• 💊 OTHER DRUGS 💊 Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Notable Threads 1 Notable Threads 2
    Dangerous Combos Addiction Support
    Emergency Services Benzo Guide v.1
    Addiction Stories Scary Case Studies
    Biology, Pharmacology & Drugs 101
  • Select Your Topic Then Scroll Down
    Alcohol Bupe Benzos
    Cocaine Heroin Opioids
    RCs Stimulants Misc
    Harm Reduction All Topics Gabapentinoids
    Tired of your habit? Struggling to cope?
    Want to regain control or get sober?
    Visit our Recovery Support Forums

The Bad new for bong lovers hahaha!

K

*KANE*

Bluelighter
Joined
Jun 27, 2001
Messages
628
Location
NOYFB
Now I used to love bongs too , but now I am angry about all the nuggets I wasted in a bong. Bongs actually filter out more THC then they do other harmful chemicals.
---------- http://www.maps.org/news-letters/v06n3/06359mj1.html
Contrary to popular impression, waterpipes don't necessarily protect smokers from harmful tars in marijuana smoke, according to a new study sponsored by MAPS and California NORML (National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws). The reason is that waterpipes filter out more psychoactive THC than they do other tars, thereby requiring users to smoke more to reach their desired effect. The study does not rule out the possibility that waterpipes could have other benefits, such as filtering out gases, but it suggests that other methods, such as the use of high potency marijuana, vaporizers, or oral ingestion are needed to avoid harmful toxins in marijuana smoke.
 
Point me to a link that shows THC and other CBNs to be water-soluble and I'll sell you this bridge I have, in Brooklyn...
 
damn I guess all those times I got stoned offa 5 hits from my bong I was faking it and fuckin with my own mind...
------------------
The only real drug problem is scorin real good drugs -- aim: Diskchucker
 
spiderman...
The report (not that new, is it?) says bongs filter out MORE THC than they do carcinogens in weed smoke. In fact they don't filter out any carcinogens, I believe.
It may be easier to hit because the smoke is cooled but it's not any healthier.
Still, you probably lose less smoke than with a joint or blunt...
 
Either way, a bong hit will you much higher than any blunt or joint. You can't get that much smoke without a tube!
I've used vaporizers and they SUCK! Part of the 'blunting' aspect of herb smoking comes from the actual smoke, no smoke in vaps!
------------------
'Phoney McRing Ring'
 
The smoke is only under water for a second and only a small amount of the smoke has contact with the water. Can the water really filter out enough THC to make a difference?
Can an expierenced user notice if 5% of the THC is gone?
------------------
"Raving is the wave of the future"
Quiksilver (rest in peace)
 
Okay, we usually make our method of smoke based upon the quality and amount of weed present.
If we have madd nice KB or something, we'll smoke those nugs in a bong--fuk you up a lot faster...we like water, but we're big on hard hits too.
If we have middies, we'll just roll blunts and blunts cuz you gotta smoke more of it to get high.
You deffinately conserve the smoke if you use a bong--blunts are meant for quanity.
------------------
*cassidy*
"the purpose of words is to convey a message--after the idea is grasped, the words are forgotten--where is a man who forgot all the words? it is he who i wish to speak to"
 
The study said " and a battery-operated model with a motorized paddle to thoroughly mix the smoke in the water". When you do bong hits, like mentioned JDSD, the smoke is only in the water for a sec, if that. The study had a machine that "thoroughly mix the smoke in water"
Also,
The THC transfer rate (how much thc we are actually receiving) is considerably higher in bongs than vaporizer.
 
that is such a dissappointment to read. i LOVE bongs - there is just no other way. Blunts and joints are only good for schwag, and bowls suck.
------------------
look at the fly...its masturbating.
 
yea i like bongs
smile.gif
...and i dont care what any scientist says, bongs get me higher!
if everyone had a bong, we'd all get along
------------------
"When you smoke herb, it reveals you to yourself" - Bob Marley
"I'm not going to change the way I look or the way I feel to conform to anything. I've always been
a freak. So I've been a freak all my life and I have to live with that, you know. I'm one of those
people." - John Lennon
 
no point, all those bong lovers will never believe u, even if given proof, they'll just bitch about gov't propaganda(sp?) just because they are afraid that they were telling people bs, about how high they got from like 2 hits.
 
OK I've also found that bongs STILL get you higher than joints with the same amount of weed. So if this study is true, why is that? Here's my theory: Even though with a bong, you're losing some THC to bong water, you waste proprtionally MORE THC with a joint while it burns and smokes in between hits. Smoking out of a bong bowl means the weed only burns when you're inhaling (conserving the herb!)
By this logic, pipes should get you the highest! What do you guys think? Is that your experience?
- Citrus
 
Bong420tripper said:
"yea i like bongs ...and i dont care what any scientist says, bongs get me higher!
if everyone had a bong, we'd all get along"
Spoken like a true idiotic pothead. It's comments like that, that give people who smoke herb a bad name.
 
Citrus, your logic is shit. How did you come to this conclusion? You say, "I find bongs get you higher..." How did you find that out, by some afterschool smoking session? You have no credibility and should stop smoking herb before you lose anymore brain cells.
 
acctaully scott who cares how he found out if i smoked forma bong and said i got higher that way then froma joint then wouldnt it be beter for me to keep smokign from a bong and nto listen to studies in experiments that have many problems in it to begin with.....
 
THC is NOT water soluble. (only very slightly so)
If it was, why the fuck would we use buckets(gravity bongs) and bongs?
Who the fuck would invent a smoking device designed for inhalation of THC, which incorporated WATER if THC was water soluble?
Straight from Lycaeum:
[THC is] Nearly insoluble in water. Soluble in hydrophobic solvents such as butane.
Nearly insoluble means that approximately between 0.01 and 0.1 moles of THC will dissolve in 1 litre of water. (this is not speculation, I took these numbers from a chemistry data sheet.)
Now if you think about how much water is in the bottom of an average sized bong..
 
Scott, what's your problem? No need to be such a bitch. I think Bong420's got the right idea. I know from my personal experience of smoking weed for years that bongs get me higher & they do it faster than any other method of smoking. There isn't very much water in a bong, and only a fraction of the smoke comes into contact with the water, and only for a fraction of a second. The amount of THC lost isn't really significant at all. all the water does is cool it down and make it easier on your lungs, which is fairly important since you're also getting a big hit. All that smoke at once gets you quite blowed...a few bongs rips will get me as good as a joint, and a few more will get me as wrecked as a blunt would
smile.gif
 
What if we just keep using our bongs without any water? You'll get the benefit of nice hits, and no THC loss due to the water. The only drawback is your hits will be harsh
smile.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top