Psychedelic Jay
Bluelighter
Well, how exactly does this tincture taste like?
It taste like you are chewing weed and drinking ___________(high proof alcohol of choice)
Well, how exactly does this tincture taste like?
It taste like you are chewing weed and drinking ___________(high proof alcohol of choice)
What happens to some of the THC when it's put inside of some water? How psychoactive is it then?
It doesn’t even come out of the weed...
You would be wasting it.
Correction: it has lots of fats to absorb THC...
You would have to drink a lot though...
Alcohol is better...
Yes, but why do some people drink cannabis tea if it's non water soluble, which also means that it's not psychoactive?
THC is not very water soluble...
THC is very soluble in ethanol...
How are you drinking it?
Glycerin tinctures.
And as a note you can somewhat easily make tinctures of marijuana in alcohol where you have to take 2-4 ml of the tincture to get fucked up. Which is well below the amount that will get you drunk.
THC is not very water soluble...
THC is very soluble in ethanol...
How are you drinking it?
Why exactly is THC very soluble in alcohol, but it's not in water?
ITT: Arguments, 10 cents.
THC is moderately soluble in hot water... enough to get a good psychoactive/anti-inflammatory effect after a few cups, but certainly not enough to get you super stoned. The Dutch government actually reccomends cannabis-in-hot-water tea because it prevents people getting panicky high.
Bhang or other oil-in-water emulsions are quite effective. So are glycerin tinctures... and THC can also be dispersed into honey, or sugars. There's lots of ways to consume THC without smoking or vapourisation.
You don't need hash or honey oil to produce a potent tincture. You can always just use high proof alcohol in the first place and concentrate it by evaporation...
Okay, I will do that very soon.
Anyways, cannabis smoke has been proven in some studies not to cause cancers at all. So why is there such a debate about this stuff?
Broken record... -_-
Because, those were inconclusive, no hard evidence... There is simply not enough time put into those studies. Plus, look at all the variables. With that much variation you can skew results off...
If in that time it causes pre-cancerous changes, what happens long term? I’m talking longer than 20 years longer...
Which variables was there in those studies?
Just like a lot of tobacco studies...
People were simply lying about the amounts they smoke. Which gave a wide range of results... From no signs of damage to Pre-cancerous lesions...
Other than lung cancer, which other respiratory-related health problems happen to marijuana smokers?