• Do NOT click on any vaporpedia.com links. The domain has been compromised and will attempt to infect your system. See https://fuckcombustion.com/threads/warning-vaporpedia-com-has-been-compromised.54960/.

Vaporization temperature dependent selection of effects

Alexis

Well-Known Member
I wouldn't be surprised. I can imagine tarred up lungs having more trouble functioning at any level, compared to healthy ones.
I'm thinking also it just came to me- the cillia specifically. Maybe vaporized cannabinoid absorption and transference, depends more than smoke, or at least significantly, upon healthy cillia structure and function?

It suddenly seems so plausible and logical to me.
 

pakalolo

Toolbag v1.1 (candidate)
Staff member
Nice, thorough post. I'll clarify each of your paragraphs, in order, for the sake of easy reading.

1. Perhaps, "just" isn't the best term, as I do agree that there would be some cannabinoids that are not released, as well as some that may even be destroyed by higher temps. "Mainly" or "predominantly" would have been better options.

2. It may be subjective, but if a lot of people feel that way, there may be something else to it that's worth looking into, or at least discussing.

3 & 4. I was referring to just vaping at a lower temperature, without stepping up to reach the higher ones. If you step up in the same session, I would imagine you'd get a very similar overall dose of cannabinoids, with some more "terpy" tasting hits at the lower temps.

5. I wasn't even counting combustion, because of the byproducts that are produced, which definitely modify the effects. I agree with your points, here.

Thanks.

If you stay at a particular lower temperature, the overall effect in terms of "high" will definitely differ. Because euphoriants are released in higher proportions as the temperature rises, your original premise is probably correct, subjective opinions notwithstanding.

I mentioned combustion because later posts brought it up.
 

EverythingsHazy

Well-Known Member
I'm thinking also it just came to me- the cillia specifically. Maybe vaporized cannabinoid absorption and transference, depends more than smoke, or at least significantly, upon healthy cillia structure and function?

It suddenly seems so plausible and logical to me.
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.

 

EverythingsHazy

Well-Known Member
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.

When water is left out at room temperature, it evaporates, well under it's boiling temperature. Would multiple hits at any high temperature cause benzene and other harmful byproducts of vaporization to be released, anyway, by the time a load is finished? If you vape veed at 90F all of the water will still be extracted, and it will never have hit it's boiling point.
 
EverythingsHazy,
  • Like
Reactions: arb

Alexis

Well-Known Member
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.
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.

Oil of oregano would definitely speed up that recovery process, to a fuller level of healing and repair.
 

Siebter

Less soul, more mind
The cilia in our respiratory system take care of particles and the like, they are not responsible for how high we can get.

I think that recommendation to have a t break before trying a vape is a total myth. When I tried the MFLB for the first time I was a pretty heavy smoker and yet it totally got me high on my first attempt. It's all in our head.
 

Alexis

Well-Known Member
The cilia in our respiratory system take care of particles and the like, they are not responsible for how high we can get.

I think that recommendation to have a t break before trying a vape is a total myth. When I tried the MFLB for the first time I was a pretty heavy smoker and yet it totally got me high on my first attempt. It's all in our head.
Yeah but we all have different heads lol! And different bodies too.

We tend to look at things so black and white, and we often make assumptions and overgeneralise (I never accepted Brian Cox's, Master of the Universe, wrapped up in a nutshell explanation of how the universe was created, Big bang, clever mans, nobel prizes all round of whoops I still gotta brush my teeth, what day is it today Oh it's friday, still gonna die at 90...)

I'm only jesting bro. I get what you are saying about the cillia's primary and essential function.

But every person can have a very different, yet legitimate experience, and this can apply to anything in life.

We have different bodies, biological and emotional tendancies, and needs. And effectively, very different, yet still real, realities.

I mean, I won't rule out for example the idea that maybe in some people, some sort of self, time based lung repair, is a factor when switching and acclimating to vaporization.

I also don't dismiss your suggestion about it being purely a mental thing.

We just don't know so we can only muse and postulate.

I'm sure that lovely clever man Brian Cox with his big Cheshire cat smile could wrap it all up in a nice tidy little package for us lol, with special effects, nice music and all uneven edges trimmed off neatly.

(I'm taking the piss out of him and arrogant man, not you mate, for so preposterpusly pretending to have ANY answers lol!)
 

Siebter

Less soul, more mind
@Alexis – Speculating is always fun and often enough the beginning of understanding things. So I don't look down on that at all, it's totally part of gathering ideas and, hopefully in the end, evidence too. But I am a huge fan of strong evidence and models that work. Models and ideas that explain or even are able to predict things, like the whole Lambda-CDM model or Einsteins theory of relativity, which were able to predict unthinkable stuff like black holes or gravitational waves decades before we were even able to detect them. Speculating by itself does not do that and therefore by itself (for me) is meaningless (still fun though), it becomes interesting only when someone tries to find out how much truth it contains.

While it is certainly true that we have different bodies with different biographies and a whole lot of variation, I don't see any evidence that our cilias work very different from each other. I'm sure even cilia can mutate and thus could work totally different or do something completely else from what we know it does. But that does not seem to happen to an extend that it would explain what we discuss here.

And it also doesn't match my experience, as I said above. I was a really heavy smoker, coughed up tar bricks every morning. That's when the cilia is a bit recovered because we don't smoke when we sleep. During the day I never had to cough, because my cilia was pretty much paralyzed from all the smoke. And yet, when I had my first vape session, I *instantly* knew it was the way to go, because I not only enjoyed the flavor, but it also got me high really nicely too. It worked, although my cilia was toast at that time. So my experience of what the cilia does and what not matches pretty exactly with what I can read about it.

Therefore the „cilia having nothing to do with the high”-model works too good for me to follow your argument – unless there would be some nice evidence of course, for which we always should have open ears for.

I hope that explains why some of my points often seem very black and white. They often are in order to make a conversation possible that does not eventually drown in the puddles of our speculations. That doesn't mean these points are not flexible, they are not even my opinions anyway. Even science itself wouldn't claim to ever have found the absolute truth about anything. It's more like „I have an idea that explains quite a lot, now prove me wrong with a better idea”. The latter part is actually crucial for any kind of scientific research.

People struggling with switching to vaporizers, „not feeling it“ etc. are definitely real phenomenas, and I'm sure there are some physical reasons behind it too. But taking drugs and experiencing them is one of the most subjective things I can come up with – that's what I was referring to when I wrote that it's all in our head. Well, maybe not all. But *a lot*. :-)
 

west-elec

Well-Known Member
My problem with isolating effects with different temperatures is re-vaping AVB. The terps and flavs are almost all gone after that first hit and everything from then on tastes worse and worse. I want every single draw to be an enjoyable experience and re hitting avb to try to get specific effects is a backwards step. Cannabis is so variable genetically that specific profiles can be bred into the plant and the dispensary advises the user in the type of product for a specific result. Only prohibition has made it necessary for people to take their medications into their own hands like you pioneers have been doing. High prices (need for efficiency) and lack of availability of the different strains drives these discussions among user base when breeders should be doing this work. As big pharma get more involved symptom specific genetics will be the norm, but for best medicine patients should demand whole flowers, not extracts.
For me each bowl should be one comfortable hit with full extraction for the best experience, so micro dosing with a powerful vape is the way to go.
 

Oil Sheik

Well-Known Member
I recently used a six-ton heat press and squished out a nice blob of gold dab.
The instruction was to use dryed flower at 210F for 20 seconds.
I was hesitant to believe that, but what the heck.

No shit, it worked and I got night-cap for 2 nights off that.
Flavor lasted 2 good rips, and bla after that .. but well worth doing again.


OS
 
Oil Sheik,

tgvp

Well-Known Member
I think that recommendation to have a t break before trying a vape is a total myth. When I tried the MFLB for the first time I was a pretty heavy smoker and yet it totally got me high on my first attempt. It's all in our head.
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.
 
tgvp,
  • Like
Reactions: C No Ego

C No Ego

Well-Known Member
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....
used to be an article called - getting high on bile acids ... not avaialbe anymore however ... it explained how the cannabinoids bind and start the metabolism process there first
 
C No Ego,

andrew`124c41+

Well-Known Member
Starting off with this reference http://www.stonerforums.com/lounge/...specific-boiling-point-role-cannabinoids.html

which I realize has been widely reprinted, mangled and represents boiling points of pure or mostly pure mixtures of compounds, I have started to compile a table listing temperatures in degrees C and F referenced against the effect you can expect by using this temperature when vaporizing. I'll be posting this tomorrow, but will detail some explanations right now.

The legend is as follows;

AI=anti inflammatory
E=Euphoriant
AN=analgesic
AE=antiemetic (anti nausea)
AX=anxiolytic
AS=antipsychotic
BD=bronchodilator
AD=antidepressant
SE=sedative

So for example if there is a line in the table that I will post that reads

180C 356F AE,AD,2AI,AX it means that from the previous temperature gradation of 170 there is a compound or compunds that give each effect. 2AI means that there are 2 compounds listed that give an anti inflammatory effect. This is NOT an exact science, but I was bored at lunch hour today and spent most of an hour compiling a rough table.

For example, the last three lines of my table will read as follows;

220C 428F AI,AN,E,SE
225C 437F SE
230C 446F SE

Meaning that if you vaporize at 230C 3 components will be contributing to a sedative effect, one an antiinflammatory effect, one a euphoriant effect and one an analgesic effect. Again, this is NOT an EXACT science, and I merely do this for interest's sake (I am treated for OCD which I hate), and I like charts and graphs.

But what this should be able to do is allow people who have variable temperature vaporizers to select somewhat of a specific effect that they want (within limits of course). To give a really quick example, if I saved all of the ABV from an Iolite, which has a fixed temperture of 190C and then reused this material in a Volcano or Extreme and set the temperature to 230C, I could reasonably expect more of a sedative couchlock type of effect.

I should have this posted by 9 pm CST tomorrow. Don't kill me if it is inaccurate. Don't praise me if it works; merely pass it along if you think it is of any value and forget it if you think it's garbage. I could be reading too much into this, but it would or could explain why, when I set my Extreme to 170 (up in 10 degree increments from 140C) all the pain from my my/moderate osteoarthritis disappeared.

peace

Tom
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.

As I have mentioned elsewhere on this Forum, boiling point temp experiments are done under near vacuum, not at the 1 atmosphere which is the actual condition. The BPs at 1 atm are often either unknown or at best estimated using a mathematical formula. I have fooled around just for the fun of it and put a drop of absolute ethanol in dosing cap to see if it sped up extraction due to the higher solubility of CBD and THC in ethanol as compared to water. I can't prove anything but I think I do get a quicker effect.

I don't think temps can be used to differentiate effects...we would be talking about fractional distillation of organic compounds which requires rather sophisticated apparatus and lab conditions. (Been quite sometime sine I was in an organic lab :-)
 

pakalolo

Toolbag v1.1 (candidate)
Staff member
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.

As I have mentioned elsewhere on this Forum, boiling point temp experiments are done under near vacuum, not at the 1 atmosphere which is the actual condition. The BPs at 1 atm are often either unknown or at best estimated using a mathematical formula. I have fooled around just for the fun of it and put a drop of absolute ethanol in dosing cap to see if it sped up extraction due to the higher solubility of CBD and THC in ethanol as compared to water. I can't prove anything but I think I do get a quicker effect.

I don't think temps can be used to differentiate effects...we would be talking about fractional distillation of organic compounds which requires rather sophisticated apparatus and lab conditions. (Been quite sometime sine I was in an organic lab :-)

Looks like you haven't read the thread.

While precise control is a unicorn hunt, there is also no doubt that temperatures influence effects.
 

Okla68

Well-Known Member
In my brief time of Vaping(3 years, 50+ using) Ive found that Temp Definitely Makes a Difference in the type of effect one gets from a Cannabis product. Seems Lower temp sessions tend to be more Motivating than Higher temp sessions which tend to be more Couchlock(IMO, for what thats worth). Seems different strains have varied effect temps.
 
Temp DEFINITELY makes a Difference in effects !
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.
 

VapurrDo

Well-Known Member
when I get to daily use, I just refill a bucket when I'm done with one. Usually 2-3 in the morning and then I will pull one big one for the afternoon, full 2-3 hit extraction and holding it in/re-breating. Usually thats enough to get me to the evening. And then, I will load up 3-4 times during the night.

The good thing is thats still under a .25 gram
 

TheEncore

Active Member
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.

As I have mentioned elsewhere on this Forum, boiling point temp experiments are done under near vacuum, not at the 1 atmosphere which is the actual condition. The BPs at 1 atm are often either unknown or at best estimated using a mathematical formula. I have fooled around just for the fun of it and put a drop of absolute ethanol in dosing cap to see if it sped up extraction due to the higher solubility of CBD and THC in ethanol as compared to water. I can't prove anything but I think I do get a quicker effect.

I don't think temps can be used to differentiate effects...we would be talking about fractional distillation of organic compounds which requires rather sophisticated apparatus and lab conditions. (Been quite sometime sine I was in an organic lab :-)
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?
 
TheEncore,
  • Like
Reactions: Madri-Gal

Pricey420

Well-Known Member
Do you think the different highs you get from vaping at low/high temps sort of rubbishes indica vs sativa effects because no matter what bud you use if you vape 2 or 3 bowls at 220 you are gonna be sleeping soon and i can feel it in my whole body whether it is indica or sativa.

I am not saying it does just want to know what everyone thinks on it
 
Top Bottom