You were not quoted out of context, I merely broke down what you said into reply sized chunks....I believe the technical term is 'de-construct & discuss'.
& I didn't say it wasn't your opinion, more pointing out the fact that your opinion has little or no scientific basis.
Have you tested volcano bags for tar?
Can you post links to tar tests on volcano bags?
No, that's not what you said is it? You said, "There is not enough information available to say this as fact....but It could be said your biased appraisal of the study is less than scientific." You called my clearly identified opinion as a statement of fact, then threw in what some might take as a provocative personal attack? This was, and still is, an opinion (and of course based on what I believe).
Here's the science part for those taking notes. The whole basis of modern science is the experiment to test a theory (or question a concept or observation). To work it has to be subjective and isolate the question, here 'does this reduce tar'. And it has to be repeatable by others to be accepted. We are also asking 'does it prevent', but that's another issue. The experiment gave internally inconsistent results. One vaporizer showed statistically significant improvements, the other did not. Real scientist therefore would
question the design of the experiment. It's clearly showing
something not accounted for. I point to the process, not so much the results. I suggest you can't really base conclusions beyond 'improvement (of an unknown magnitude) in at least some conditions'. The goal, I think, of the authors?
No, I don't own a Volcano (although most guys know what it is). I have some considerable experience with HA bags, no tar there. That's my observation. Can you disprove it? Is there tar there? No, I have no 3rd party test data showing lack of what I say is not there, rather think it's your move to answer why I (and others of course) don't report tar buildup (rather resin very rich in THC, a concentrate not waste product).
IMO 'drying' the terpines and cannabanoids out of herb creates no more tars than drying the water out does. And again, start with the starting weight of a MFLB load, subtract the weight of the water and good stuff that came off and you're basically at the ABV weight. What material made up this theoretical tar? In blazing this seems pretty clear, THC and other complex factions are destroyed supplying the raw materials for the tars.
If you have access to more up to date studies involving the direct measuring of tar output from smoking versus vapourizing, you are welcome to add them to the discussion. The point I am trying to make is that I am at least aiming to further the discussion by providing what information I have on the subject.
Not everyone can go out and purchase a Volcano, so it is good to know that even the shittiest, most outdated products on the market still offer a significant reduction in tar consumption when compared side-by-side with combustion.
Thanks for doing so. That squares with my understanding, I'm sorry if I made it sound like it was your study, I understand it was Normal and company trying to open up the discussion as well. I agree, it's an improvement for sure (as we all know most likely), we should on that basis alone promote the idea to our friends.
Please note, the original question from the OP here is "Do vaporizers like the solo/volcano eliminate most of the tar?". I think the answer is a resounding yes. More so, I believe properly run vapes like Solo and Volcano prevent the formation of tars to start with......and am confident I'm not alone in that opinion/experience. Better even than eliminating it after it's formed (from what we pay so dearly for) I believe.
Thanks again.
OF
. I haven't tried this specifically, but I have tried similar things in my questionable past, such as drinking alcohol (I want to say it was vermouth) that I had put through a pretty gunked up water piece. It did not end well.