Lung burn when vaping - bad news for vaping?

[MinnBobber]

I'd feel a little bit better if they said the same thing about COPD.

Study: Marijuana Smoking Poses "Relatively Small" Risk To Lungs, Associated With Far Fewer Adverse Effects Than Tobacco
Thursday, 11 July 2013

Los Angeles, CA: Pulmonary complications associated with the smoking of cannabis are "relatively small" and far lower than those associated with tobacco smoking, according to a recent review published in the June edition of the scientific journal Annals of the American Thoracic Society.

The paper - authored by Donald P. Tashkin, MD, emeritus professor of medicine and medical director of the Pulmonary Function Laboratory at the David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles - is "the most comprehensive and authoritative review of the subject ever published," according to an accompanying commentary. Donald Tashkin conducted US-government sponsored studies of marijuana and lung function for over 30 years.

His review finds that although smoking cannabis may be associated with symptoms of chronic bronchitis, studies do not substantiate claims that it is positively associated with the development of lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), emphysema, or bullous lung disease.

"[H]abitual use of marijuana alone does not appear to lead to significant abnormalities in lung function," Tashkin writes. "[F]indings from a limited number of well-designed epidemiological studies do not suggest an increased risk of either lung or upper airway cancer from light or moderate use. ... Overall, the risks of pulmonary complications of regular use of marijuana appear to be relatively small and far lower than those of tobacco smoking."

Writing in an accompanying commentary, McGill University's Dr. Mark Ware concludes: "Cannabis smoking is not equivalent to tobacco smoking in terms of respiratory risk. ... [C]annabis smoking does not seem to increase risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or airway cancers. In fact, there is even a suggestion that at low doses cannabis may be protective for both conditions. ... This conclusion will affect the way health professionals interact with patients, parents with teenagers, and policy makers with their constituents. ... Efforts to develop cleaner cannabinoid delivery systems can and should continue, but at least for now, [those] who smoke small amounts of cannabis for medical or recreational purposes can breathe a little bit easier."

For more information, please contact Paul Armentano, NORML Deputy Director, at: paul@norml.org. Full text of the study, "Effects of marijuana smoking on the lung," appears in Annals of the American Thoracic Society.
.......................................................................................

This was smoking cannabis and vaping has to be much better for one's health
EDIT---A couple more studies;

A separate study published in 2012 in The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) similarly reported that cumulative marijuana smoke exposure over a period of up to 7 joint-years (the equivalent of up to one marijuana cigarette per day for seven years) was not associated with adverse effects on pulmonary function.

A 2013 review also published in the Annals of the American Thoracic Society acknowledged that marijuana smoke exposure was not positively associated with the development of lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), emphysema, or bullous lung disease. It concluded: “[H]abitual use of marijuana alone does not appear to lead to significant abnormalities in lung function. Findings from a limited number of well-designed epidemiological studies do not suggest an increased risk of either lung or upper airway cancer from light or moderate use. … Overall, the risks of pulmonary complications of regular use of marijuana appear to be relatively small and far lower than those of tobacco smoking.” - See more at: http://blog.norml.org/tag/copd/#sthash.USaqck6H.dpuf

 

[lwien]

His review finds that although smoking cannabis may be associated with symptoms of chronic bronchitis, studies do not substantiate claims that it is... ....associated with the development of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)......

I find this quote kind of odd being that chronic bronchitis IS part of the COPD spectrum along with emphysema.

Edit: I took out the words "may" and "positively" in the quote because it seems that in this context, they may be being used to sell a concept.

 

[hoptimum]

@steama you got my point. Finally somebody who is willing to talk about this without fear. How much the lungs will be "fucked up" in relation to quantity and frequency of use will be only answered in a few years time unfortunately. My personal unscientific opinion is that there' s an unknown individual and collective limit that puts the individual in a risky territory based on the frequency/quantity relation. Low dose/frequency may be ok (hopefully), high dose/frequency may be not...

@mitchgo61 give me a few days... That will be helpful exercise to me also

Thousands of people have been actively vaping for well over 15 years and the process has been well researched, especially in Israel. If there was evidence of serious harm we would be seeing it by now through medical records and anecdotally on forums like this. We're not. Your speculation is based on unfounded fear, not science. Everything has risks, including going out of your house. If your fears tell you its dangerous, dont do it. If you have evidence, lets see it. Speculating about potential harm based on unfounded fear is not a scientific method. In fact its the opposite of science.

 

[cybrguy]

Just FYI- there is in fact a decent amount of research on vaporizing cannabis, just not in English (or available for free in any language- behind paywalls). There is more of it in Hebrew than in any other language I know of, mostly from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, which has a lab run by Raphael Mechoulam, who discovered THC. He has a had a cadre of scientists under him studying THC, anandamide, other cannabinoids, and vaporization, for years. The older THC research from that lab has been translated into English, as has much of the anandamide research, but not much of the vaporization research has been.

Well, why the F*** not, and how do we get that done?

 

[cybrguy]

That wasn't meant to be a rhetorical question. How DO we get these studies translated to English so we can read them? My Hebrew is a little weak...

 

[mitchgo61]

That wasn't meant to be a rhetorical question. How DO we get these studies translated to English so we can read them? My Hebrew is a little weak...

I was fluent in Hebrew in college. Of course, Jimmy Carter was prez then, so my skills are rusty.

Google translate? Apple's itranslate app? One of those?

 

[arf777]

That wasn't meant to be a rhetorical question. How DO we get these studies translated to English so we can read them? My Hebrew is a little weak...

I'd offer, but I'm really busy (handicapped, chronic pain, work full-time, trying to start a business, caring for elderly parents, working on Deadpool and Klingon cosplay). And I can only sight-translate Biblical Hebrew and Medieval Aramaic. Modern Hebrew, I need to slog through with grammar guides and dictionaries. Could try google translate, but it tends to kinda suck with languages where the words are in a very different order than in English. I have seen it do very confusing things with Hebrew and with German.

I'm gonna see if my mom feels like tackling this. She is semi-retired, it overlaps her field (clinical social work) and she is fluent in Modern Hebrew. Or my dad, who is also fluent, is fully retired, and until recently was in public health. They both lived on kibbtuzim before I was born. And pops is an old freak, worked the hash fields in Lebanon, while mom recently began vaping for pain. They'd be actively interested.

 

[Detonator]

Folk

Recently I posted a statistical survey in another forum and 50% of the forum used more than 1 gr/day. More specifically 16% used over 3 gr/day. Only 4% used equals to or less than 1 gr/ week.... And 80% of the forum was combusting...

so elaborating on some of @CarolKing 's consideration, what do you think is a safe daily or weekly vaporized intake? How often and how much?

Humans like drugs, have you seen ask the tv commercials? Cannabis is better vaped than smoked, after a few months of it you can just tell, don't need a scientist to tell me I'm right.

Try to stay under a 1/4 pound per week and you'll be fine...

 

[MinnBobber]

....And pops is an old freak, worked the hash fields in Lebanon, while mom recently began vaping for pain.....

......................................................
Off topic but couldn't resist.
Now there's an interesting job.
My favorite of all time----red Lebanese hash.
And inquiring minds want to know-- why is red Lebanese hash reddish vs blond Lebanese??????

 

[cybrguy]

I'm gonna see if my mom feels like tackling this. She is semi-retired, it overlaps her field (clinical social work) and she is fluent in Modern Hebrew. Or my dad, who is also fluent, is fully retired, and until recently was in public health. They both lived on kibbtuzim before I was born. And pops is an old freak, worked the hash fields in Lebanon, while mom recently began vaping for pain. They'd be actively interested.

It would be great if they could. Some of the studies behind pay walls may be hard to get. I'm a little surprised that this research doesn't get automatically translated to English. Most Hebrew speakers also speak English and any researcher should easily understand how limited the audience would be for hebrew language only writeups. It is a mystery.
Sorry is that sounded very English centric, but while it is true that English is not the most commonly spoken language (third or second, depending your source) it tends to be the language of business and science.

 

[PetNature]

I get the same burning sensation in my lungs if I take big hits through bongs, both combustion and vaporization. My solution to the problem is smaller hits, or use an inhaler before/after. I have asthma which might cause the problem.

 

[lwien]

This link was posted in another thread by @weedemon but it should be here as well........

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4456813/

 

[mitchgo61]

This link was posted in another thread by @weedemon but it should be here as well........

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4456813/

That is very interesting....and somewhat persuasive, since it compiles results from multiple studies.

 

[cybrguy]

This link was posted in another thread by @weedemon but it should be here as well........

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4456813/

But WTF is this and where does it come from? This appears right near the begining the article.
"Although frequent comparisons with tobacco emphasize that the smoke from cannabis has more carcinogens and respiratory irritants, the absence of nicotine likely mitigates the impact of some of these compounds (2)."
Like, WTF?

I went to the reference in (2), and I am still reading it, but it doesn't seem to support the above.

 

[lwien]

But WTF is this and where does it come from? This appears right near the begining the article.
"Although frequent comparisons with tobacco emphasize that the smoke from cannabis has more carcinogens and respiratory irritants, the absence of nicotine likely mitigates the impact of some of these compounds (2)."
Like, WTF?

I took that to mean that nicotine in tobacco is far worse for you than any of the carcinogens and respiratory irritants that are found in cannabis smoke. Makes sense to me.

 

[cybrguy]

But this part of the sentence is not true.
"the smoke from cannabis has more carcinogens and respiratory irritants"

At least I have read nothing to suggest this, and much to suggest the opposite.

 

[lwien]

But this part of the sentence is not true.
"the smoke from cannabis has more carcinogens and respiratory irritants".

At least I have read nothing to suggest this, and much to suggest the opposite.

But if you take nicotine out of the equation, it may be true, eh?

 

[cybrguy]

Well, if nicotine were the only "carcinogens and respiratory irritant" in tobacco than I might understand what they mean, but it isn't of course. Maybe I need to read this stoned. I'll try again later...

 

[lwien]

Found this article: Cannabis and tobacco smoke are not equally carcinogenic

Another great read.

 

[cybrguy]

Great line from the end of that study.
"It should be noted that with the development of vaporizers, that use the respiratory route for the delivery of carcinogen-free cannabis vapors, the carcinogenic potential of smoked cannabis has been largely eliminated [47,48]."

FUCK COMBUSTION, Man.

 

[organic weed]

@hoptimum @mitchgo61

I haven't have much time to dig into my long scientific literature collection as I wished, but I pick two scientific publications that had caught my attention, showing that vaping indeed simply reduces pulmonary symptoms but it doesn't necessarily avoid them. I have found NO study that says that vaping IS safe. Reducing harm and being safe are 2 completely different things. I actually challenge any of you guys to post here a scientific article that says that vaping IS SAFE. I am vaping, so I am not one of those guys that is all against cannabis... It has been simply impossible for me to find scientific evidence that says that vaping is safe. Most article say that vaping is safer than smoking, and I guess we all agree on this, but you won't find any scientific article around saying that vaping is safe, at least at the moment. We may have a knowledge gap here, but I guess most of the people who say vaping is 100% safe are just saying that out of hope with no scientific backup.... Here go the 2 articles that picked my brain


Nicholas T. Van Dam, Mitch Earleywine, 2010: Pulmonary function in cannabis users: Support for a clinical trial of the vaporizer. International Journal of Drug Policy, Volume 21, Issue 6, November 2010, Pages 511–513


Twenty frequent cannabis users reporting at least two respiratory symptoms completed subjective ratings of respiratory symptoms and spirometry measures prior to and following 1 month's use of a cannabis vaporizer in a pre/post-design. Only 12 participants (60%) did not develop a respiratory illness. The remaining 40% did develop illness at some level. These improved also maximum total lung volume compared to smoking. However, the maximum amount of air exhaled in 1 s (forced expiratory volume) did not improved significantly. The study concluded that the vaporizer has potential for the administration of medical cannabis and as a harm reduction technique.

....In other words, the harm is still there but it is simply reduced.


Mitch Earleywine*1 and Sara Smucker Barnwell, 2007: Decreased respiratory symptoms in cannabis users who vaporize. Harm Reduction Journal, http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/4/1/11

Simple chi-square test revealed that vaporizer users were less likely to report respiratory problems than participants who did not vaporize, with 100 of 152 vaporizer users (65.8%) reporting no respiratory problems, compared to 3767 of 6731 (56.0%), chi-square (1) = 5.8, p < .05. The data reveal that respiratory symptoms like cough, phlegm, and tightness in the chest increase with cigarette use and can-nabis use, but are less severe among users of a vaporizer, confirming that still there is an impat.The odds ratio suggests that vaporizer users are only 40% as likely to report respiratory symptoms as users who do not vaporize, even when age, sex, cigarette use, and amount of can-nabis consumed are controlled. In addition, it seems that users who have spent this much money and effort might minimize reports of their respiratory symptoms, consciously or inadvertently, in an effort to justify their actions and investment.

....again.... the harm is still there but it is simply reduced.

It is very tuff to find good literature about it. There are articles that say that CO and toxins are reduced but none of them say that the is NO boxing or NO CO production... It's just an harm reduction and not harm free measure. I guess we shouldn't be in denial on this point.

@cybrguy if you dig into literature, some articles say that cannabinoids have anti-cancer properties but other studies say that this has to be proved yet... in addition, the anti-cancer properties is delivered mostly through oils and not through vaping. If you look, almost every people who claimed cannabis helped them curing their cancer is because they used the oil and not because they vaped...

Once more, my point it: we don't have scientific evidence (yet?) that proves that vaping is safe. It is very likely safer than smoking but there is no scientific evidence that shows that people who have been vaping fro 20 or 30 years regulary didn't develop any chronic respiratory illness... literature so far only show that is SAFER than smoking but not necessarily safe, especially if vaping a lot...

 

[ragnorak71]

no scientific evidence of something not happening shocker!!!

 

[uhranium]

I bet there are enough guys who started with something like the volcano in 2000 and still vape everyday. 0,5g in 15years is not that much of a difference between 1g in 20 years (btw who damps 1g a day??)

 

[howie105]

When discussions go circular they seldom resolve themselves in a satisfactory manner.

 

[Astedra]

I started vaping with the mflb for 4 months did not notice anything. Then in January I got the crafty. Since then I have a worsening cough and when I cough there is a secondary sound as when you have a chest cold. Hope I don't have to stop, as I just picked up the arizer air today. I have been smoking marijuana for over nine years just combusting, with no lung issues. I switch to vaping and now I have this bad cough and am feeling super dry on the inside. I drink water but it don't help.