How I conserve weed with my vape (10+ highs per 0.1g)

[FlyingLow]

Imo rebreathing is a falsehood. I don't get any more elevated than i do from holding my inhale a few extra seconds...all rebreathing does is starve the brain of oxygen, and i find rebreathing does not deliver more thc nor does it deliver a more medicated effect...the lack of oxygen does create some tempory lightheadedness, but does not make me any more medicated.


$0.02

 

[CRvapes]

Imo rebreathing is a falsehood. I don't get any more elevated than i do from holding my inhale a few extra seconds...all it does is starve the brain of oxygen, and i find it does not deliver more thc nor does it deliver a more medicated effect...the lack of oxygen does create some tempory lightheadedness, but does not make me any more medicated.

i noticed this too! ill get lightheaded but from lack of air lol

 

[FlyingLow]

Lol. Vape more, rebreathe less.



You get the same effect from breathing in and out of a paper bag.

 

[CarolKing]

@yonatanil Higher temps are suppose to work for pain. Curious how the 320 degrees would help my arthritis throughout my body? I need 375 degrees and above, depending how harsh the vapor is in a particular vaporizer and the cannabis. This of course is another subject.

 

[lwien]

You get the same effect from breathing in and out of a paper bag.

Breathing in and out of a paper bag is quite a bit different in that with a paper bag, you are re-breathing your exhaled carbon dioxide which lowers your PH level. In the technique I suggested, this doesn't happen at all.

But in regards to the final affects or lack thereof, your anecdotal evidence as well as mine is pretty meaningless in the whole scheme of things so my suggestion to anyone reading this thread is to try out all of the different methods and use the one that works for you regardless if it works or doesn't work for anyone else.

For me, I go with a bit of logic being that we all pretty much agree that any exhaled vapor is wasted vapor so it makes sense....to me......that by re-inhaling that exhaled vapor, I would get more of the actives out of the same hit. Is this in fact true? Beats the hell out of me.....

 

[FlyingLow]

Well, lets agree to disagree.

Imo that is an antiquated opinion, im on a cell phone in a foreign country, so googling the subject is difficult right now for me to cite examples.

Type in a search or two, you'll find many of the newer theories would argue the majority of thc and other good active ingredients are absodbed in the first 3-7 seconds after inhaling. IMO The rewarding effects for holding any longer are minimal in relation to the amount of residue you allow to settle into your lungs while going for that full-of-pride ghost hit.

Think of how often you must clean your glassware... even just vaping. All those particles settle somewhere and you cant ISO wash your lungs! [FUCK COMBUSTION]

 

[MinnBobber]

Lol. Vape


You get the same effect from breathing in and out of a paper bag.

......................
I prefer to call it recirculating the vapor as it is nothing like breathing out into a bag and then
rebreathing that spent air. If lwien's method is like mine, there are just easy inhales/exhales with no lung strain whatsoever, unlike taking giant inhale and holding for a minute.

What maximizes the lungs ability to absorb cannabis or oxygen?
Air movement over the alveoli and where they have multiple opportunities to absorb the goodies.

Inhale slowly from vaporizer to fully bring goodies into the lungs. Nice deep inhale. Easy 5-10 second hold. Slowly exhale only about 15% of what you inhaled. Slight hold and then slow inhale of just air/oxygen to fill your lungs again/ that 15% you exhaled.
I can repeat this up to 10 times from just one vape hit and still get some vapor on exhale # 10. That vapor has had 10 trips around the lungs- and it is truly tapped out .
A single intake and long hold just does not get that circulation over and over again to extract again and again until vapor is fully depleted.

This helps to fully get max benefits from one vape inhale, for those that want/need/enjoy max efficiency.
For those with easy supply or growers, this may not be "worth it".
I have to drive 1000 miles one way to get tiny amount in CO so I need to make it last !

 

[lwien]

Yup MB, that's exactly what I do but I don't do it 10 times. More like 3 but for me, as I am sure for you, it works really well.

 

[MinnBobber]

Yup MB, that's exactly what I do but I don't do it 10 times. More like 3 but for me, as I am sure for you, it works really well.

,..................?
I don't do it 10 times all the time, but sometimes to be amazed that original vapor is still in the lungs after 10 partial breaths.

 

[Tommy10]

Interesting, I doubt this numbers would ever get me or most smokers I know quoted numbers of highs, but lucky being high is subjective. I'd consider myself a heavy users but I do acknowledge the bennfits of micro dosing and have my stints. When quoting the efficiency of vaping I have been called everything from mistaken to outright lying. The most maths I ever did was 40 full bong hits from a gram in the vapcap, nowhere near what OP gets, but still twice as efficient as MJ/Tobacoo and the smallest snapper bowl around and these are visible large hits.

Also let it be known I vote rebreath in the rebreath vs single long hold debate. Not only can I not hold my breath for shit I think it's more effective and you get to see a little vapor each time.
Although in the bothering at all vs packing more bud, I vote huge cloud exhales after a few seconds hold.... Unless I'm running really low then we are talking conservation. Mmmmm, so much tek!

 

[AJS]

Actually, it's more of a re-breathing technique, CK. I'll take a full hit, hold for about 7 seconds, let a little out and then take in another lungful of air, hold for 7 seconds, exhale a little bit and then take in another lungful of air. That way, I'm re-oxgenating the same hit over and over again. Works for me in maximizing the amount of THC that I can get from a single hit.

I normally hold my hits for about 2-3 seconds because I really don't mind the end result a lot of the time, I'll always do one or two small bowls and stop there.

Well, I decided to pack half a bowl and use the above method and 20 minutes later the effects are if I vaped much more with my usual exhale. I made sure to always be very slightly inhaling or exhaling during the process to keep everything moving inside my lungs.

Vaped probably a .03

 

[Seek]

I'd like to respond to these points you made:

2) Taking very slow and drawn out hits

What is the reason behind this? Does slow draw somehow get cannabinoids into you more efficiently?
Or is just your particular vape bad at extracting on fast hits? Not every vape works the same.
For example conduction vapes give a thick kick when you pull slowly and give you most vapor at the beginning of your hit.
And convection vapes usually need some airflow to start going, so they will give you air at the start and as you continue get denser.

4) Keeping the vapor in my lungs for as long as possible (at least 1 minute)

This is controversinal, some say it helps get you higher, some say it's just bad for you.
I think it may be a bit of both. It may get a tiny bit of more cannabinoids absorbed but leave you deprived of oxygen as a payoff.

1) Vaping the same bowl over multiple sessions (up to 15 sessions)
3) Keep hitting the vape until the weed has cooled (after turning off vape)
5) Only doing a single hit per session

These three points sound exactly like you're trying to use a session vape liek an on-demand one.
And I think you would love to upgrade to such a vape as it would be much more user-friendly for you.
Look at Firefly 2 or Grasshopper, these are already designed to do exacly what you are forcibly trying to change your sessions vape into.

 

[juneshayek]

What is the reason behind this?

Mine is a conduction vape meaning that incoming air is cool, so my reasoning is that a slow hit will allow heat to build up and diffuse throughout the entire bowlful, instead of just the weed in contact with the walls of the heating chamber. With convection vapes, doing this probably makes less sense, since incoming air is already warm.

This is controversinal

I know it is, and am also familiar with the research that @FlyingLow quoted. But the reason why I've been doing it was that it really worked for me. A lot better than just exhaling after 10 seconds. Now, since this thread though, I've switched to the rebreathing method which seems to be working even better.

These three points sound exactly like you're trying to use a session vape

I'm really happy with my flowermate, but that's certainly an interesting suggestion. I'll check it out. Thanks!

@AJS, cool that it worked for you. It's pretty neat, right? I'm amazed at how little weed can actually get you high!

@MGG , I've never really done anything other than weed, not even alcohol, so I have no idea, to be honest!

@Tommy10, 40 hits per gram is up there, in the same order of magnitude as what I'm getting. The rest of the difference is probably just me being extra sensitive to the effects of weed.

@yonatanil, that's a very interesting table! I would have thought though, that for any given temperature you should be getting the accumulated benefits of the lower temperatures, since all the other substances with lower boiling points are also boiling. I mean, if THC boils and 160 C, it should boil even more at 180 C. This may also be the reason for the discrepancy @CarolKing is mentioning.

so my suggestion to anyone reading this thread is to try out all of the different methods

I couldn't agree more. Also, vaping makes experimentation really easy so there's no real downside to playing around a bit.

 

[CRvapes]

Quite a useful Graph, i vaped using my crafty at 168 - 175 with wonderful results

 

[zor]

This. If you've been a regular vaper for longer than two weeks your tolerance should most definitely be higher than that. Even as a fresh new smoker I have a hard time imagining the microdosing you're talking about, not withstanding something like you having some sort of weird genetic disposition towards having an abnormally small tolerance.

I was thinking similarly for a while but recently I've found that I get way more medicated on less cannabis than I used to...I think it depends on many variables, in my case I have come upon higher quality herb and noticed a change in my technique such as a deeper inhale and longer hold (although I used to be a very powerful swimmer in my youth, my lung capacity is nothing like what it used to be ) and the result is that two hits off my ssv with about 0.06g in Ddave's mod results in a deep rust brown abv weed and substantial effects. One hit is good medicine for anxiety, two to three for insomnia. I've been vaping every day for about 6 years {minus those sad dry spans} and there would be times where I thought my tolerance to be too high (pun!) but I've found myself getting more outta my weed than before.

That said, I do very well recall what being high used to feel like after a drought/t-break or even when I first ever got high, and the current sensations are quite different.

Holding your hit in does NOT make you more high --- it is a misunderstanding of how your lungs work with the gas blood exchange. Your alveoli absorb air and the THC when air is moving across the alveoli. When you 'hold your breath' it stops air movement inside your lungs and across the alveoli which immediately slows and reduces the gas exchange from the lungs and within the blood. If you want your lungs to absorb more active ingredient a slow inhale and exhale exposes your alveoli to more THC laden air that can be absorbed by the blood.

I'm curious, what is your source for this? Oxygen and CO2 diffuse across the alveoli and capillaries thriugh simole diffusion, via concentration gradients. Whether yku are circulating air in your lungs or not does not have an effect, as far as I know, and it wouldnt make sense that diffusion would be halted due to stationary gas; these given molecules will always move to equilibrate a concentration gradient.

 

[zor]

High School Biology class, but Google works too. You will just need to dig a little. Good luck.

No need to be curt, I have a Masters in both biology and neruoscience. As I learned in school, what I wrote before is true and having just googled it to confirm, stand by what I learned. Here, for examplehttps://www2.estrellamountain.edu/faculty/farabee/biobk/BioBookRESPSYS.html#The Alveoli and Gas Exchange

 

[Ozyzj]

As posted above by zor, I think there's a ton of variables at play here, and almost all of them are subjective, but I wanted to chime in on the quoted portion below:

I'd like to respond to these points you made:

What is the reason behind this? Does slow draw somehow get cannabinoids into you more efficiently?
Or is just your particular vape bad at extracting on fast hits? Not every vape works the same.
For example conduction vapes give a thick kick when you pull slowly and give you most vapor at the beginning of your hit.
And convection vapes usually need some airflow to start going, so they will give you air at the start and as you continue get denser.

Preface: I have a convection vape, but I think the slow draw is more important regarding the function of the person, not the vape.

In my experience, the slower I draw, the easier it is to perform a true "mouth inhale". I think this is also called the "cigarette inhale". I was never a cig smoker so I'm pretty new to the technique, so it takes some concentration for me to do it right. If I rush while taking my draw, I seem to run out of lung power way too early, meaning that I don't get a lot of the vapor deep into the lungs.

In support of the original post, my usual approach is to take my time slowly drawing vapor into the mouth for say 10 seconds, then afterwards, breathe in fresh air at the same slow pace either through the nose or mouth for another 10 or 15 seconds. Also, going by the idea that we can most effectively absorb vapor that is in motion (I don't know if this is a fact), I think it makes sense that the slower the vapor is traveling, the better its odds are of being fully absorbed.

My take on this: for those looking to maximize their material or cut down on the number of puffs needed per session as much as possible, I really recommend focusing on a slower and deeper inhale.

 

[zor]

Come on, don't be so sensitive. I am just funning with you pal. Seriously, I learned this in high school. Check those links I gave you and the links in the video footer.

Sorry, I misinterpreted your tone!

But I wasn't talking about whether you get higher by holding the hit in or not, rather that holding your breath will impede gas exchange, and that isn't true.

The studies he cites are also dealing with smoke vs vapor, which I think is a significant difference given the increase in available thc per hit, the lack of any CO and CO2 to give a dizziness or other pseudo-high sensation, and one concludes the following:
Heart rate was minimally affected by the breathhold manipulation. Effects of marijuana on mood were not consistently affected by breathhold duration.

Without seeing the actual data this sounds rather subjective to me; I've measured my heart rate (still can't believe my phone does this shit) while in my peak highs and it varies considerably given other factors like stress, fatigue, excitement, etc. These aren't a complete set of scientific conclusions to address whether a user gets more high or not.

 

[beiberhole69]

High School Biology class, but Google works too. You will just need to dig a little. Good luck.

Google this: Why holding your hit in does not get you higher?

Here is a video for you that includes links to scientific studies.

...and there is so much more.

This is not relevant to the discussion because he is talking about SMOKE, which is completely different than vapor.

Here is a link to a study done with the Volcano where they're studying how much THC gets extracted:
https://www.researchgate.net/public...he_pulmonary_delivery_of_tetrahydrocannabinol

You'll see towards the conclusion that they looked at the exhaled vapor and found that 30-40% of the THC wasn't absorbed.


But in addition to the extra absorption that's likely taking place, when you hold your breath and expand your lungs to their total capacity you trigger your parasympathetic nervous system and that forces your body to relax... and if the user has any anxiety issues (which people who get "too high" usually do) then that will definitely help.

Here's a little vid that talks about the parasympathetic nervous system in regards to relaxing out of a fight or flight physical response (most relevant part starts around 3:45:
http://howtofightnow.com/overcoming-fear-before-a-fight/

 

[beiberhole69]

Do you really need to constantly repeat yourself like that?

I looked at all the studies linked in the YT video, they are all smoke specific. Smoke and vapour are absorbed differently by the lungs.

 

[zor]

I can assure you that I have many details wrong on this topic overall. I don't even have the entire vocabulary down pat. I have found the topic to be extremely complex. But my goals are not so lofty as to strive beyond Google searches. All I am really interested in how all this effects my greater enjoyment of the herb.

I just want to avoid misinformation where possible, one of the reasons I loathe other forums based on cannabis and vaporization is because people there spout off opinions as fact or get things mixed up, which does no service for those asking the questions. FC has reliably had critical thinkers and knowledgeable contributors which fosters a culture of curiosity and honesty, or so I feel.

 

[kimura]

just to stir the pot, I would submit that cannabis "smoke" contains cannabis vapor. what happens to the material at the edge of the cherry? Hot air is being drawn through it, but not getting it hot enough to ignite (yet). sounds familiar, right? I am not a scientist but it seems to me that cannabinoids are in fact being "boiled" off or aerosolized even when you smoke a joint. therefore I'm not sure it's valid to make the claim that the active cannabinoids in smoke are absorbed differently from the cannabinoids in vapor. is there any actual research on the difference yet?

I think of smoke as vapors + bullshit (combustion byproducts), with the cannabinoid vapor content of "smoke" being less potent due to loss from pyrolysis. but this is all just conjecture on my part

 

[juneshayek]

@zor, @beiberhole69, these are some interesting points and consistent with what I've experienced. I find my heart rate is a really bad proxy for how high I am. It really only increases if I panick, but other than that stays pretty normal throughout a high.

Also, in my experience, as I've also said before, holding it in for a minute gets me twice as high as holding it in for 10 seconds. The rebreathing technique does seem to outperform holding it in, but by how much? That's what I'm still trying to find out, and I'll post when I know more. (Of course, I realise that what works for me may not do so for others, but I still think it's worth documenting.)

As for holding it in vs re-breathing in terms of the actual mechanism, @zor, I imagine that although most of the surface area of the lungs comprises alveoli, most of the volume may not. Thus re-breathing may simply just redistribute vapor otherwise stuck in areas where little adsorption would be taking place, e.g. the wind pipe etc. Although pure speculation, I think this mechanism at least explains how rebreathing could work better, though still in the same ballpark as keeping it in, which is what I'm seeing so far. Numbers will follow.

 

[zor]

oh, I don't disagree about the potential benefit of rebreathing, I've read anecdotes and studies on deep sea divers and their abilities to hold their breath. I do imagine the turbulence from rebreathing can help distribution of the vapor particles too. Fascinating stuff!

 

[C No Ego]

@zor, @beiberhole69, these are some interesting points and consistent with what I've experienced. I find my heart rate is a really bad proxy for how high I am. It really only increases if I panick, but other than that stays pretty normal throughout a high.

Also, in my experience, as I've also said before, holding it in for a minute gets me twice as high as holding it in for 10 seconds. The rebreathing technique does seem to outperform holding it in, but by how much? That's what I'm still trying to find out, and I'll post when I know more. (Of course, I realise that what works for me may not do so for others, but I still think it's worth documenting.)

As for holding it in vs re-breathing in terms of the actual mechanism, @zor, I imagine that although most of the surface area of the lungs comprises alveoli, most of the volume may not. Thus re-breathing may simply just redistribute vapor otherwise stuck in areas where little adsorption would be taking place, e.g. the wind pipe etc. Although pure speculation, I think this mechanism at least explains how rebreathing could work better, though still in the same ballpark as keeping it in, which is what I'm seeing so far. Numbers will follow.

I think the idea is the lungs absorb only a certain amount of oxygen and/or vapor up to about 5 seconds. they've absorbed enough at that point and need new fresh oxygen to re activate absorption receptors. this is the benefit of re breathing to re activate receptors once the lungs have taken in all they are going to take in. I typically re breathe about three times some times if the vapor is smooth...