (such as occurs by smoking marijuana cigarettes) with the least health risk (such as occurs by oral ingestion of capsules) would also be desirable. The use of water-filtered marijuana smoke, as produced by a water pipe, is one little-explored alternative. This article reviews some of the scientific work that has been done regarding the effects of water filtration on the composition and effects of marijuana and tobacco smoke.

While most of the research on water filtration has focused on tobacco smoke, the work with marijuana smoke has revealed that, except for their respective psychoactive components (nicotine and cannabinoids), both smokes share many common constituents and physical properties. Many of the results obtained from studies of tobacco smoke are applicable to marijuana smoke.

In the late 1970's, a group based at the University of Athens Medical School (Greece) conducted a series of chemical and pharmacological studies on marijuana and tobacco smoke.1-4 These scientists tested smoke that had been filtered through a water pipe and also tested the water itself, which contained both soluble and insoluble compounds. Chemical analysis revealed many different compounds in the smoke and in the water, as expected from the combustion of plant materials.

The water did trap some THC, as well as other psychoactive compounds, however, most of the THC present in the marijuana passed through the water pipe unchanged. Pharmacological tests (in mice) revealed that some of the water-trapped marijuana compounds were responsible for producing catatonia and for suppressing spontaneous motor activity. In contrast, the water-filtered smoke itself did not affect spontaneous motor activity and did not induce catatonia, though it was richer in THC. These results indicate that water filtration removes some behaviorally active compounds in preference to others; this may be important when comparing the therapeutic effects of whole marijuana smoke to water-filtered smoke.

Research has shown that water filtration reduces both the amount of particulate matter and the number and quantity of toxic substances in the smoke that passes through it. In a 1963 study by Hoffman et al.,5 the water pipe was found to retain 90% of the phenol and 50% of the particulate matter and benzo-a-pyrene of the original tobacco smoke. In another study,6 tobacco smoke components that were passed through a water pipe showed only a minor hyperplasic reaction and no sebaceous gland destruction when they were painted onto mouse skin. (The application of substances to mouse skin to assess carcinogenic potential is a classic toxicological test; the induction of abnormal cell proliferation [hyperplasia] is a red flag.)

In contrast, tobacco smoke condensate that was not water-filtered induced strong hyperplasia and complete sebaceous gland destruction when applied to mouse skin in the same concentration. Salem and Sami,7 also using the mouse skin test, showed that there was a significant reduction of carcinogenic potential in water-filtered smoke compared to the water remaining in the pipe i.e., the water-trapped material was more carcinogenic than the smoke that passed through it. Indeed, when analyzed by thin layer chromatography, two carcinogenic agents were identified in the water itself, while only one was identified in the water filtered smoke. Therefore, water filtration removes at least two known carcinogens that would normally be found in the smoke.

Recently, Dr. Gary Huber at the University of Texas and colleagues from Harvard's School of Public Health conducted a cellular toxicity study of marijuana and tobacco smoke.8 This research group showed that passing marijuana or tobacco smoke through water, or even exposing the smoke to a wetted surface of about 48 square inches, effectively removed substances (acrolein and acetaldehyde) which are toxic to alveolar macrophages.

Alveolar macrophages are one of the major defense cells of the lung and are an important component of the immune system. When the macrophages were exposed to smoke that was not water filtered, there was a marked impairment of their capacity to kill bacteria. When the smoke was water-filtered, however, there was no reduction in the bactericidal ability of the macrophages, suggesting that marijuana smoke that has been passed through sufficient water will have less impact on the immune system than marijuana smoke that has not been water-filtered. This intriguing finding would be of particular importance when treating patients with the AIDS wasting syndrome.

The laboratory results discussed above parallel what is known from studying human tobacco-smoking populations. Thus, there is substantial epidemiological evidence that among tobacco smokers, those who smoke through a water pipe have a much lower incidence of carcinoma than those who smoke cigarettes or smoke a "regular" pipe or cigars.6,7,9,10

In summary, it appears that water filtration can be effective in removing components from marijuana smoke that are known toxicants, while allowing the THC to pass through relatively intact. The effectiveness of toxicant removal is related to the smoke's water contact area. Specially designed water pipes, incorporating particulate filters and gas dispersion frits would likely be most effective in this regard; the gas dispersion frit serves to break up the smoke into very fine bubbles, thereby increasing its water contact area. While individuals vary greatly in their smoking technique, state of health, dosing regimen, and so on, it seems that many patients could benefit from the use of water pipes to deliver THC. This would allow patients to titrate their dose easily while reducing the health hazard associated with smoke.
.

[colour added for emphasis. p_d]

Full article including references here
 
Last edited:
=D dhwwwooo...shhhhhlllurp.....um, does that mean i should attach the filter from the kitchen sink tap onto the stem below the waterline for better filtration and more Jah-some i-ration?
#:^)

keep those moose-lipped joints to youself, thankya kindly
 
Cheers!

This is damn interesting, and very good news as far as I'm concerned. I'd always assumed that while water pipe filtered smoke would be just as carcinogenic and toxic, only more palatable to consume. Its a fucking bonus that it would seem that its now proven to be less toxic and carcinogenic.

Big ups to phase_dancer for finding this one! :)

-plaz out-
 
I should also mention where I found this.

I'm often at Rhodiums site checking chemistry refs., but I rarely visit the excellent pharmacology site files and links. Quite a few updates since I last had a good look.

http://www.rhodium.ws/pharmacology/index.html

Although not perhaps updated as often as the chem pages, you'll find most of the important MDMA related links and other very intersting things from this one place, and you can be fairly sure of its authenticity as Rhodium's attention to detail is rarely matched.


Hats off again chief!
 
On the issue of marijuana and health risks, see this post for a comparison of marijuana and cigarette constituents. (not entirely on topic, but a question that people ask from time to time...)
 
Fuck! I knew there were some components of marijuana smoke which made it at least as toxic as tobacco smoke but some of the WORST compounds are in much higher concentrations in dope 8o

Acetaldehyde and acrolein in the gas phase and benzoanthracene and benzopyrene in the particulate phase are REALLY toxic compounds and they are present in marijuana in higher concentrations. 8(

Without seeing the date of the publication, I would also suspect if it's over 10-15 years, that these tests were probably done using dope with way less tarry resins than current varieties. Therefore it could be presumed the amounts stated may only be conservative estimates when applied to some hydro strains.


An interesting observation. Marijuana is noted to produce more ammonia, which would undoubtedly play a part in the tobacco rush when the two are smoked together as ammonia accelerates absorption of nicotine
 
Sort of off topic

Sort of off the topic but I can't handle smoke I cough my lungs up. What I love using is an evaperator and if heading out I will take a mull muffin or similar but love the evaperator.
 
Good find, phase_dancer. One more for the bongs.

Regarding that table comparing tobacco and marijuana smoke, as Oopz mentioned in her (her right?) post, a marijuana smoker will generally consume far less per dose than a tobacco smoker. The average cigarette, used in the experiments to determine the results of that table, are 1g, and that's a lot of weed to smoke in one session. Just wanted to clarify that for people who might otherwise be ignorant.

I take it that it doesn't really matter how dirty the bong water is, the effect will be the same? What about water temperature, would that alter the effectiveness at all? I also wonder how big the water pipes they used were. I've seen bongs so small, you'd question whether the water does anything at all, and i've heard of 6ft "party bongs", so i'm curious.
 
Such a shame that smoking bongs tends to mangle me completly. I prefer the more social aspect of sharing a joint as opposed to simply the physical effects of it which tend to be more intense through bong use.

At least I don't smoke cigarettes normally (hey, I can justify it however I want!)...
 
EJ said:
I take it that it doesn't really matter how dirty the bong water is, the effect will be the same? What about water temperature, would that alter the effectiveness at all? I also wonder how big the water pipes they used were. I've seen bongs so small, you'd question whether the water does anything at all, and i've heard of 6ft "party bongs", so i'm curious.
The dirtier the water, the more crap dissolved in it, as it approaches saturation, its effectiveness would have to decrease. Warm water would be much better at dissolving shit too.

And remember folks, coughs can spread through bongs, so if you don't clean it regularly and you have heaps of people sucking on it ;) it's going to be far from healthy.

Quitting pot (I only smoked bongs) did wonders for my lungs. I havent had a chest infection for years, and they aren't the pissweak sacks of shit they once were.

...now if only I could quit ciggies too....
 
^Thanks, that makes sense.

Pleo: I've never understood how smoking joints are any more social than smoking bongs, unless you think drinking is less social than smoking joints. Same shit to me. We generally sit around talking, then have a cone inbetween, what's the difference? I guess it's in the execution.

Oh, and maybe just go a bit easier on the bongs if they get you too ripped. A lot of people think you have to smoke the entire cone in one hit, or suffocate yourself, just be comfortable and toke at it at your own pace. Or maybe you're just inhaling a whole lot more smoke through a bong as opposed to a joint without noticing, because they're so much more efficient. Of course, some people just prefer joints, to each his own.
 
It's partly to do with the impromptu nature of a joint - someone might whip one out and you'll find yourself in a circle passing it around. It's also a lot easier to do discreetly (at a glance it could well just be a normal cigarette) while smoking a bong is pretty obvious. This increases the amount of situations where partaking in a bit of a puff is possible.

But yeah, it's mainly just a personal preference - done both, like joints better. :)
 
Packers rites....

Great find phase!!! :)

"Puff.. Puff.. Give
Puff..Puff.. Give... Cmon on man ya fuckin up tha rotation!" =D

Back on topic of the shared bong, never let to many share yours cause it is a major way of spreading germs! Too many times have i seen a communal bong pass a cold or flu around a house. Even nastier, you can contract hep B via sharing a bong with the wrong person...hence me NEVER using a communal bong with people i don't know.

Some say that joints are the more social way to smoke at parties, etc, it's much of a muchness to me, but i will say that i feel it is the least conspicuous way to smoke. Having said that, i've never been a fan of joints really...some dopey bastard in the rotation always ends up making the end soggy and impossible to toke on... ;)

S
 
Good article, thanks phase_dancer :) Very interesting.

My personal preference has always been the bong, ever since I was a kid - our bong is about 13 years old now, it's like part of the family ;) hehe - it's practical for my needs, as I live in a non-smoking house. With a bong I can blow the smoke out of a window and not stink up the place too much.

I also prefer bongs because you can regulate the dose very easily, it uses less choof, takes very little effort to prepare a dose, and if you mix with tobacco you get a really decent nicotine rush from a single lungful. Plus, you never run out of papers...

BigTrancer :)
 
Starts with 'B'... rhymes with 'fuck it'...

Nothin' beats the bucket!
 
^^^^^^^^ Buckets rule if you can have a bucket just sitting around the place, usually they are just a pain in the ass, and some stoner tool always some how manages to spill it.

Buckets don't have filtration tho :)



so the ultimate bong would be to have the down pipe connected to something like a bubble wand from a fish tank in the bottom of the chamber which breaks the smoke into tiny bubbles, the bubbles flow through a litre of water up the tube through a filter into your mouth.

heh
 
^^^ No, the ultimate bong would have to be The Deathstar
/Imperial march plays in the background

Me and a couple of friends tried to make it once in year 8, we were missing the 'C2' valve though, and we couldnt afford/steal one by the time the shops shut on that faithful day. Into the cupboard it went, never to be seen again. We were stoners, we didn't remeber these things.
We were close, so close my friend you could taste it.
But no, life doesn't work that way.

If anyone ever gets this thing going, please post pics, I don't smoke anymore but until I see one in action, my life will remain, sadly, incomplete.

Oh Deathstar, why did you forsake me so? :(
 
I rigged up a joint smoking device using my air pump from my 6ft fish tanks.

The pump, which is basically a small box that has 2 long thin flexible tubes coming out of it sits on the table. In one end goes the end of a joint. A big joint. With no tobacco and filtered with an ultra slim filter - this ensures a high degree of standardization and fits perfectly in end of the tube.

The other end goes in my mouth.

The best thing about it is the air is continually drawn through, all be it slowly, but doesn't allow it to just burn away. When your done toking you just put your finger over the end to stop the smoke escaping. You barely have to breathe. Just light it, turn on the pump, lie back and let it fill your lungs. Gold.

When i'm not doing this, i'm sucking down cones from my double chambered reinforced pyrex waterfall bong. Or eating big trancer's cookies, if i want to be really high.
 
I'm also wondering if anyone has ever made the Death Bong. And this is how you use it...

1. Light up.
2. Start smoking.
3. Close the valve (this cuts off all incoming air).
4. YANK the cord attached to the plastic aerosol top.
This causes a ton of smoke to go into your lungs instantly.
5. Pass out.
 
Top