• Cannabis Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules

Which "legal smoking blends" have cannabinoids?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Simply glancing at the structure of JWH compounds tells me they're toxic crap. Big gangly hydrocarbons like that are toxic to humans by definition.

Additionally, there is a large body of clinical data documenting the toxicity of aspartame.

Yeah, but this is simply speculation... before we knew:

"Well, from the looks of these tests, JWH-018 seems to be pretty safe..."

http://www.synchronium.net/2009/02/21/jwh-018-toxicology/

... now we know.

Aside from all the cancer research:

http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?p=520822#post520822

http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v101/n6/abs/6605248a.html

http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...serid=10&md5=a3856676f52f83dacb4997e57c829176

http://mct.aacrjournals.org/content/early/2009/10/30/1535-7163.MCT-09-0448.abstract[

http://www.jleukbio.org/cgi/content/full/82/3/532

http://www.jci.org/articles/view/16116/version/1

http://www.cancer-therapy.org/CT6A/HTML/11._Fogli_&_Breschi,_103-116.html

http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v101/n6/abs/6605248a.html

http://mct.aacrjournals.org/content/8/11/3117.abstract

http://www.fasebj.org/cgi/reprint/17/3/529.pdf

http://www.fasebj.org/cgi/content/full/17/3/529

I'd be pretty confident in saying, it's pretty safe (vaporizing and oral consumption).
 
^Dude I'm short on time and energy so I didn't analyze them in depth, but a cursory review of those studies proves nothing regarding the toxicity of aminoalkylindole cannabinoids. You need a large body of comprehensive, long-term clinical studies specifically investigating mechanisms of toxicity before you can declare a compound to be safe.

The studies you posted are irrelevant. They are investigating the effects of these compounds on specific biochemical processes related to the treatment of cancer. Additionally, the "toxicological data" you posted is not, in any way, a legitimate or comprehensive analysis of the toxicity of indolic cannabinoids.

I don't care if you use them, I don't care if anyone else uses them-- whatever. But its straight-up criminal to assert that these compounds are "probably safe" when in reality we have nowhere near enough data to make that conclusion.
 
^Dude I'm short on time and energy so I didn't analyze them in depth, but a cursory review of those studies proves nothing regarding the toxicity of aminoalkylindole cannabinoids. You need a large body of comprehensive, long-term clinical studies specifically investigating mechanisms of toxicity before you can declare a compound to be safe.

The studies you posted are irrelevant. They are investigating the effects of these compounds on specific biochemical processes related to the treatment of cancer. Additionally, the "toxicological data" you posted is not, in any way, a legitimate or comprehensive analysis of the toxicity of indolic cannabinoids.

I don't care if you use them, I don't care if anyone else uses them-- whatever. But its straight-up criminal to assert that these compounds are "probably safe" when in reality we have nowhere near enough data to make that conclusion.

Wouldn't you say, this applies to the majority of substances? I mean, do we really have enough data on most drugs - whether natural or synthetic?

Point being, you'll never get enough actual research. If you want to be anal about it, yes, we don't have enough information to say it's factual. No one is saying it's definite. I'd say though, atm, it's at least a factoid that these JWH compounds and the like are relatively safe.

Do we still know all that much about MDMA? Do people still consume it, safely and remain healthy? Have people speculated it as being toxic? What about Cannabis smoke? People have debated this one for a while. It being carcinogenic. Those arguing, "All smoke is carcinogenic," then those saying, "Cannabis smoke is different." When the studies come out, the ultra-skeptics like yourself remain still on their view. Even if the results show they were wrong. example; the studies that prove Cannabis smoke is not nearly as dangerous as Tobacco smoke, and for the most part, still isn't carcinogenic (you still hear people say that Cannabis smoke is still carcinogenic, even pro-Cannabis people).

So if you're working with a limited amount of data on a certain compound/substance. Then you it comes down to your own conclusions, on what you read/studied. This is my opinion, develop go yours. Yours now though, is primarily based on chemistry...
 
Last edited:
You cannot know what you're taking, as the manufacturers refuse to publish that information and nobody has really tested them. When the FDA, Customs & Border Patrol, DEA, etc. have tested them they claim different cannabinoids each time.
Most of your comments of parinoia I would expect from some one living in Sarah Palins house
 
Question to Big Stroonz since you seem most knowledgable.

I got this Afghan Herbal incense resin that seems very potent, but their website says it contains no JWH-018. I've smoked Spice tropical and K2 summit. Any ideas? Can they say it doesn't containt JWH-018, and put other synth chems on it, cos i t has something in it, I know from the effects.

Thanks
 
Is it weird if I like smoking spice more than weed (depending on the type of blend) .... but beware of the "pricey" shit.... its got some sort of psychedelic which can induce "the fear" .... you cant even walk when it kicks in.

right now my favorite is Mad MOnkey Blueberry which I can get 20 grams for 7 bucks .. (or a gram for 1 dollar) ... cause all the spice is about to be banned in cali.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top