A Guide to 'Healthy' Vaping: a consideration of the entire process

Siebter

Less soul, more mind
Often researchers will emphasize that nicotine is the real danger (as many vaping papers focus on ecigs w/ tobacco), which gives me a little comfort.

Overlooked that part and I think that's important: actually just the opposite is the case. Nicotine research used to be tobacco smoke research, which changed since we are able to look at pure nicotine and its effect – since then even the WHO has removed nicotine from the list of carcinogens, its supposed lethal dose has been raised by a multitude and nicotine nowadays is considered to be „mildly addictive“ (about the same as caffeine) while tobacco smoke remains to be considered highly addictive. One of the major revelations in this context is that it's the smoke that kills us, not the nicotine.
 

Truth Seeker

Well-Known Member
I don't understand how switching to a route of administration that definitely involves carcinogens from a ROA that possibly contains carcinogens is an improvement from a health perspective.

Also, it's important to know that the vast majority of scientists conducting these studies know fuck-all about vaping. To the best of my knowledge, most of the "e-cigs emit cancer causing chemicals" studies involved running the vapes at voltages no real world user would. Because it would taste like burnt ass.

It's like saying "apples cause cancer"....... if you burn them to a crisp before eating them. Ok cool, but no one eats apples that way so I'm not sure what this proves exactly.
It's quite simple isolated carcinogens and other negative by-products from cannabis combustion has not been proven to cause cancer nor COPD. The problems with vaping is even though you get rid of some nasty chemistry (combustion) you've got a host of other potential issues (dryness in air passages, inhalation of possible chemicals from growers, ppm, inhaled terpenes etc)

My main argument is that vaping has not been proved to be healthier than combustion for inhalation of cannabis. In fact it could be worse!
I've seen a post here where vaping has caused respiratory issues such as wheezing and symptoms of asthma!
 
Truth Seeker,
  • Like
Reactions: shredder

Siebter

Less soul, more mind
My main argument is that vaping has not been proved to be healthier than combustion for inhalation of cannabis.

This shows a major misunderstanding on how scientific research works. Try to proof that eating bananas don't cause cancer. Spoiler: you won't find any proof of that. Does that mean bananas cause cancer?

You also seem to ignore basically every link posted in this thread.
 

shredder

Well-Known Member
I've seen a post here where vaping has caused respiratory issues such as wheezing and symptoms of asthma!

If your talking about me, and it sounds like you are.

I got asthma as an adult, and after working as a welder for 10+ years. At the time I did not use because I had a nuclear clearance and got drug tested.

I smoked weed heavy in the 70's, stopped in 1979, then restarted around 2008. I bought a volcano in 09, but smoked joints as well until 2014.

I quit for the same reasons I use mostly edibles now. My asthma got worse and smoking and then vaping made it worse after a few years of each.

Now to say vaping is like smoking would be a stretch, and my experience was just mine and probably not typical.

Party on! Happy Thanksgiving y'all!
 

florduh

Well-Known Member
you've got a host of other potential issues (dryness in air passages, inhalation of possible chemicals from growers, ppm, inhaled terpenes etc)
All of those potential issues exist with combustion as well. You get all of the disadvantages of high temp vaping along with the disadvantages of smoking.

I know some people find vaping more irritating than combustion. But I highly doubt that's the norm. Most of the anecdotes I've heard say the complete opposite. Even people who prefer the effects of combustion will admit their throat and lungs feel better after vaping than smoking. That's been my personal experience as well. Combusting just seems much harder on the body.


My main argument is that vaping has not been proved to be healthier than combustion for inhalation of cannabis. In fact it could be worse!

I mean, it's certainly possible. But it seems very unlikely. I'd definitely need to see more evidence before I'd act as though the more implausible option is true.

Something just occurred to me. As @Siebter pointed out, nicotine is not a carcinogen. The smoking itself causes cancer. Yet, as you pointed out, Cannabis smokers don't seem to get cancer. It seems like some component of cannabis protects smokers from the toxic effects of smoking. If that's true, I'm not sure why those same components wouldn't protect vapers from the possible long term negative effect of vaping.
 

Truth Seeker

Well-Known Member
All of those potential issues exist with combustion as well. You get all of the disadvantages of high temp vaping along with the disadvantages of smoking.

I know some people find vaping more irritating than combustion. But I highly doubt that's the norm. Most of the anecdotes I've heard say the complete opposite. Even people who prefer the effects of combustion will admit their throat and lungs feel better after vaping than smoking. That's been my personal experience as well. Combusting just seems much harder on the body.




I mean, it's certainly possible. But it seems very unlikely. I'd definitely need to see more evidence before I'd act as though the more implausible option is true.

Something just occurred to me. As @Siebter pointed out, nicotine is not a carcinogen. The smoking itself causes cancer. Yet, as you pointed out, Cannabis smokers don't seem to get cancer. It seems like some component of cannabis protects smokers from the toxic effects of smoking. If that's true, I'm not sure why those same components wouldn't protect vapers from the possible long term negative effect of vaping.
The level of irritation I get from vaping makes me question the validity of it being healthier (that’s why I got into it because it supposedly safer than combustion)

I felt a few of the advantages yet the disadvantages were so bad I had to question the long-term harm of continual vaping. Maybe I’m not the norm? Maybe there is a small segment that does become highly irritated with the inhalation of vapor? I wish I had the answer but as of right now I guess the most prudent thing to be when to stop vaping if it’s causing harm?
 

Robert-in-YEG

Well-Known Member
The level of irritation I get from vaping makes me question the validity of it being healthier (that’s why I got into it because it supposedly safer than combustion)

I felt a few of the advantages yet the disadvantages were so bad I had to question the long-term harm of continual vaping. Maybe I’m not the norm? Maybe there is a small segment that does become highly irritated with the inhalation of vapor? I wish I had the answer but as of right now I guess the most prudent thing to be when to stop vaping if it’s causing harm?
If something doesn't feel right, or if you have doubts, or if you're doing something that hurts, stop doing it. It doesn't matter what anyone else says. It doesn't matter what experts say. If it hurts, stop doing it.

Very little comes without risk or cost. For more than 10 years I took benzodiazepines for insomnia and anxiety; the cost was addiction. Weaning off benzos, the cost was more anxiety and insomnia. Now I am reducing that anxiety with moderate use of cannabis, but that comes with the risks of dry herb vaping. There is a cost, but it is likely better than addiction or the early onset dementia that comes with benzos and aging.

Robert-in-YEG

"There's no free lunch".
~ Unknown
 

invertedisdead

Weapons of VAS Destruction
The level of irritation I get from vaping makes me question the validity of it being healthier (that’s why I got into it because it supposedly safer than combustion)

I felt a few of the advantages yet the disadvantages were so bad I had to question the long-term harm of continual vaping. Maybe I’m not the norm? Maybe there is a small segment that does become highly irritated with the inhalation of vapor? I wish I had the answer but as of right now I guess the most prudent thing to be when to stop vaping if it’s causing harm?

Are you vaping just once a week like you suggest with combustion though when you experience all the irritation? Or is that irritation based off frequent daily use? When you mention smoking just one joint a week it still suggests to me that combustion brings its own issues to you - that, or you just don’t consume much - and if that’s the case I honestly wouldn’t stress on vaping vs smoking at such low usage of one time per week.

As far as studies to support vaporization - some have taken place, but not much. Studies rely heavily on funding from grants but who would benefit from funding those vaping studies? The FDA? NIDA? The DEA? Would you even feel confident in results from such biased agencies? Technically cannabis vaporizers aren’t legal, and federally the plant is a schedule 1 narcotic. I wouldn’t expect to see much anything positive about cannabis going forward IMHO recreational has ruined most of the medical stride we made. IMO the fact these studies don’t already exist suggest nobody is performing them. But it doesn’t mean vaping is bad. Western Medicine (at least in the US) is not big into “harm reduction” so it’s hard for the medical industry to get excited about it. In other countries people literally can get dry herb vaporizers through their health insurance - despite more cannabis use than anywhere in the world the United States is nowhere close to that.

that said I am disappointed myself in the lack of published literature considering every dispensary cannabis product undergoes analytics testing, the labs are booming, they just aren’t testing anything we could learn from. Vaping already has a tarnished reputation from propaganda so it’s just hard to find someone who believe in it enough to fund the research. We could fund it ourselves if we all pitched in a dollar to find out what we’re actually missing instead of VASing over $500 vaporizers. I’ve considered making a thread about this before, and would happily put my designs up against any commercial product for testing of the entire process.


We can extrapolate from cigarette research that combustion probably doesn’t destroy all these bad compounds into something safer. I don’t like to generalize these statements too much cause there’s probably compounds that are safer when burnt off and others that aren’t. Everything has its own degradation pathway. But it’s well known that combusted terpenes degrade into polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. So while the word on vaporized and inhaled cannabis terpenes may be out, we know that it’s a far less destructive process to those compounds already known to have anti-oxidant / anti cancer / anti mutagenic properties themselves.

As far as vapor harshness, IMHO I believe much of it truthfully stems from old combustion habits. There’s two standouts I’ve noticed myself doing and catching others doing. The first is cloud chasing - when a bong is milked out as dense as smoke but with vapor, there’s much more cannabinoids in that same volume, which could easily equate to harshness. I believe now that it’s often simply due to the density and visibility differences of vapor vs smoke. A reoccurring theme I notice now is how people tend to not even feel the vapor UNTIL they inhale too much and start coughing. There was actually much more cannabinoids in the hit than they thought, but because you can’t see as well it it’s not perceived the same, and makes it easy to continually over-do it if chasing those clouds.
 

shredder

Well-Known Member
The level of irritation I get from vaping makes me question the validity of it being healthier (that’s why I got into it because it supposedly safer than combustion)

I felt a few of the advantages yet the disadvantages were so bad I had to question the long-term harm of continual vaping. Maybe I’m not the norm? Maybe there is a small segment that does become highly irritated with the inhalation of vapor? I wish I had the answer but as of right now I guess the most prudent thing to be when to stop vaping if it’s causing harm?

There's always edibles.
 

Siebter

Less soul, more mind
@invertedisdead already raised a ton of good points, I'd like to add another referring to irritation from smoking vs. vaping: one thing that happens when we smoke is that the cilia in our respiratory system (which are responsible for keeping our air pathways clean from dust and other particles) will get paralyzed by the sheer amount of smoke (ash, tar etc.) and thus stop working. Coughing is a very natural reaction to transport collected particles / mucus for example in our mouth so we can swallow it down (it's a bit gross, I know). But that needs our cilia to be able to do their job, which they can't when we regularly smoke, hence we do *not* cough so easily. Someone who never smoked will definitely cough heavily when smoking for the first time (=cilia still alive), if you want to keep smoking, you need to „learn“ how to keep your cilia paralyzed.

Vapor is not smoke, it does not overload our cilia, that means they stay much more sensitive towards stuff we inhale, hence we might tend to cough more. This is the part where I see moderation being a good idea; as @invertedisdead mentioned, we actually do not need to chuck huge clouds to get high. I mean we can, but if we want to avoid coughing fits, there's a ton of options to minimize throat tickling and the like, for example by taking smaller hits. Might take more time, but is still just as effective in my experience.
 

daeso393

New Member
...because there is absolutely no reason to extrapolate assumptions for using e cigarettes from cigarettes. As I said: it looks like smoking, so it has to harm like smoking – absolute nonsense with no scientific base to it.

If you want to look at potential risks of e cigarettes, look at peer reviewed studies with clear results, not at case studies full of assumptions that „may“ (or may not) be true, for example →this one. Don't rely on articles about studies or studies that are not peer-reviewed (or behind a paywall); in those you can always muse about things that may or may not happen, but that's not very useful.

They tracked people for 3.5 years, that's hardly enough to make any definitive conclusion from. I read the case study in full, it's not behind a paywall if you are affiliated with a hospital. There's no discussion of extensive nicotine use. You can also try scihub to get access.

Overlooked that part and I think that's important: actually just the opposite is the case. Nicotine research used to be tobacco smoke research, which changed since we are able to look at pure nicotine and its effect – since then even the WHO has removed nicotine from the list of carcinogens, its supposed lethal dose has been raised by a multitude and nicotine nowadays is considered to be „mildly addictive“ (about the same as caffeine) while tobacco smoke remains to be considered highly addictive. One of the major revelations in this context is that it's the smoke that kills us, not the nicotine.

This is sorta true but not quite. There are few studies that isolate nicotine from tobacco. Nicotine is no longer listed as a carcinogen, correct. But NNN (a nicotine-like derivative produced from tobacco) IS listed as a group 1 carcinogen. Tobacco is still a group 1 carcinogen.

Also, the other studies you linked are in questionable journals with impact factors below 1. They aren't useless, but you seem to be cherry picking those articles that support your view.
 
daeso393,
  • Like
Reactions: Grass Yes

Siebter

Less soul, more mind
They tracked people for 3.5 years, that's hardly enough to make any definitive conclusion from.
Believe it or not, but in tobacco / nicotine research the risk factor of e cigs compared to regular cigarette smoking is considered to be at least 95% lower, and that number is used very carefully. That is not based on this study only, there are many many more – however, ask yourself: how long would a study like that have to be to make a *definite* conclusion? 20 years? 50 years? A scientist would say that even a hundred years would not be enough, because as long as you don't find anything (and the study I linked literally found *nothing*) you will not be able to exclude possible risks. You can define clear risk factors once you find them. The study itself (published & peer-reviewed in „Nature“, one of the leading scientific journals, instructed by one of the leading scientists in nicotine / tobacco research) does not claim to allow definite conclusions either, since a single study never can. This was just one example on how a good study looks like.

This is sorta true but not quite. There are few studies that isolate nicotine from tobacco. Nicotine is no longer listed as a carcinogen, correct. But NNN (a nicotine-like derivative produced from tobacco) IS listed as a group 1 carcinogen. Tobacco is still a group 1 carcinogen.
So which part exactly is „not quite“ true then? NNN-nicotine is not used in e cigarettes. Tobacco is not used in e cigarettes.

Also, the other studies you linked are in questionable journals with impact factors below 1. They aren't useless, but you seem to be cherry picking those articles that support your view.
Um... again: „Nature“, one of the leading scientific journals. Do you actually try to question the reputation of that source?

If you refer to the cannabis related studies, then yes – as @invertedisdead explained, the research situation for cannabis and especially vaporizing cannabis is not ideal (although I'd be interested to understand what makes these sources „questionable“ for you), what exactly is researched (and reviewed) is dictated a lot by lobbyism and the financial situation of a research institute. However, I wasn't exactly cherry picking but rather sharing pretty much all the serious research I even know of (there is probably more, but I haven't come across them yet). But the lack of extensive research does not indicate that there must be harm – and again: there *is* some research and what it suggests is actually quite clear. For cigarette smoking and its risks you wouldn't even need half the resources to find its dangers.

Edit: how does that even match?

There's even a case report of a heavy vape user being diagnosed with oral cancer - https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2020-022301. Obviously it's a case report and n=1 but there's value in that.

and this:

They tracked people for 3.5 years, that's hardly enough to make any definitive conclusion from.

One case report without full context versus 16 cases observed over a period of 3½ years with regular checkups. Um...
 
Last edited:

Truth Seeker

Well-Known Member
Are you vaping just once a week like you suggest with combustion though when you experience all the irritation? Or is that irritation based off frequent daily use? When you mention smoking just one joint a week it still suggests to me that combustion brings its own issues to you - that, or you just don’t consume much - and if that’s the case I honestly wouldn’t stress on vaping vs smoking at such low usage of one time per week.

As far as studies to support vaporization - some have taken place, but not much. Studies rely heavily on funding from grants but who would benefit from funding those vaping studies? The FDA? NIDA? The DEA? Would you even feel confident in results from such biased agencies? Technically cannabis vaporizers aren’t legal, and federally the plant is a schedule 1 narcotic. I wouldn’t expect to see much anything positive about cannabis going forward IMHO recreational has ruined most of the medical stride we made. IMO the fact these studies don’t already exist suggest nobody is performing them. But it doesn’t mean vaping is bad. Western Medicine (at least in the US) is not big into “harm reduction” so it’s hard for the medical industry to get excited about it. In other countries people literally can get dry herb vaporizers through their health insurance - despite more cannabis use than anywhere in the world the United States is nowhere close to that.

that said I am disappointed myself in the lack of published literature considering every dispensary cannabis product undergoes analytics testing, the labs are booming, they just aren’t testing anything we could learn from. Vaping already has a tarnished reputation from propaganda so it’s just hard to find someone who believe in it enough to fund the research. We could fund it ourselves if we all pitched in a dollar to find out what we’re actually missing instead of VASing over $500 vaporizers. I’ve considered making a thread about this before, and would happily put my designs up against any commercial product for testing of the entire process.


We can extrapolate from cigarette research that combustion probably doesn’t destroy all these bad compounds into something safer. I don’t like to generalize these statements too much cause there’s probably compounds that are safer when burnt off and others that aren’t. Everything has its own degradation pathway. But it’s well known that combusted terpenes degrade into polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. So while the word on vaporized and inhaled cannabis terpenes may be out, we know that it’s a far less destructive process to those compounds already known to have anti-oxidant / anti cancer / anti mutagenic properties themselves.

As far as vapor harshness, IMHO I believe much of it truthfully stems from old combustion habits. There’s two standouts I’ve noticed myself doing and catching others doing. The first is cloud chasing - when a bong is milked out as dense as smoke but with vapor, there’s much more cannabinoids in that same volume, which could easily equate to harshness. I believe now that it’s often simply due to the density and visibility differences of vapor vs smoke. A reoccurring theme I notice now is how people tend to not even feel the vapor UNTIL they inhale too much and start coughing. There was actually much more cannabinoids in the hit than they thought, but because you can’t see as well it it’s not perceived the same, and makes it easy to continually over-do it if chasing those clouds.
I concur with what you and others have said about the benefits of vaping over combustion it just drys my throat out to the point of discomfort even after only a few tokes....major buzz kill. Why deal with the irritation if I can minimize the risks of combustion by intermittent usage? kind of a no win situation and at some point I'm saying adios to dispensary's and all this modern cannabis business and their shady licensed counterparts and rubber stamp lab testing and who knows what conflicts of interest exist in such a industry. Probably no better time than ever to quit all forms of inhalation.
 

vapirtoo

Well-Known Member
Well maybe not ALL forms of inhalation. LOL.
Yeah too far.
From my personal and subjective observation,
my lungs feel more flexible and my breathing seems deeper
since vaping. To each, their own?
Have you tried warm water in your water tool?
Grow your own and make edibles?
There are ways around that irritation. IMHO
 

invertedisdead

Weapons of VAS Destruction
I concur with what you and others have said about the benefits of vaping over combustion it just drys my throat out to the point of discomfort even after only a few tokes....major buzz kill. Why deal with the irritation if I can minimize the risks of combustion by intermittent usage? kind of a no win situation and at some point I'm saying adios to dispensary's and all this modern cannabis business and their shady licensed counterparts and rubber stamp lab testing and who knows what conflicts of interest exist in such a industry. Probably no better time than ever to quit all forms of inhalation.

Yeah man, no need to swim up river if it doesn’t work for ya, I’m just a bit surprised you notice such irritation with such low usage of once a week.

I’ve dealt with vapor harshness quite a lot of times so I can genuinely relate to your posts, but I always chalked it up to being a heavier user myself.

I would normally suggest concentrates instead but you said you aren’t interested in them. But I usually switch to concentrates exclusively when flower vaping becomes too irritating for me. Can’t recall ever having major irritation issues with concentrates, I usually come back to flower eventually for the high but I’m not sure I could consider flower vaping as smoother. Definitely subjective though.

Your posts remind me of my good friend Biohacker from here. He went through every vape on the market, multiple times - eventually moved on to dabs for a few years and finally settled on micro dosing off cartridges. Last time I talked to him he put the vape down for good. Which I can understand and respect.

Let me ask you a question - your lungs are fine right? It’s your throat that feels scorched? Cause that’s what happens to me, the vape harshness is totally different from smoking harshness (for me)
I never get a heavy, hurty, lung busting feeling, but I definitely get scorched throats.

IMHO it’s probably the convection......
Said it a number of times over the years on this forum when I’ve had to straight up stop using convection.

One thing I do have an issue with is how it seems easier for the average person to hit the end of a hot roach, then use a vaporizer without some form of “cooling unit.” The popularity of cooling stems in recent years only further demonstrates this IMHO.

Is it possible that combustion “recycles” that latent heat energy input, thus actually using less heat than convection vaporization? Think about how the energy is carried across a bowl when ignited. I’ve commented before on the high energy requirements of vaporization compared to smoking. Sort of how charcoal has more energy than wood, but only after the volatiles have been vaporized off.
 

daeso393

New Member
Believe it or not, but in tobacco / nicotine research the risk factor of e cigs compared to regular cigarette smoking is considered to be at least 95% lower, and that number is used very carefully. That is not based on this study only, there are many many more – however, ask yourself: how long would a study like that have to be to make a *definite* conclusion? 20 years? 50 years? A scientist would say that even a hundred years would not be enough, because as long as you don't find anything (and the study I linked literally found *nothing*) you will not be able to exclude possible risks. You can define clear risk factors once you find them. The study itself (published & peer-reviewed in „Nature“, one of the leading scientific journals, instructed by one of the leading scientists in nicotine / tobacco research) does not claim to allow definite conclusions either, since a single study never can. This was just one example on how a good study looks like.

Um... again: „Nature“, one of the leading scientific journals. Do you actually try to question the reputation of that source?
That article isn't published in Nature, it's in Scientific Reports. If there was a vaping article in Nature it would be a seminal article for the field. I'm not sure if you don't understand what you are reading or are trying to overstate the credibility of your source, but either way you are incorrect. My guess is you are confusing the article being indexed on the nature.com website as being published in the journal Nature.

Epidemiological research is fairly clear that we need need to track people over a lifetime. We cannot draw any definitive conclusions about vaping until we have a cohort of tens of thousands of gerontological vape users. There will be no definitive conclusions for at least another 20-30 years. Until then everything is speculation.

So which part exactly is „not quite“ true then? NNN-nicotine is not used in e cigarettes. Tobacco is not used in e cigarettes.

I had to look this up to verify, so I'm glad you made this point. It looks like it's found in very low levels, and produced endogenously, see this study - https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.8b0008989.


I would just add, because I don't want my tone to come off as snarky, I think we're relatively close in our views. The research is not conclusive, and we are trying to extrapolate conclusions from only a handful of studies which is problematic. But, I appreciate the discussion.
 
Last edited:

Siebter

Less soul, more mind
That article isn't published in Nature, it's in Scientific Reports.

...which is administered by „Nature“, and that doesn't take away it's credibility at all – it's an actual, well done peer reviewed study and not an article with vague assumptions. My point wasn't the results of said study, but its approach. I still don't understand how a single case weighs more for you than that study – which, again, does not claim to have definite answers anyway.

Epidemiological research is fairly clear that we need need to track people over a lifetime. We cannot draw any definitive conclusions about vaping until we have a cohort of tens of thousands of gerontological vape users. There will be no definitive conclusions for at least another 20-30 years. Until then everything is speculation.

No, *even then* it wouldn't be possible to make definite conclusions. You seem to think that one can proof the lack of harm, but that's not possible.

Anyway, the discussion about e cigarettes is a bit offtopic, I suggest dropping it in order to focus on vaping cannabis.
 
Siebter,
  • Like
Reactions: Grass Yes

Truth Seeker

Well-Known Member
Yeah man, no need to swim up river if it doesn’t work for ya, I’m just a bit surprised you notice such irritation with such low usage of once a week.

I’ve dealt with vapor harshness quite a lot of times so I can genuinely relate to your posts, but I always chalked it up to being a heavier user myself.

I would normally suggest concentrates instead but you said you aren’t interested in them. But I usually switch to concentrates exclusively when flower vaping becomes too irritating for me. Can’t recall ever having major irritation issues with concentrates, I usually come back to flower eventually for the high but I’m not sure I could consider flower vaping as smoother. Definitely subjective though.

Your posts remind me of my good friend Biohacker from here. He went through every vape on the market, multiple times - eventually moved on to dabs for a few years and finally settled on micro dosing off cartridges. Last time I talked to him he put the vape down for good. Which I can understand and respect.

Let me ask you a question - your lungs are fine right? It’s your throat that feels scorched? Cause that’s what happens to me, the vape harshness is totally different from smoking harshness (for me)
I never get a heavy, hurty, lung busting feeling, but I definitely get scorched throats.

IMHO it’s probably the convection......
Said it a number of times over the years on this forum when I’ve had to straight up stop using convection.

One thing I do have an issue with is how it seems easier for the average person to hit the end of a hot roach, then use a vaporizer without some form of “cooling unit.” The popularity of cooling stems in recent years only further demonstrates this IMHO.

Is it possible that combustion “recycles” that latent heat energy input, thus actually using less heat than convection vaporization? Think about how the energy is carried across a bowl when ignited. I’ve commented before on the high energy requirements of vaporization compared to smoking. Sort of how charcoal has more energy than wood, but only after the volatiles have been vaporized off.
Yes it's my throat that gets dry, irritation can last a day or two.....drink lots of water etc too so that's not an issue (with/without water tool)
Maybe it's convection maybe you're right?
 

Siebter

Less soul, more mind
Maybe it's convection maybe you're right?

I'm pretty sure convection has a higher tendency to create throat irritation. I can puff on my Dynavap mouth to lung style, but my Tinymight needs at least eight seconds of uninterrupted inhalation – doesn't have to be the temperature (as I mentioned, I wouldn't consider vapor being „hot“ anyway) but the sheer length of the draw.
 

Truth Seeker

Well-Known Member
I'm pretty sure convection has a higher tendency to create throat irritation. I can puff on my Dynavap mouth to lung style, but my Tinymight needs at least eight seconds of uninterrupted inhalation – doesn't have to be the temperature (as I mentioned, I wouldn't consider vapor being „hot“ anyway) but the sheer length of the draw.
I've been thinking of buying a Dynavap or a Silver Surfer or even a Vapor Bros. Problem with a mouth to lung hit is the back of throat gets hit and that's my problem (persistent dryness at back of throat when vaping).
 

Siebter

Less soul, more mind
A Dynavap will give you a bit of a throat hit for sure (unless you stay at lower temps), which is something I actually enjoy because it mimiks the feeling of a joint – so *that* kind of throat hit should be familiar and manageable for you, I think the MFLB has a similar kind of feel (has been a while since I used one).

It's not easy to come up with a good idea except for maybe going to a otolaryngologist (omg is that even a word?) to let it check – it does seem to be particularly sensitive in your case.
 

Flow

Well-Known Member
how about a bong and a Tamer from Elev8 on any of your whip vape ?
device filled with glycérin, keep it in the freezer…

I guess this could be a good option for you ?
 

Truth Seeker

Well-Known Member
how about a bong and a Tamer from Elev8 on any of your whip vape ?
device filled with glycérin, keep it in the freezer…

I guess this could be a good option for you ?
This might be the way to go! I'm thinking of buying a silver surfer so thanks for the heads up!
I was vaping for about 3 weeks and my chest felt great and breathing was great, increased athletic performance yet my throat
gets tore up, maybe if I can vape once a week with this cooling device it would mitigate throat harshness.
I'm on reddit right now and the discussions of vaping and throat harshness is very well documented there. Folks are probably afraid to speak up on this forum as readily as they will there.
 
Truth Seeker,

Siebter

Less soul, more mind
I'm on reddit right now and the discussions of vaping and throat harshness is very well documented there. Folks are probably afraid to speak up on this forum as readily as they will there.
I follow r/vaporents & r/Dynavap pretty much every day and don't find the discussions there about these kind of issues coming up more frequent than here. Throat irritations, coughing and the like are not taboo on FC, but rather considered to be the norm. The question is not so much if these issues exist at all, but rather what they mean and how to minimize them. A constant irritation at the same spot would make me concerned as well, but usually these discussions are about much more general symptoms.
 
Top Bottom