Why do most drugs that you smoke take a while to take effect?

[The Network]

Seriously, we've been over this. Smoking is not faster than IV.

 

[ferinox]

Seriously, we've been over this. Smoking is not faster than IV.

Who mad you the final authority? read this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Route_of_administration#Inhalation

 

[mgrady3]

If you IV into say your ankle or foot (not sure why you'd do this, but hypothetically) couldn't it take longer to reach your brain than the same substance inhaled?

I understand that IV goes right into your bloodstream, but inhalation, for all intents and purposes, does the same thing.

 

[IndustrialStrength]

Well I don't have a fuckton of experience with drugs but I would still think I'd know the difference between coming up a ramp and running into a wall going 900mph and going straight to the top(which is probably the best metaphor for how I experience most drugs).

Apparently you are incorrect in that assumption.
How you react to a substance does not necessarily correlate to the experiences of other users.
In this case it would appear that your experiences differ from other users.
Your experiences also seem to deviate from what is commonly accepted in the scientific community regarding the statements you have made.
As such your assumption that with your lack of experience that you would know the difference appears to be patently false.

Seriously, we've been over this. Smoking is not faster than IV.

This statement is incorrect.
The smoking ROA can result in faster onset of effects than IV.
Cocaine could be an example of this phenomena.
However, one must note that with regards to the effects being discussed anything reported will likey be subjective.

"The time to reach peak subjective was significantly faster for smoked (1.4+/-0.5 min) than for intravenous cocaine (3.1+/-0.9 min),
which was faster than intranasal cocaine (14.6+/-8 min)."

Effects of route of administration on cocaine induced dopamine transporter blockade in the human brain.
PMID: 10983846 or doi:10.1016/S0024-3205(00)00731-1

Abstract:

NSFW:

Life Sciences, Volume 67, Issue 12, 11 August 2000, Pages 1507-1515, ISSN 0024-3205, DOI: 10.1016/S0024-3205(00)00731-1.

Effects of route of administration on cocaine induced dopamine transporter blockade in the human brain

Nora D. Volkow, Gene. -Jack Wang, Marian W. Fischman, Richard Foltin, Joanna S. Fowler, Dinko Franceschi, Maja Franceschi, Jean Logan, Samuel J. Gatley, Christopher Wong, Yu-Shin Ding, Robert Hitzemann, Naomi Pappas

Abstract:
The route of administration influences the reinforcing effects of cocaine. Here we assessed whether there were differences in the efficacy of cocaine to block the dopamine transporters (major target for cocaine's reinforcing effects), as a function of route of administration. Positron emission tomography and [11C]cocaine, a dopamine transporter radioligand, were used to compare the levels of dopamine transporter blockade induced by intravenous, smoked and intranasal cocaine in 32 current cocaine abusers. In parallel, the temporal course for the self-reports of 'high' were obtained. Cocaine significantly blocked dopamine transporters. The levels of blockade were comparable across all routes of administration and a dose effect was observed for intravenous and intranasal cocaine but not for smoked cocaine. For equivalent levels of cocaine in plasma and DAT blockade, smoked cocaine induced significantly greater self reports of 'high' than intranasal cocaine and showed a trend for a greater effect than intravenous cocaine. The time to reach peak subjective was significantly faster for smoked (1.4 +/- 0.5 min) than for intravenous cocaine (3.1 +/- 0.9 min), which was faster than intranasal cocaine (14.6 +/- 8 min). Differences in the reinforcing effects of cocaine as a function of the route of administration are not due to differences in the efficacy of cocaine to block the dopamine transporters. The faster time course for the subjective effects for smoked than intravenous and for intravenous than for intranasal cocaine highlights the importance of the speed of cocaine's delivery into the brain on its reinforcing effects.

Though to defend your point of view as well the fact that certain substances have similar onset times via inhalation as well as IV can confuse the issue.
In the case of the following the ROA is an aerosol inhalation rather than smoking but considering both are forms of inhalation it may apply.
The following is in regards to morphine to be clear.



"The authors found that, with administration by inhalation, the total bioavailability was 59%, of which 43% was absorbed almost instantaneously and 57% was absorbed with a half-life of 18 min."

"Conclusions: The onset and duration of the effects of morphine
are similar after intravenous administration or inhalation
via this new pulmonary drug delivery system."

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of inhaled versus intravenous morphine in healthy volunteers.
PMID: 10969293

Abstract:

NSFW:

Anesthesiology. 2000 Sep;93(3):619-28.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of inhaled versus intravenous morphine in
healthy volunteers.

Dershwitz M, Walsh JL, Morishige RJ, Connors PM, Rubsamen RM, Shafer SL, Rosow CE.

BACKGROUND: A new pulmonary drug delivery system produces aerosols from
disposable packets of medication. This study compared the pharmacokinetics andpharmacodynamics of morphine delivered by an AERx prototype with intravenousmorphine.

METHODS: Fifteen healthy volunteers were enrolled. Two subjects were
administered four inhalations of 2.2 mg morphine each at 1-min intervals or 4.4
mg over 3 min by intravenous infusion. Thirteen subjects were given twice the
above doses, i.e., eight inhalations or 8.8 mg intravenously over 7 min. Arterial
blood sampling was performed every minute during administration and at 2, 5, 7,10, 15, 20, 45, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180, and 240 min after administration. The
effect of morphine was assessed by measuring pupil diameter and ventilatory
response to a hypercapnic challenge. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analyses were performed simultaneously using mixed-effect models.
RESULTS: The pharmacokinetic data after intravenous administration were described by a three-exponent decay model preceded by a lag time. The pharmacokinetic model for administration by inhalation consisted of the three-exponent intravenous pharmacokinetic model preceded by a two-exponent absorption model. The authors found that, with administration by inhalation, the total bioavailability was 59%, of which 43% was absorbed almost instantaneously and 57% was absorbed with a half-life of 18 min. The median times to the half-maximal miotic effects of morphine were 10 and 5.5 min after inhalation and intravenous administration, respectively (P < 0.01). The pharmacodynamic parameter ke0 was approximately 0.003 min-1.

CONCLUSIONS: The onset and duration of the effects of morphine are
similar after intravenous administration or inhalation via this new pulmonary
drug delivery system. Morphine bioavailability after such administration is 59%
of the dose loaded into the dosage form.

To get a better understanding of the literature than my quotes can possibly hope to convey read the full article linked below.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of inhaled versus intravenous morphine in healthy volunteers.


In this particular case I would speculate to say that your experiences with the smoking/inhalation ROA differs from what would be considered the norm.
Perhaps your genetic makeup, interactions with other substances/medications you consume, or psychological reasons account for your difference in reaction.

Regardless to answer your question of "Why do most drugs that you smoke take a while to take effect?"
The answer is that for a large number of users they don't.
You appear to be an exception to the norm with regards to this ROA.
Hopefully that answers your question & clarifies things for you.

 

[boughtthetshirt]

kd said it rit 2ed quickest next to bangin.... i feel weed like the fuckin sec i inhale more or less basicly i dont think u know what ur talking about and dont be a dick telling people to stfu you did ask the question after all and anyone taking the time to type anything back is "contributing".. maby just really shitty dope lmaao some one all ready said it i know.

 

[Lord]

Woh woh woh now. You say onset is often faster through inhalation than injection?! Injection - Straight into bloodstream then into the brain, Inhalation - Gots to go through all sorts of mechanisms before it hits the brain! Where is your logic?

Out the door.

Of the 29 drugs on the front page of Erowid, heroin is the only one listed as having a quicker onset by inhalation than by injection (5-10 seconds compared to 10-20 seconds)

 

[rollingstoned!]

Troll?

 

[The Network]

The only reason people shoot heroin is because it's a way better rush than vaping it.

 

[psychomimetic]

Out the door.

Of the 29 drugs on the front page of Erowid, heroin is the only one listed as having a quicker onset by inhalation than by injection (5-10 seconds compared to 10-20 seconds)

In all fairness, most of those drugs (assuming you're referring to this page- http://www.erowid.org/psychoactives/psychoactives.shtml ) can't be injected or smoked with ease or safety or success.

Here's the ones from that page that people generally don't shoot or smoke, or can't do one or the other or either with- Alcohol, amanitas, ayahuasca, cacti, cannabis, caffeine (although it can be shot and can probably be smoked too, no one does) datura (can be smoked but not shot), DXM, GHB, Ibogaine, Inhalants, LSD, morning glory, mushrooms, nitrous, peyote, salvia, tobacco, and zolpidem.

So out of those 29, more then 19 are lacking data. Having never smoked or shot MDMA I can't comment on it. Heroin is faster inhaled then shot, but what about opiates and oxycodone (both of which are on that page)? Opiates is very vague, but there are quite a few of them that hit you quicker when inhaled then shot. I'm not sure about oxy, I've never heard of anyone vaporizing pure oxycodone and as such have no data about it. I also don't know the data for 5-meo-dmt, zolpidem and 2c-B.

So on that page, most of the drugs listed can't be shot or can't be smoked or both (most of them are plants). The ones that hit you faster when shot are meth, ketamine and DMT.

The ones that hit you faster when smoked are- heroin, cocaine, many of the drugs in the opiates vault and maybe oxycodone.

The way I read that list, almost none of them have any data one way or the other. 3 of them hit you faster when shot and 3 or 4 of them hit you faster when inhaled. There are also a few like zolpidem, MDMA, 2C-B, and 5-meo-DMT that I'm not sure about.

 

[The Network]

^ I'm sorry did you just say NO ONE smokes cannabis? Man you must have smoked so much you forgot... everything. Also same thing with salvia and tobacco. Did you just make a list of a bunch of drugs or did you actually think about it?

 

[mgrady3]

^^ Why is your attitude so aggressive towards other people's posts?

I'm sure it was a typo/mindslip for psychomimetic listing cannabis under the drugs that generally aren't shot or smoked.

but his post is valid none the less, he shows clearly that there are drugs that fit both ends of the bill, ie. there are drugs that hit you faster when iv'd and there are drugs that hit you faster when inhaled.

Of the drugs he, and others have listed, it seems the general answer to your original post is that, most drugs when smoked do not take a long time to take effect, most are rather rapid. The main difference being the time to peak which differs from drug to drug.

I think this thread has been answered.. and the OP is being mainly ignorant.

 

[8L4YN3]

The Network, i hate to break it down to you but you're an idiot. You come here and claim some bullshit thats wrong as fact, then attack others who're clearly more experienced than you when it comes to drug use.

Anyways, "The Network" all drugs are different i hate to break it to you but drugs taking 30 minutes to peak upon smoking are in the minority. In contrast to this drug you claim takes 30 minutes methamphetamine definantly and many more actually do hit faster than an IV dose. The problem as someone states before is that you can only send so much drug up to your brain at once.

Most drugs when smoked have you peaking withing 5 minutes easily, maybe 10 minutes sometimes i guess. But yeah this drug you're talking of, maybe you're right, but thats not true for most drugs, smoking is actually extremely quick way of introducing a drug into your body. How fast do we need fresh oxygen? Think about it, smoking is very efficient to a point.

IV may feel quicker because its like a concentrated hit of your drug, much bigger than you could absorb by smoking, in your bloodstream heading for your brain, causing a rush and what not. But it's still slightly slowly than smoking technically. IV still is better lol. (note semi-serious stupidtiy).

 

[The Network]

^ I'm sorry can you translate that to the English language?

 

[killermunchies]

You all must have really shitty watches. I've never heard of weed hitting anyone faster than about 10 minutes. And JWH-018 takes over 20 minutes to hit me sometimes. So do other things that I smoke.

That's weird. JWH, when vaporized, hits me in well under a minute. Weed takes around 5 minutes for me.

 

[mgrady3]

Can This Thread please be closed?
The Question has been answered and the OP simply refuses to accept that and instead responds ignorantly.

 

[psychomimetic]

^ I'm sorry did you just say NO ONE smokes cannabis? Man you must have smoked so much you forgot... everything. Also same thing with salvia and tobacco. Did you just make a list of a bunch of drugs or did you actually think about it?

If you read the post, the drugs I listed could either not be smoked or not be shot or not be done in either way.

Cannabis cannot be shot, so I was correct in adding it to that list.

We can't compare how fast you come up on cannabis from smoking vs shooting it because the data for shooting it doesn't exist.

Several of those drugs are like this- salvia, tobacco, datura and cacti namely, although smoking cacti kinda sucks, it can be done and does exhibit effects.

You're arguing your point solely on your personal experience, which isn't a very good arguing technique. Especially when your personal experience contradicts the experience of pretty much everyone else in this thread.

 

[delta_9]

tl;dr
But the average time it takes from inhalation to absolute first sign of effects is approx. 4 seconds.

 

[TheFDA]

I have one theory that I could think of; Is it that most of the time the chemicals themselves aren't actually psychoactive and they need to metabolize into something that is psychoactive?

Then again just THC or just JWH-018 or just Heroin could work themselves without being metabolized but I don't really know.
Or it could just be that chemicals absorb surprisingly slow through the lung lining (kinda ties in with the fact that I don't know if maybe just THC itself is psychoactive and maybe you just need a lot of it to get stoned).

So why is it that even if you smoke a drug it can take almost half an hour to kick in sometimes, and other ones like DMT or salvia can hit you in a few milliseconds?


Edit; WOOOOOOOO 69th post, I need to have a party.

I think it would really help people better understand your post if you clarified exactly what drugs you're talking about that take "a long time" to take effect, & if you clarified exactly what you MEAN by "take effect"... Like, whether you mean how long it takes before you start feeling any effects from smoking a substance, or if you mean how long it takes before you start feeling the peak effects of a substance...

 

[Lord]

In all fairness, most of those drugs (assuming you're referring to this page- http://www.erowid.org/psychoactives/psychoactives.shtml ) can't be injected or smoked with ease or safety or success.

Here's the ones from that page that people generally don't shoot or smoke, or can't do one or the other or either with- Alcohol, amanitas, ayahuasca, cacti, cannabis, caffeine (although it can be shot and can probably be smoked too, no one does) datura (can be smoked but not shot), DXM, GHB, Ibogaine, Inhalants, LSD, morning glory, mushrooms, nitrous, peyote, salvia, tobacco, and zolpidem.

So out of those 29, more then 19 are lacking data. Having never smoked or shot MDMA I can't comment on it. Heroin is faster inhaled then shot, but what about opiates and oxycodone (both of which are on that page)? Opiates is very vague, but there are quite a few of them that hit you quicker when inhaled then shot. I'm not sure about oxy, I've never heard of anyone vaporizing pure oxycodone and as such have no data about it. I also don't know the data for 5-meo-dmt, zolpidem and 2c-B.

So on that page, most of the drugs listed can't be shot or can't be smoked or both (most of them are plants). The ones that hit you faster when shot are meth, ketamine and DMT.

The ones that hit you faster when smoked are- heroin, cocaine, many of the drugs in the opiates vault and maybe oxycodone.

The way I read that list, almost none of them have any data one way or the other. 3 of them hit you faster when shot and 3 or 4 of them hit you faster when inhaled. There are also a few like zolpidem, MDMA, 2C-B, and 5-meo-DMT that I'm not sure about.

Erowid is surprisingly empty in my opinion. Most sections need to have a lot of information added to them.

 

[8L4YN3]

^ I'm sorry can you translate that to the English language?

Lol is this how you deal with being made to look like an idiot good sir? I understand what it's like to feel abit behind the pack brain power wise... I have sympathy for the intellectually challenged.

Also, people pure thc can be injected. Obviously we cant test how quick cannabis takes to peak when shot because we cant inject cannabis, but we can inject the chemicals we can isolate..

It's not even hard, the thc's a lipid thing is a non issue. They just use a type of emulsion, and a solvent thats not water. I've read many of research articles where people were administrated thc via intravenus means. This also means we can do the same with CBD, the two main chemicals which result in the cannabis high..

"The Network", are you feeling stupid yet? Like it must really suck to come here and make a thread proclaiming something so wrong, "most drugs when smoked take a while to take effect".... Now you're learning that actually it's the complete opposite to what you thought, most drugs take effect rather quickly when smoked!! Hah! You made a fool out of yourself, how does it feel?

Do you need me to dumb down this post as well so you can understand it?

Also whats with the hostility? You come here asking why some drugs take long to take effect when smoked and why some drugs dont, we tell you the truth that all drugs when smoked take effect extremely quickly, within seconds/minutes. You cannot handle the fact your belief is wrong, and pointlessly start being a little troll to anyone who picks apart your stupid posts. So whats then man? Are you just a wanker dickhead troll or is your gentle ego abit harmed after being made to look stupid. I'd respect you if you could actually read and fully comprehend someones post, then formulate a logical reply to it, but it seems this skill is out of your reach yes?

Anyways the original life of this thread is long gone, the OP is obviously a troll who isn't prepared or dosn't understand how discussion works... So as someone else claimed this thread may as well be closed as it serves no purpos but to highlight "the networks" stupidity and lack of manners.