Bill Densoyle
Well-Known Member
I just call em like I see em. S&B is unparalleled. I have nothing personal against those who wish to apply lipstick onto the pig that is the REST of the vaporizer industry. But I do like to defend S&B against the criticisms of such folks on the FC forum.While I agree that links to quoted studies helps validate those studies, I also think that it's a bit of a stretch to imply that someone is just making this shit up or that the study doesn't exist just because they didn't include a link.
Perhaps this would be a good time for me to bring up another idea I was considering: Thickness of vapor is not a proper measure of quality of vapor. Any home-made device could get really hot without burning, and make a thick vapor mist. But S&B takes it to a whole nother level by scientifically keeping the entire heating chamber at the desired temp without having part of it closer to the heat and part further away, without inaccurate temperature measurements, without inconsistencies that require stirring, and without any chance of human or mechanical error.
Oftentimes the better medical delivery of vapor will be LESS thick and more invisible, because its keeping a constant warm throughout the filling chamber, instead of making one spot too hot and one spot too cold. The airflow is such that it provides a thorough and accurate extraction, because its pushing thru the whole chamber at one solid rate of speed, and constantly holding the desired temperature.
Well, I may try to rewrite that idea better later. But there ya go.
Last edited: