Particulates and gasses from vaporisation

[bit_pattern]

Was going to post this in the cannabis forum but it seems to be populated mainly by teenage stoners, thought I might get an answer from some of the luminaries on this forum (p_d I'm looking at you!).

Can anyone tell me, or point me to the relevant literature, if there is any information on what other gasses and particulates are released from cannabis when heated up to 180 degrees C?

After using nothing but a vaporiser over the last month I am less than convinced it is as safe as it is made out to be, still gives me chest pain etc. I seem to recall the government banned e-cigarettes recently on the basis that there is no evidence to support claims that they are safer than normal cig's. So I'm starting to wonder if there really IS evidence to support the claim that vap's are safer than smoking.

 

[Sykik]

If this isn't answered by anyone soon bit_pattern I might send this over the advance drug discussion forum, but I'll let it linger for a bit longer.

 

[PsiloSubNaut]

I have wondered the same thing as i still get chest pain the day after vaping very pure cannabis oil

Could this be due to the heavy oil on the lungs?

 

[Sykik]

it all comes down to the different boiling points off all the different compounds in the weed/oil/hash..

everything below the temperature of the plate (say x) will boil (turn to gas/vaporise).

oil boiling points < x will boil

THC < x will boil

Bad stuff that might be > x wont boil.

You need to list the temps of the boiling points in the stuff your vaporising, and you want to set the temperaturer of the plate in the vaporiser to about 5 degrees above the boiling point of THC. Not that boiling point and pressure are intimately related.

 

[phase_dancer]

Ok, there's a lot out there on the pyrolysis of Cannabis (and tobacco for that matter) and the products produced. I posted something long ago on this. I'll see if I can find it again.

Now, while burning might produce a host more carcinogens and other chemicals, which are obviously bad for you, other health concerns could well apply to vaporisation as Psilo has mentioned. You are essentially breathing in a bunch of oils which are largely insoluble.

 

[phase_dancer]

Sykik makes a good point, however, there will probably be substances in the plant matter that will pyrolyze at temps under the vaporisation temp of THC. As with any pyrolysis there will be new substances formed, and probably further reactions between some of these substances. So, while vaporisation is not the complete answer, it's probably better for you than regular smoking (joint or bong).

 

[bit_pattern]

^^ Thats what I figured, checked the MAPS/Volcano(tm) paper, was hard to make heads or tails of, maybe talk to yolu in a few days about the technical jargon that I don't understand? too drunk now... But in the NY.

Thx all, but think I'm gonna have to not inhale anything, my lungs are pretty fucked, been smoking bongs since age 12, ice for a good few years, art least a year of daily use, and doing a gram in a night on weekends type shit.

 

[bit_pattern]

Ok, there's a lot out there on the pyrolysis of Cannabis (and tobacco for that matter) and the products produced. I posted something long ago on this. I'll see if I can find it again.

If you could be much appreciated, might have to quiz you on more technical details that go over my head but would be thankful, if nothing else.

 

[Roger&Me]

I'm sure that vaporization is a bit bad for you, but when compared to smoking there's really no question. I feel absurdly better since I stopped smoking and started vaporizing.

 

[bit_pattern]

^^ Yeh no doubt, my only concern is the fact I have damaged my lungs quite extensively, I think I will have to stop vaping and smoking.

Thanks for the replies, I have found a few papers myself, will post again on this subject when I have the time after the holidays, but I have some questions about some of the more technical descriptions in the paper, maybe pd or the other luminaries here might be able to help me interpret.

 

[static_mind]

There are soooo many different chemicals that vapourise in weed and then even more that change when burnt.

Id put my money on the non burned being better. But in effect your lungs don't really like having any crap put on them period. Maybe eat weed for a while like 2 weeks and see how you go?

 

[De quincy]

Vaporised ‘street’ cannabis: Less risky? A comment on Bloor, Wang, Španel, and Smith (2008)
Dr Anthony Arcuri

Bloor et al. (2008) examined the presence of chemical compounds in cannabis cigarette smoke and in cannabis vaporized by two types of electric heating devices commercially available in the UK, with a particular focus on ammonia. The researchers analysed both mainstream smoke (i.e., the smoke inhaled and exhaled by cannabis smokers) and sidestream smoke (the smoke emitted from a smouldering ‘joint’ or ‘cone’) from the cannabis cigarettes, which contained standard 3% cultivated cannabis, imported from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). In contrast, the cannabis vapours emitted by the electric heating devices were derived from samples of ‘street’ cannabis seized by the local police force.

The authors revealed that the air samples from their vaporised ‘street’ cannabis contained ammonia levels of up to 170 parts per million (p.p.m.). Sidestream smoke from the cannabis cigarettes of known origin and potency was found to contain ammonia levels of 250 p.p.m., whereas mainstream smoke from these cigarettes contained peak ammonia levels of 10 p.p.m. The researchers also found other compounds present at lower levels across all conditions — acetaldehyde, methanol, acetone, acetic acid and uncharacterised terpentines.

Given that ammonia is toxic at levels greater than 35 p.p.m. (exposure to which has been associated with neurobehavioural impairment, asthma provocation, and bronchial hyperactivity), these results suggest that concentrated ‘street’ cannabis vapours derived from electric heating devices contain toxic levels of ammonia. In contrast, although the sidestream smoke from the cannabis cigarettes of known constitution and potency contained ammonia at toxic levels (which remains a concern for passive cannabis smokers), the filtered mainstream smoke (as inhaled by cannabis users) did not reach such toxic levels.

Bloor et al. noted that some harm reduction messages have communicated that administering cannabis via ‘vaporisers’ is a safer alternative than inhaling smoke directly from burning cannabis. It appears, however, that these messages (which may have been garnered from studies using apparatus insensitive to products such as ammonia) have been challenged by the results of the current study.
In arriving at their conclusions, the researchers failed to acknowledge that the chemical compounds measured in this study were derived from two very different cannabis sources; standardised cannabis cigarettes and ‘street’ cannabis of unknown origin or potency, that are not strictly comparable. Nonetheless, on its own, the finding that electrically vaporised ‘street’ cannabis contained toxic levels of ammonia warrants further research attention

http://ncpic.org.au/ncpic/publications/e-zines/article/ncpic-e-zine-november-2008?page=3

 

[expothead]

its better than smoking - no doubt about it - but it is by no means risk-free and I have to admit it's still irritates my lungs.