F.U.B.A.R.
Bluelight Crew
If tobacco was an inert substance then you might have a point. But it ain't, so you don't.
-
🇬🇧 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
European & African
Drug Discussion
Welcome Guest!
Posting Rules Bluelight Rules -
EADD Moderators: Pissed_and_messed | Shinji Ikari
[UK] Tobacco replacement in joints?
- Thread starter sudo
- Start date
If tobacco was an inert substance then you might have a point. But it ain't, so you don't.
consumer
Bluelighter
It doesn't get you stoned though..If tobacco was an inert substance then you might have a point. But it ain't, so you don't.
steewith2ees
Bluelight Crew
As nicotine has such a similar effect to caffeine this is a good point - they do combine well, on the same spectrum as why a joint and espresso go down so well together in the 'Dam - and unless you don't smoke tobacco normally you are kidding yourself if you think pure joints containing nothing but cannabis plant matter are 'healthier' regarding your lungs then I feel folk are in for a disappointment as I gather it contains about 3 - 5 times of carcinogenic tar as standard tobacco does.
If you don't some tobacco - you should avoid using it at all in spliffs as at least cannabis is not by any stretch as highly addictive as cigarette smoking. If you already are addicted to nicotine however you may as well use tobacco in your joint's - any decent weed still batters the fuck out of you when half diluted with 'baccy and you will be doing slightly less damage to your lungs on that particular day.
F.U.B.A.R.
Bluelight Crew
qft!
consumer
Bluelighter
Cannabis has been shown i think to be less damaging on the lungs than tobacco. I cant be bothered looking for the study but i did read one earlier this year.
consumer
Bluelighter
Here is the study. You a kidding yourself if you think adding tobacco to a joint is making it more healthy...seriously.
University of California study - Cannabis less harmful than tobacco
University of California study - Cannabis less harmful than tobacco
F.U.B.A.R.
Bluelight Crew
Just took a glance, and this paragraph caught my eye...
“An important factor that helps explain the difference in effects from these two substances is the amount of each that is typically smoked,” Pletcher said. “Tobacco users typically smoke ten to 20 cigarettes/day, and some smoke much more than that. Marijuana users, on average, smoke only two to three times a month, so the typical exposure to marijuana is much lower than for tobacco.”
If they're comparing the effects of 20 cigs/day to smoking weed 2/3 times a month, then I'm not surprised the weed comes out on top.
I feel this 'study' may be a little flawed as this does not reflect 'typical' marijuana use afaic...
consumer
Bluelighter
All i know is once i stopped putting tobacco in my joints I lost the cough i had had for many years. There are a lot of chemicals added to tobacco as well. I just dont believe weed is as bad for the lungs as tobacco.
F.U.B.A.R.
Bluelight Crew
Neither do I tbh - if your weed is organically grown, you know the source and it's been properly cured. However, I wouldn't trust a lot of the commercially grown stuff these days.
I do find neat spliffs to be particularly harsh on my throat though - probably because (iirc) cannabis burns at a higher temperature than tobacco.
Last edited:
consumer
Bluelighter
Yes it is kind of at first but you soon get used to it. After a while you wouldn't dream of adding tobacco to a joint. It tastes so good without it. And yes i was smoking my own organic outdoor grown weed that was properly dried and cured.
I have mates that have been smoking weed for 40 + years. The ones that dont mix with tobacco dont have a cough. The ones that do all have a cough. Also there has never been even one case of lung cancer ever linked to cannabis. You would think there would be many after all these years.
I have mates that have been smoking weed for 40 + years. The ones that dont mix with tobacco dont have a cough. The ones that do all have a cough. Also there has never been even one case of lung cancer ever linked to cannabis. You would think there would be many after all these years.
drug_mentor
Bluelight Crew
Are you assuming that if someone doesn't add tobacco to their joint they will smoke twice as much weed? It seems you are, otherwise I don't know how you could justify the claim that adding tobacco does less damage to your lungs on the premise that tobacco is less damaging to the lungs than weed. No matter how bad a half gram of weed (for example) is for your lungs, a half gram of weed with tobacco on top is clearly going to be more damaging.
I don't think the assumption it seems like you are making is reasonable. If I want to smoke a half gram joint, I will roll a half gram joint. If I add tobacco the joint will be bigger than if I don't. Thus, if I add tobacco, I am smoking more material and doing more damage to my lungs.
I understand if you already smoke tobacco you could argue that adding the tobacco in the joint will mean you smoke less tobacco in cigarettes. In this case at best you could say adding tobacco to joints is no worse for you. I think even this conclusion is wrong. Cigarettes are generally filtered, joints are not. This means the tobacco you add to a joint is having less tar filtered out of it than if you smoked it in a cigarette.
It is also worth noting that the premise that tobacco is less bad for your lungs than cannabis is highly dubious. Yes, cannabis smoke does contain more tar than cigarette smoke. However, tar is far from the only damaging component of tobacco smoke, and the majority of damaging chemicals present in tobacco smoke are not present in cannabis smoke.
steewith2ees
Bluelight Crew
P/T - if there's one thing then that is a constant in all of this then its that smoking tar producing matter is damaging for your lungs regardless of the circumstances - I simply based my assumptions on the - obviously wrong - idea that the tar produced by the combustion of these materials was the primary source of respiratory damage - I also took already acknowledge that weed smoking is always going to be less harmful from the simple fact that one is never going to smoke anywhere near as many joints as a tobacco addict smokes cigarettes.
If my maths is wrong about the cumulative harm of any particular blend of materials then I stand corrected.
They do still make a decent drug combo though in terms of the mild stimulating effect of the tobacco....
If my maths is wrong about the cumulative harm of any particular blend of materials then I stand corrected.
They do still make a decent drug combo though in terms of the mild stimulating effect of the tobacco....
mydrugbuddy
Bluelighter
Yeah it was on that Michael Mosely documentary about e-cigs that the tobacco leaf by itself is fairly harmless, it's only when it's combusted that it gives off all the toxic shit. The same applies to a Lettuce leaf apparently.
Never the less, I still believe that tobacco is more harmful, carciogenic, way more expensive and addictive compared to other alternatives so i continue to buy my damiana, marshmallow leaves, and mullein easily and cheaply off ebay.
They make good pallatable tobacco replaement herbs for smoking. I use them for my noids and bongs. The D is a bit harsh and The MM and M is mild and mellow , so i use roughly a 20/40/40 mix. The D is quite dry and stays lit once its been lit, whilst the other 2 are a bit moist and need constant re-lighting. Adding the D helps with this, otherwise i'd forget the D altogether. The stuff is all very cheap and excellent VFM on ebay. Like £4 for 500g or something like that. Dunno if im allowed to mention sources of legal things but i allways get them from Geordie 256 (The Alchemists Apothecary) on ebay.
I use them in a bong, some of the herbs have relatively tough woody stems and other relatively large 'woody' chunks that will poke through your cig papers and make them less ideal for spliff making, unless you grind them down slightly if you're not using a bong and trying to make spliffs with them. I chuck out the handful of woody chunks you will get with the Mullein. Spose you could just crush the stemmy bits in your fist.
Otherwise you could buy a pack of herbal cigarettes, rip the cigs open for the herbs and use them, theyd be bound to roll up nicely, that would probably be much easier, but probably not such good VFM. Scrap that, I've heard they taste fowl.
Never the less, I still believe that tobacco is more harmful, carciogenic, way more expensive and addictive compared to other alternatives so i continue to buy my damiana, marshmallow leaves, and mullein easily and cheaply off ebay.
They make good pallatable tobacco replaement herbs for smoking. I use them for my noids and bongs. The D is a bit harsh and The MM and M is mild and mellow , so i use roughly a 20/40/40 mix. The D is quite dry and stays lit once its been lit, whilst the other 2 are a bit moist and need constant re-lighting. Adding the D helps with this, otherwise i'd forget the D altogether. The stuff is all very cheap and excellent VFM on ebay. Like £4 for 500g or something like that. Dunno if im allowed to mention sources of legal things but i allways get them from Geordie 256 (The Alchemists Apothecary) on ebay.
I use them in a bong, some of the herbs have relatively tough woody stems and other relatively large 'woody' chunks that will poke through your cig papers and make them less ideal for spliff making, unless you grind them down slightly if you're not using a bong and trying to make spliffs with them. I chuck out the handful of woody chunks you will get with the Mullein. Spose you could just crush the stemmy bits in your fist.
Otherwise you could buy a pack of herbal cigarettes, rip the cigs open for the herbs and use them, theyd be bound to roll up nicely, that would probably be much easier, but probably not such good VFM. Scrap that, I've heard they taste fowl.