r/science • u/informationtiger • Dec 18 '19

Chemistry Nicotine formula used by e-cigarette maker Juul is nearly identical to the flavor and addictive profile of Marlboro cigarettes

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-juul-ecigarettes-study-idUSKBN1YL26R
36.9k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

2.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

6

u/[deleted] Dec 18 '19 edited Dec 18 '19

[deleted]

1

u/SonOf2Pac Dec 18 '19

I'm curious as to what mechanism you believe is at play that rolling papers are more effective at reducing tar intake than water.

His anecdotal, visual evidence, most likely

1

u/radiantcabbage Dec 18 '19

based on a well known study carried out by the CA chapter of NORML, which measured the output of vape vs joint vs bong, and performed exactly in that order in terms of tar ratio to THC extraction.

the advantage to vapor is obvious, since they never reach combustion temps, but the drawback being overall THC delivery is poor. this was their conclusion on paper vs water,

Surprisingly, the unfiltered joint outperformed all devices except the vaporizers, with a ratio of about 1 part cannabinoids to 13 parts tar. This disturbingly poor ratio may be explained by the low potency of the NIDA-supplied marijuana used in the study, which was around 2.3%.

Disappointingly, waterpipes performed uniformly worse than the unfiltered joint. The least bad waterpipe, the bong, produced 30% more tar per cannabinoids than the unfiltered joint. Ironically, the pipe with the electric mixer scored by far the worst of any device. This suggests that water filtration is actually counterproductive, apparently because water tends to absorb THC more readily than other, noxious tars.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 18 '19 edited Dec 18 '19

[deleted]

1

u/radiantcabbage Dec 19 '19

Well that's just not true in a realistic sense, THC is not very soluble in H20.

don't be disingenuous. it's only me here, the peanut gallery has moved on by now. feels like we need to keep things in perspective between "better than nothing" and "not your best choice". how "fragile" can this ratio be, a margin of +/= 30%?

you're linking a study that makes no comparisons btw, and it's no coincidence ukcia also hosts the same paper I cited

1

u/[deleted] Dec 19 '19 edited Dec 19 '19

[deleted]

1

u/radiantcabbage Dec 19 '19

because we're talking about a physical interface only, not dissolving a solution. the point is entirely moot if you know the difference. and they cover the same logic in the theory of surface area, filtration != solute

My "study" is just a review of all the available literature on the subject of water filtration for cannabis smoke, including your linked study, it is not a study itself.

they're not mutually exclusive, and the fact is you're just creating straw men to contradict I really don't know what here. bong water doesn't filters tar? never denied that, so where exactly are we going with this

1

u/[deleted] Dec 19 '19

[deleted]

1

u/radiantcabbage Dec 19 '19

solution

you keep using this word, it doesn't mean what you think it means

We are contradicting your flawed claim that bongs are worse for you than joints in terms of tar.

in what way? none so far

1

u/[deleted] Dec 19 '19

[deleted]

1

u/radiantcabbage Dec 19 '19

so you never wondered why, at no point did you find any new information that directly compared water to paper, or anything else in light of this "modern cannabis".

the hive might enjoy this rhetoric, it's wasted on me is what I'm saying. not here to teach chemistry buddy, look it up

→ More replies (0)