Cigarette smoke is definitely bad for our lung cilia. Apparently, the smoke can lead to reduced cilia length, which can negatively impact their ability to clear mucus. I wonder if this reduced cilia length has something to do with smokers not getting as high when they first vape. That period that everyone mentions, where they should "stop smoking for a few weeks to get the full vaporization effect" might be related to this phenomenon. Perhaps, cilia regeneration is necessary.
Healthy smokers with normal lung function and normal chest X-rays are at significant risk for respiratory tract infections, chronic obstructive lung disease and bronchogenic carcinoma. Fundamental to these risks are the observations that cigarette smoking is associated with a decrease in mucociliary clearance, a process driven by ciliated airway epithelial cells functioning in a coordinated fashion to move airway surface fluid and mucus in a cephalad fashion, thus continually cleansing the respiratory surface of inhaled particulates. Prior reports have attributed the smoking-related decrease in mucociliary clearance to a decrease in numbers of ciliated cells, changes in cilia structure and/or beat frequency. While these mechanisms likely contribute to the smoking-induced dysfunction in mucociliary clearance, the present study documents a new concept to help explain decreased mucociliary clearance, that smoking is associated with an average shortening of airway epithelial cilia. Independent of the methodology used to assess airway epithelial cilia length in normal smokers compared to nonsmokers, the results consistently demonstrate that, on average, cilia of normal smokers are 10% shorter than those of normal nonsmokers. Based on models of mucociliary clearance, this reduction in cilia length should have a significant influence on mucociliary clearance, and thus is likely to have a significant role in the risk for developing smoking-induced lung disease.
Perhaps of greater significance is the potential implication for individual smokers. As noted in each method of analysis, a significant population of smokers (23 to 50%) exhibited mean cilia lengths that were shorter than the minimum mean cilia length observed for nonsmokers using the same analytical technique. To understand the significance of these data at the level of individual cells, plots of the distribution of cilia lengths observed in hydrated, unfixed cells were plotted for each individual in the study, and the results confirmed that 4 out of 10 smokers had a large fraction of cells (>25%) with cilia shorter than 6 [IMG alt="An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is pone.0008157.e103.jpg"]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2790614/bin/pone.0008157.e103.jpg[/IMG]m, a length that theoretically might not contribute to mucus flow. The basis for the individual variation among smokers did not correlate with pack-yr history of smokers, so other factors possibly including genetic predisposition may be involved.
Smoking Is Associated with Shortened Airway Cilia - PMC
Whereas cilia damage and reduced cilia beat frequency have been implicated as causative of reduced mucociliary clearance in smokers, theoretically mucociliary clearance could also be affected by cilia length. Based on models of mucociliary clearance ...www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
I think it depends on load size. Microloads yes, but with loads of 0.15 or more, I still get plenty medicated at low temps. Low being 360's-370's.
Is the buzz different at those lower temps? I've always gone for 390F as the max before benzene levels increase, though I'm not sure the traditional logic of stopping there for that reason actually checks out.
I had in my own head for whatever reason- an estimate of 6-8 weeks total abstinence from actual smoke, for cillia structure and function to be virtually fully restored and healed in most cases.
Yeah but we all have different heads lol! And different bodies too.
.
I agree that the cilia have no part in the absorption of cannabinoïds, as this happen in the lungs, when the gazeous exchange insert them into the bloodstream. But the fact of not smoking while you try vaporization may have more to do to the fact that you enjoy effect of the 'purer high', instead of the 'tainted` version that includes the drowsiness of the smoke and for those using tobacco in their joints, the kick of the nicotine (and quenching the addiction craving). So many times, I proposed friends to try vaping, then 10 minutes after, as their throat are not burned and they are not getting half comatose, they believe it has no effect, then light a joint. Without realising that they were high as fuck, but werent looking for the right symptoms.
plant cannabinoids instantly bind with bile acids too before making it into the lungs etc....
That's intersting, I will try to do some research on that!
I just happened to run into this. I understand your interest and motivation in putting this together and that you note this is not hard science. In making the rounds of our local dispensaries in MD, I am struck by the amount of psuedoscience passed off by "bud tenders" that purport to have expertise in all things cannabis related. I am not going to delve into details but suffice it to say they often speak of things that one just cannot find in peer reviewed scientific literature.
To quote my buddy T, "Why wonder when you can know?" Get you a flowerpot and you'll know (or come try mine). 585F is way different than 685...
Makes sense. The higher the temp, the quicker the extraction of cannabinoids in vapor, and subsequently a larger dose of THC per hit , draw, or puff. Do you decide how much bud to consume for a sesh and only pack that amount for the sesh? Or do you fill up the bowl for multiple seshes? OR, do you require/prefer more than a bowl in a sesh? How quickly you consume the bud in vapor, and hence, the preferred dose of cannabinoids and terpenes, is largely determined by how high the device’s extraction temp is.
Andrew, I had done a little research and found some actual studies with those boiling point temps, but I had no idea that I might be looking at completely irrelevant data and I don't have a science background. Can we persuade you to do a quick google search or pubmed search to see if there is any new evidence that we can rely on?
yeah, i also think like you... doesn't matter if you vape sativa/indica, after 2-3 hours the dopamine concentration in the brain will decrease and you will start feeling tired if you vape in the evening.... after working all day.... the difference between indica/sativa just terpenes... so after 2-3 hours it may help sleeping...because only thc is directed influencing dopamine in our brain.. not the terpz