Is there tar in vapor?

[hoptimum]

Sorry for the late response guys here is the source..
1.http://www.maps.org/news-letters/v06n3/06359mj1.html
2.http://vaporizer-info.com/en/medical-applications

OK, so I know the data is a little old but assuming the vaporizer they were testing were really "vaporizing" shouldn't their be no tar at all because of no combustion. Yes, there are newer vapes out there and there will be newer ones in the future but if the earlier models were indeed vaporizers shouldn't there be no tar as well? Opinions?

So you're pointing out the dangers of tar in an electric hot plate and a hot air gun? Both of those methods were prone to combustion back in the days of Eagle Bill. But thanks. I'll try to stay away from them.

 

[Thevaped1]

So you're pointing out the dangers of tar in an electric hot plate and a hot air gun? Both of those methods were prone to combustion back in the days of Eagle Bill. But thanks. I'll try to stay away from them.

OK, ill give you that those vaporizers are indeed ancient but regardless, you can take a magic flight box and a volcano and they would be doing the same thing.Vaporizing. If the studies above were done in a controlled environment why wouldn't you think that they were also vaporizing the tested material (cannabis). Are you saying that because these vaporizers are old it means that the experiment is flawed?
Again just looking at all the info.. I still vape by the way.

 

[OF]

2.http://vaporizer-info.com/en/medical-applications

And yes I know that its not vapor/tar ratio in the studies but cannabinoid/tar ratio which my point still stands why the tar if their is no combustion?

Useful reference. A quick read finds (emphasis mine):
"In 2007 the University of California, San Fransisco, published the results of their investigation in the Official Journal of the American Academy of Neurology. It said that "Using CO as an indicator, there was virtually no exposure to harmful combustion products using the vaporizing device. Since it replicates smoking's efficiency at producing the desired THC effect using smaller amounts of the active ingredient as opposed to pill forms, this device has great potential for improving the therapeutic utility of THC."

We don't have to have combustion (chemically combining oxygen to make water and CO2) to get hot enough to produce nasty stuff, it's just the most popular way to do it. If, OTOH, we're careful with temperatures we can use physics to evaporate off the molecules we want intact while heating them high enough will start chemical changes (breaking bonds with enough energy from heat) making new stuff......like tar.

I don't believe good vaporizers, run properly, have to make tars and other nasty stuff chemically.

You can do it, but you can also avoid it which is, I think, the idea?

Are you saying that because these vaporizers are old it means that the experiment is flawed?
Again just looking at all the info.. I still vape by the way.

I'm not sure what he's trying to say, but I say the idea of that experiment was to show it was possible to reduce it. We want to reduced it to zero if possible, a different question?

OF

 

[hoptimum]

OK, ill give you that those vaporizers are indeed ancient but regardless, you can take a magic flight box and a volcano and they would be doing the same thing.Vaporizing. If the studies above were done in a controlled environment why wouldn't you think that they were also vaporizing the tested material (cannabis). Are you saying that because these vaporizers are old it means that the experiment is flawed?
Again just looking at all the info.. I still vape by the way.

No, I'm saying that those vaporizers frequently combusted. The MFLB is capable of combusting as well, but the Volcano is not. Combustion can produce tars, vaporization cannot.

 

[DOOM]

I dont know anything about this subject but remember seeing a thread awhile back concerning tar and vaporizers. Here's a link to a french forum where they discuss more about the study that basically say, tar inhaled during 10 sessions of vaporization is equivalent to those taken up if you smoke between 7 and 8 joints"...idk about that lol but it might worth checking out.

Here's the french forum: http://lucid-state.org/forum/showth...annabis-reste-extrèmement-nocif-pour-la-santé

The thread started in 2012 that talks about this issue: http://fuckcombustion.com/threads/daily-vape-as-dangerous-as-daily-smoke.7762/

 

[PoisonousHydra]

Sorry for the late response guys here is the source..
1.http://www.maps.org/news-letters/v06n3/06359mj1.html

Ironically enough, your tardiness was not really an issue here, since the study that I pointed out earlier (http://www.cannabis-med.org/data/pdf/2001-03-04-9.pdf) is actually the source material for the paper that you have linked to at MAPS. Look at the name of the author, and the description of the devices, and they are identical. Through some stroke of luck, we have all been discussing the same, antiquated study most of this time .

Post Script: Thanks for the update. Since not everyone here is bilingual, I read through some of the sources cited at the aforementioned

french forum

This (http://www.ufcmed.org/wp-content/up...dicales_Grotenhermen_2009_editions_indica.pdf) was particularly interesting to me, so I took the liberty of translating an excerpt from it:

In terms of health, the best technique consists finally of inhaling cannabis with the aid of an inhaler (or vapourizer). Some special devices have been commercially available for several years. The cannabis is heated to approximately 180°C to 200°C, permitting the evapouration and inhalation of the cannabinoids and the essential oils without burning the plant material. The combustion of these are produced starting at as little as approximately 230°C. Thanks to this innovative technique, we can avoid the formation of the highly toxic products of combustion. It is important to watch that the apparatus actually maintains 180°C to 200°C at the reservoir level. Important variations in temperature have been observed with different devices, notably caused by air circulation during the process of vapourization.

 

[CG420]

It's like this, Vaporizing = 100% Only THC intake, Carcinogen free = 0% Tar buildup, Smoking = 100% CO2 + CO intake.

In order to really understand how does your vaporizer work, you should understand what they are meant to do in the first place. Vaporizers are smokeless systems that heats up herbal material, but doesn’t actually cause them to combust. Instead, it causes the essential oils aka RESIN GLANDS (TRICHOMES), which contain the active ingredients (THC) of the herb, to boil (RELEASE) until it actually creates vapors (ESCAPES FROM PLANT TISSUES) that can be inhaled for so that you can get the same effect as if you were smoking it, but with a hell of a lot fewer harmful effects that derive from smoking alone.

Burning plant material is a chemical reaction between O2 and the hydrocarbons in plant material. When sufficient heat is introduced the oxygen and hydrocarbons burn...

This burning results in water, CO2, and other chemical byproducts we call smoke. Smoke is the result of those hydrocarbons that were not completely burned.

I think your question should be focused more on what is vapor, how is it created and how does temperature play a role in vaporization.

Sources:
http://www.portablevaporizerpro.com/how-does-a-vaporizer-work/

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070609041218AAwhQsJ