True or False: If you see vapor as you exhale you are wasting the hit?

[stickstones]

I knew you did...since that is your daily driver...but I can't. I mean I can, but it takes forever and I get out of breath after a stem or two if I do it that way. It's just more relaxing to take the little half hits for me.

 

[lwien]

^^ I run 20 miles a week. I wonder if that helps even though I'm an old fucker...

 

[Vaporisateur]

I have to find the article or the research again, but if I'm not mistaking there was a case made that stated that how DEEP you inhale is more important than how LONG you hold it. My gut says that both are important.

That being said, I've been a daily toker for many years and I recently converted to vaporization to almost 100% and the fact that I don't need to use as much weed for the same or even more lasting effect, I don't worry too much about how much vapor I exhale even if that's considered a 'waste'. And to top it off, I'm keeping my ABV for edibles... how much more can I get from my weed? lol


I also notice a different exhaled vapor with different types of strains and also depending on which device I'm using, and under which conditions...

Bottom line, the taste and the results is what really matters to me now

 

[treecityrnd]

"There is a common misconception that holding the smoke or vapor in your lungs will increase the effect. Zacny & Chait (1991) showed that prolonged breathholding does not substantially enhance the effects of inhaled marijuana smoke (Zacny & Chait, 1991). In addition, it has been shown that depth of inhalation is far more important than the duration in determining THC absorption (Azorlosa, Greenwald, & Stitzer, 1995). All the data suggests that you should STOP ghosting your 4 footer!" - Administering Your Meds, TreeCity Research and Development (2011)

Zacny, J. P., & Chait, L. D. (1991). Response to marijuana as a function of potency and breathhold duration. Psychopharmacology (Berl), 103(2), 223-226.
Azorlosa, J. L., Greenwald, M. K., & Stitzer, M. L. (1995). Marijuana smoking: effects of varying puff volume and breathhold duration. J Pharmacol Exp Ther, 272(2), 560-569.

 

[Vaporisateur]

^ Thank you, treecityrnd. That's exactly what I was referring to.

 

[VWFringe]

those studies don't work for vapor, IMO

anecdotally, everyone seems to agree, whether thru re-breathing, smaller hits, deeper hits, or longer hits, the less vapor expelled the better.

I've had a cold & couldn't hold hits more than 10 seconds...I gave up, man, if I had to get high on vapor hits I held for only a few seconds, I'd be doing it all day

everyone can settle this for themselves, by simply seeing if they get higher from a 25 second hit compared to a 15 second hit...be sure to take few deep breaths before hand

anecdotally I believe my lungs have gotten less able to absorb vapor, and that it now takes me 25 seconds to feel like i did before after just 20 seconds...but can't determine if it's tolerance or decreased lung function. And, I can only tolerate three or four hits, maybe because i'm capped/medicated, but partly because I feel like my lungs can't take anymore...maybe I should get a bubbler.

 

[WatTyler]

^ But I can grasp this as a principle that would hold true for any gas, be it smoke, vapor or oxygen, but would like to see it confirmed. That there is a finite capacity for your lungs to absorb from a 'lungful', and that the surface area of the lung exposed (depth of inhalation) is the critical factor, and not meaningfully time dependent.

So if we take a breath and exhale, if my memory serves correctly, that the gas composition decreases from around 20% O2 in air, to 16% O2 in the exhale (I can't really remember if this is correct and can't be bothered to check, it's nearly bed time).

So following the opening theory, it shouldn't make much difference how long we hold that breath, the same ratio of O2 is exhaled. 16%. It must have been very well studied. Can anybody confirm if this is true? If so, I see no reason why it wouldn't hold true for vapor as well.

It seems logical. I mean after excersise and oxygen debt we don't slow down or hold our breath to maximise gas transfer- instead we breathe faster and deeper.

These are my thoughts on the matter.

Edit; one more thought actually- regarding the amount of vapor expelled- I guess the logic is it's gotta go somewhere, and better in the body than out. But I think this doesn't have to play any role at all - I could hold a hit in my mouth until it totally condensed and breathe out nothing, but it's not going to get me high. Not unless it's getting to the right bits deep down. So holding ones breath just mean more condensation at ineffective locations in the airway?

 

[VWFringe]

i think we all agree if you see vapor as you exhale you are wasting the hit

i'm getting over a cold and it's taking me longer hits to get the same feeling, and i notice a lot more vapor on exhale also

 

[eddyfrancis]

i think we all agree if you see vapor as you exhale you are wasting the hit

Yes. I think sometimes we get smoke confused with vapor, which is easy given that they are essentially the same thing. But in our case, the vapor we are referring to is nearly pure THC, and not much else. From that, we can conclude that visible vapor is wasted vapor.

edit: I have never seen any data supporting my claim of vapor being pure THC, it is only my assumption. There could very well be visible particles of other stuff that your lungs have trouble absorbing.

Just trying to support both sides of the argument.

 

[Sour Deez]

I dont think its technically pure thc. When comparing smoke and vapor, i would think the vapor has more concentration of thc in it then smoke. But there has to be more to vapor then just thc.

I did try holding my hits longer, I didnt notice enough for me to think anything of it. Next im gonna try to blow in a bottle and recycle the hit.

I still feel as long as you get the vapor DEEP in your lungs you will absorb all you can.

 

[VWFringe]

correct me if i'm wrong, but if herb's rated at 15% THC level, doesn't that mean the THC we get vaping is just a fraction of what goes into our lungs?

 

[hereatlast]

doesn't that mean the THC we get vaping is just a fraction of what goes into our lungs?

I think this is a fair assumption. Considering the vast array of compounds that are found in the glandular trichomes and our lack of a specific targeting technique it seems the vapor we inhale (even at lower temperatures) consists of quite a few compounds beyond THC and even cannabinoids in general.

But there has to be more to vapor then just thc.

Totally. It seems to me that THC consistently gets too much shine, both in the actual possibility of targeting the cannabinoid in isolation and the motivation to produce plants that are flush-full of the singular canna.

One of the most amazing things to me is that the vapor we inhale surely includes a complicated mix of non-cannabinoid compounds such as terpenes and/or flavonoids. Some of these compounds have been studied extensively outside of cannabis and they can prove to have pretty amazing medicinal (and maybe recreational?) applications on their own. As such, strains and/or batches with a particularly high level of a terpene such as 'limonene' (just a prominent example) may produce distinct effects aside from the unique cannabinoid profile.




More generally, regarding the question that appears as the thread title: while it seems like some users here gain from specific and extensive breathing techniques, personally I kind of prefer to maintain a more intuitive methodology. I certainly try to breathe in the vapor deeply but don't get particularly caught up with rebreathing or counting techniques. While I don't think that visible vapor on exhalation is necessarily a qualitative or quantitative marker of potency, most of the hits I take do result in visible vapor on the exhale and I certainly don't feel short-changed
All my

 

[eddyfrancis]

I just did a quick google search and came up with a Volcano study. I'm not quite sure if I'm reading the results correctly, but from what I gather, they got a 75% yield of THC in the vapor. After they accounted for water vapor and "hygroscopic components in the condensates" , they came up with a 99% THC yield. Can someone read the study and see whether or not I'm seeing the results right? There is so much info it's hard for me to comprehend right now.

Here is the link: http://www.vapormed.com/pdf/Cannabis_smoke_condensate_III.pdf

 

[WatTyler]

i think we all agree if you see vapor as you exhale you are wasting the hit

i'm getting over a cold and it's taking me longer hits to get the same feeling, and i notice a lot more vapor on exhale also

not quite. I do agree that you are wasting vapor, but not that 'hit' (if by hit you mean THC delivered in that lungful). You can't fail to waste a given (fairly large IMO) percentage of what you inhale. Exhaled vapor may well mean wasted vapor, but no vapor exhaled after a big hit doesn't necessarily mean that it's all got into your blood stream in my thinking. I think that measures of THC in the exhale are pretty meaningless- it should be blood THC that is measured.

The more I consider it the more I'm convinced that any smoke/vapor distinction is a big red herring and it's actually to do with the physiology of the lungs and how they work mechanically as gas exchange organs. Therefore comparisons with normal breathing and gas absorption are valid.

Our lungs are actually inefficient with regards to vaping and can't ever be expected to process 100% of a gas that's inhaled- they're designed to do an awful lot more than absorb drugs, and there's a whole gas exchange process going on with each breath. They're designed to do that to an optimal level, which would be down to the point where it's more efficient for the body to take a new breath of fresh air, rather than continue to try to absorb a diminishing proportion of a gas, whilst adding others to the mix. It's easy for the lungs to absorb 1 in 10 oxygen molecules (for example) than it is when that ratio decreases to 1 in 100- it's just inefficient and so the body's designed to replenish the lungful of air with fresh stuff that has fresh gasses mixed again at concentrations that are easier to process. This might be different in whales/seals/dolphin lungs that are designed for long breath holdings, and can maybe extract from a big lungful effectively down to far lower proportions (certainly their blood can carry more O2)

So our lungs are quite clearly designed to maximise gas exchange and work better/faster/harder with deep rapid breathing, rather than slow, long-held breaths. Think about it- to absorb more oxygen and hyperventilate you take lots of rapid deep breaths, not hold your breath. The same with vapor I say- to absorb more and 'hyperventilate' on THC you're better taking the same approach.

Of course, this is all my own opinion and I've not sought to verify any of my claims.

 

[eddyfrancis]

Funny how this is such a controversial topic.

 

[Yero]

Very interesting thread, I've though about this issue a lot myself. The studies treecityrnd posted are applicable to vapor IMO because both are essentially mixtures of gases containing differing chemicals except thc. However I challenge the idea that exhaled vapor is necessarily wasted THC. Other gases evaporated from the plant material may be what we are seeing. Without an biochemical analysis of exhaled vapor smoke there is no way to know for sure.

In terms of maximizing thc intake from vapor it looks like re-breathing works well. as long as you make sure to take clean fresh breaths inbetween bag hits, as each re-breathe increases the CO2 in the bag and decreases the O2. I saw a line curve that showed you can re-breath one hit about 20 times or so to get 90% of the thc absorbed in the lungs. I usually do only about 5 max as thats more feasible and still retains about 70% thc ( i wish i could find the chart). you will never get 100% absorption as laws of diffusion wouldn't allow it. The thc has to reach equilibrium with your lung tissue and the bag you are breathing into with every breath.

so anecdotalally this gives evidence that exhaled vapor does have wasted thc in it. that is why i rebreathe.

 

[eddyfrancis]

I will add this. I have a Launch Box and it takes me around 2 trenches to get high taking normal sized hits and never exhaling visible vapor. Now when I use the Magick Wand and vape the same amount, I take huge hits and hold my breath until very little vapor is exhaled. I get far higher from the Magick Wand because my lungs are absorbing the same amount of THC in much less time then it takes to use the Launch Box.

Edit: What I'm feeling from the Magick Wand is not an oxygen deprivation high. I do know what oxygen deprivation feels like.

 

[eddyfrancis]

Oops, double post.

 

[albe]

luchiano...my main man with a zen approach to getting high. Shit, I was almost inspired to give it a go and see what you are talking about...then I remembered I am a fat slob with no discipline who is just trying to get hammered!

I feel similar, although at least I have a medical reason to always be vaked.

I am going to try it. I had no idea that diet and exercise could be the secret to lowering my tolerance!

i find it gets me way higher, coming home from a long bike ride and hitting the vape =

if u need a motivation to exercise this is a pretty decent one, works for me lol

 

[stickstones]

I was combusting yesterday for the first time in a while. I gotta say, I kept thinking how nice it was to have a session where I wasn't counting my hit hold or thinking about efficiency. Sometimes the way I vape doesn't seem built for relaxation. I gotta get back to enjoying the sessions as well as the ensuing hi.

 

[stickstones]

Great session with my PD last night not even thinking about all this shit!

 

[eddyfrancis]

Haha I think weedemon summed it up well. "If it's not fun being so conservative then don't do it."

 

[lwien]

Haha I think weedemon summed it up well. "If it's not fun being so conservative then don't do it."

For some, while it may not be fun to conserve, it may be a financial necessity.

 

[eddyfrancis]

Yeah, that's the boat I'm in right now Iwien. Having glaucoma requires being medicated all the time and due to various issues I haven't been able to get a garden set up. So needless to say I've been spending a lot, and that really makes me want to conserve. Luckily I finally got a perpetual garden running a little bit ago and my first harvest is coming up in a week or two!

 

[SD_haze]

Also when it comes to vaporizing cannabis for medicinal benefits, specifically for pain (but others too), there have been studies done that shows a low dose of cbds provided sizable pain relief but HIGH doses actually reported pain higher than sober.
(this is from michael backes of cornerstone collective)

And considering how potent vapor can be, sometimes even one big cloud could be more than necessary for optimal medicinal benefit.


That being said, I have medical for insomnia, and when it comes to that larger doses tend to provide more effective relief.