Maximizing Cannabis Smoke Efficiency

[Spixii]

So, I realized something interesting.

Your lungs are basically bags hanging in your chest. Even though the alveoli are positioned and grouped to maximize surface area for efficient FAE, when you inhale there is what is called "dead space" in the center of your lungs. This is basically stagnant air that is not taking part in gas exchange. So when you take a hit of weed, there is smoke in your lungs that cannot transfer its THC across the blood-air barrier. This is part of why the concept of "ghosting" someone else's hit actually works. The smoke that you exhale still contains a considerable amount of THC.

I was thinking that there must be a way to disturb the air in your lungs so that the smoke in the "dead space" would come into contact with your alveoli and transfer THC into your body. So I came up with the idea to exhale a small volume of smoke, then inhale again, and repeat until all smoke is exhaled. By doing this, the smoke in your lungs is basically stirred, so that you can absorb more THC.

In theory, this should work, and in my personal experience is very effective. I can smoke quite a bit less to achieve the same level of high.

I am curious as to whether anyone has tried before. I haven't done any research, so I'm not sure.

-Spixii

 

[Egzoset]

Salutations Spixii,

...there must be a way to disturb the air in your lungs so that the smoke in the "dead space" would come into contact with your alveoli and transfer THC into your body. So I came up with the idea to exhale a small volume of smoke, then inhale again, and repeat until all smoke is exhaled. By doing this, the smoke in your lungs is basically stirred, so that you can absorb more THC.

This appears to correspond to an exercise i'm trying to evaluate myself.

I am curious as to whether anyone has tried before.

There's an easy enough method to maximize your intake, simply stop smoking and begin vaporizing instead: as you may know, combustion destroys a significant amount of the noble molecules...

 

[Spixii]

There's an easy enough method to maximize your intake, simply stop smoking and begin vaporizing instead: as you may know, combustion destroys a significant amount of the noble molecules...

I know, but I like my glass pieces too much. And the same concept would apply to vaporization as well.

 

[FnX]

I really don't think it's too healthy to try and maximize the absorption of smoke, it has some really bad stuff in it you don't want to stick in your lungs with maximum efficiency IMO. With vaporizers it's a different story though, the best technique I came up with was to inhale extremely slowly from a bag of not too condensed vapor to about half the capacity of my lungs, then inhale pure air for the rest of my lung capacity, again very slow. I can keep inhaling for well over a minute if I try to, but that's a bit of an overkill already I think. Then just a slow exhale and it seems like there's nothing visible coming out leading me to believe I've essentially absorbed almost all of it. No need to hold breath or anything, just make sure you get enough oxygen and learn how your own lungs work and what their limits are.

 

[Spixii]

I really don't think it's too healthy to try and maximize the absorption of smoke, it has some really bad stuff in it you don't want to stick in your lungs with maximum efficiency IMO. With vaporizers it's a different story though, the best technique I came up with was to inhale extremely slowly from a bag of not too condensed vapor to about half the capacity of my lungs, then inhale pure air for the rest of my lung capacity, again very slow. I can keep inhaling for well over a minute if I try to, but that's a bit of an overkill already I think. Then just a slow exhale and it seems like there's nothing visible coming out leading me to believe I've essentially absorbed almost all of it. No need to hold breath or anything, just make sure you get enough oxygen and learn how your own lungs work and what their limits are.

I don't believe visible vapor has anything to do with the THC present in the smoke/vapor you inhale. That would be larger particulate matter (I think). When you hold in a hit of smoke till nothing visible is exhaled, it is because the larger molecular structures in the smoke have settled in your lungs. Although what you do would still have the same effect of constantly moving air across the alveoli.

 

[Mysterie]

how freaking poor are you?

when you exhale there is a really negligible (3% maybe i cant remember) amount of THC left in the smoke

this is why only dumbasses hotbox cars, it doesn't get you higher but you have less oxygen to breath

 

[Jibult]

this is why only dumbasses hotbox cars, it doesn't get you higher but you have less oxygen to breath

Does this statement take into account that a substantial amount of the smoke in a hotboxed vehicle or room escaped into the air directly from the source, without being inhaled first? If it doesn't, you calling others' dumbasses is a bit like the pot calling the kettle black here. I mean, I can think of several reasons not to hotbox the car you're driving, but none of them include "Because there's less than like 3% THC in the smoke."

 

[Spixii]

how freaking poor are you?

when you exhale there is a really negligible (3% maybe i cant remember) amount of THC left in the smoke

this is why only dumbasses hotbox cars, it doesn't get you higher but you have less oxygen to breath

Haha, you are totally wrong. The dead space in a person's air pathways averages about 33% in a healthy male. That is 33% of smoke that you are not absorbing THC from, not to mention that alveoli don't transfer 100% of any chemicals you inhale. So even if you could absorb THC from 100% of the smoke in your lungs, you wouldn't absorb 100% of the THC. Or 97% either, I would venture a guess.

And on the note of hotboxing cars, they aren't air tight. Within a car, FAE occurs with the outside air no matter what. So if you hotbox a car, you aren't reducing the oxygen concentration in the air whatsoever. And even if the concentration of oxygen in the air DID decrease some, the human body only absorbs 20% of the oxygen you inhale, so there would still be plenty. Know your stuff before you comment.

 

[Egzoset]

Hi again,

...I like my glass pieces...

No problem, i could suggest you to search for Vitolo on YouTube (*) and pick his record with a pristine Sherlock Holmes-style pipe made only of glass and inert sintered material (used for heat diffusion, similar to "Health Stones" i believe). It's got an excellent reputation and that's an experience i'd describe as mid-way between smoking and vaporizing, keeping in mind that this particular pipe design is 100 % about vaporisation, nonetheless. I'm refering to a type of ritual implying fire, e.g. intense power and temperature which once tamed down provide a rich session hardly reproducible with a table device unless compensating for the cannabic vapour's dryness with a water accessory, usually made of glass...

With vaporizers it's a different story...

I share this opinion as well. More smoke would make no sense to me as a cannabis consumer, even less if i consider that would be sacrilege to burn cannabis!!







*

NSFW:

Vitolo on YouTube

 

[Mysterie]

Haha, you are totally wrong. The dead space in a person's air pathways averages about 33% in a healthy male. That is 33% of smoke that you are not absorbing THC from, not to mention that alveoli don't transfer 100% of any chemicals you inhale. So even if you could absorb THC from 100% of the smoke in your lungs, you wouldn't absorb 100% of the THC.

And on the note of hotboxing cars, they aren't air tight. Within a car, FAE occurs with the outside air no matter what. So if you hotbox a car, you aren't reducing the oxygen concentration in the air whatsoever. And even if the concentration of oxygen in the air DID decrease some, the human body only absorbs 20% of the oxygen you inhale, so there would still be plenty. Know your stuff before you comment.

i gotta spew shit to see what colours it turns once in a while

if i didnt make that post i would have kept at laughing and pointing at people hotboxing cars, ya dig?

also what do you make of this "In under 10 seconds you absorb over 90% of the THC that you can absorb without exhaling and inhaling again. Your lungs stop absorbing it after a point. There is still THC in the smoke you exhale; you can't can't really absorb anymore after around 5 seconds." its not from a study but a reliable source

Does this statement take into account that a substantial amount of the smoke in a hotboxed vehicle or room escaped into the air directly from the source, without being inhaled first? If it doesn't, you calling others' dumbasses is a bit like the pot calling the kettle black here. I mean, I can think of several reasons not to hotbox the car you're driving, but none of them include "Because there's less than like 3% THC in the smoke."

i guess i didnt think about that, i was mostly thinking about the lack of fresh air etc making it an unpleasant experience etc

 

[Spixii]

i gotta spew shit to see what colours it turns once in a while

if i didnt make that post i would have kept at laughing and pointing at people hotboxing cars, ya dig?

I can understand that. Sorry if I came across rude.

also what do you make of this "In under 10 seconds you absorb over 90% of the THC that you can absorb without exhaling and inhaling again. Your lungs stop absorbing it after a point. There is still THC in the smoke you exhale; you can't can't really absorb anymore after around 5 seconds." its not from a study but a reliable source

I don't actually know the efficiency for THC transfer across the blood-air barrier, nor have I found any studies on it. It may very well be quite high. However, it is a fact that "dead space" volume in the lungs is around 1/3 of the total tidal volume, so even if 100% of the THC that comes into contact with alveoli is absorbed, you would still be expelling roughly 33% of the THC you inhaled (in reality it is anywhere from 25%-33% ).

As for reliable sources, I could only imagine that information such as the efficiency of THC transfer by the lungs could only come from a legitimate study. Otherwise, I would assume that any information is false and that your "reliable source" only heard the information from another "reliable source". Considering that there are no studies that I have found, I hypothesize that most of those statistics come from rumors. Just my 2¢.

Hi again,
No problem, i could suggest you to search for Vitolo on YouTube (*) and pick his record with a pristine Sherlock Holmes-style pipe made only of glass and inert sintered material (used for heat diffusion, similar to "Health Stones" i believe). It's got an excellent reputation and that's an experience i'd describe as mid-way between smoking and vaporizing, keeping in mind that this particular pipe design is 100 % about vaporisation, nonetheless. I'm refering to a type of ritual implying fire, e.g. intense power and temperature which once tamed down provide a rich session hardly reproducible with a table device unless compensating for the cannabic vapour's dryness with a water accessory, usually made of glass...

*

NSFW:

Vitolo on YouTube

Thanks. That looks really awesome. I might have to check it out.

 

[FnX]

I don't believe visible vapor has anything to do with the THC present in the smoke/vapor you inhale. That would be larger particulate matter (I think). When you hold in a hit of smoke till nothing visible is exhaled, it is because the larger molecular structures in the smoke have settled in your lungs. Although what you do would still have the same effect of constantly moving air across the alveoli.

I believe that THC itself is that "larger particulate matter" you're referring to. In a pure form, THC (and many of the other cannabinoids too) is a quite oily waxy substance, it can be in a more solid form, but when exposed to heat, it becomes more oily. I've tried applying all sort of filters on the mouthpiece of the vape and noticed that when I inhaled vapor through it, there was this brownish golden goo (kinda like BHO) left behind with all the actives and I felt extremely diminished effects if any at all. There certainly weren't any green plant particles or their discolored leftovers in it. There's all kinds of plant terpenoids and essential oils among the vapor too, some of which have various psychoactive or medicinal properties. So in a sense, you're putting this oily waxy substance in your lungs to be absorbed when you're inhaling THC.

Because of it's chemical and physical properties, lungs have quite a difficulty absorbing THC as far as I'm aware, it definitely isn't an invisible gas that easily passes through the cell membranes in your lungs or anything like that.

Try exhaling in some kind of see-through plastic bag for example and let the smoke/vapor settle there, you'll see that eventually the sides will be coated with this psychoactive tar like residue, as long as you exhale something visible. If you do this with smoke you will obviously get all sorts of combustion by products in there too. Vaporizer bags that have been extensively used can for example be boiled in fatty milk to make a cannabinoid hot chocolate drink, or soaked in acetone to make a potent extract, but you have to be sure that the bag doesn't dissolve in the acetone or you'll end up with an unusable mess.

 

[Egzoset]

Salutations FnX,

Vaporizer bags that have been extensively used can for example be...

...sprayed with 94 % concentrated alcohol mist!

At leat that's what i used to do...

This way the amount of solvant can be kept to a strict minimum while the "reclaimed" substance collects at the bottom, because of gravity.