Ok, if vaporizing is simply smoking evaporated cannabis resin, is smoking pure cold water extracted hash the same thing? Assuming the hash is 100% pure (hypothetically since this would be next to impossible but lets assume for the sake of argument) you are evaporating a bloc of pure resin when you smoke it. The same process goes on in your vaporizer when you heat your bud, evaporating the resin found on the plant material no? I just though I would get your opinion on this.

Hold on one sec. Vaporizing involves heating cannabis to a certain temperature so that the THC evaporates and is thus inhaled. Resin is just a by product of combustion of a substance such as weed smoke collecting on to a certain surface over time. (Right?) Hash I believe is just a highly concentrated substance of ALOT of kief. Also resin isnt found on bud. So I hope I helped but Im not a "Expert" lol.

__________________
And on the 7th day GOD stepped back and sayed, "This is my creation, perfect in every way.." After several minutes the almighty commented, " Oh, ..... man, I left Cannabis everywhere......?!?!?!


God then decided to create politicians later that evening

Thc is but one of the components contained in the resin. By resin I mean the trichomes found on the bud. Hash is a concentrate of resin, made the purest possible using water extraction, but it can also be made with a screen though it is much less pure usually since small particles of plant matter get through the screen. Resin is actually mostly found on the bud, and often quite a bit on the small leaves around the bud.

Like you I used to think hash was something else, made from the seive of the plant or something, but it is simply a mass of the capitate trichomes found on the plant.

ok well when u typically refer to resin in respect to weed ppl think of the charred black residue

ya wtf are u talking about dude?
lol
resin is just straight up nasty black shit from like the sides of a pipe,
not (hash),not even the same kinda thing
lol

Ya thanks for your thought I was thinking the same thing I just didnt want to be so "Straight" forward to him haha

__________________
And on the 7th day GOD stepped back and sayed, "This is my creation, perfect in every way.." After several minutes the almighty commented, " Oh, ..... man, I left Cannabis everywhere......?!?!?!


God then decided to create politicians later that evening

Labels aside, there can be no 100% pure hash. When it approaches over 50% THC, it becomes oily and viscous- this is hash oil. As you get more and more pure, it will eventually become 100% cannabinoids, a reddish-brown mix of various cannabinoids. The purest hash out there will still contain plant matter that has tar and carcinogens released during smoking.

Short answer is no, a vaporizer is still far healthier.

Oh, and I just realized that you got your definition of vaporization wrong, I guess thats what everyone else was saying. Vaporization is done by either passing hot air over bud to boil off THC into a gaseous form to be inhaled or by directly heating it without exposing it to flame (both of which prevent the plant matter from burning nearly as much so it doesn't release as many chemicals/tar).

I think all of you need some clarification here. THC is a molecule, a chemical structure. It is the main component of the cannabis resin that you will feel an effect from, but there are many others (61 identified I believe). The resin is what gets you "high", no one "smokes" THC.

When you spark a joint, you burn the plant material the bud is made of and consequently has the most resin on it. "Resin" is what the trichomes are made of, if you don't know what a trichome is please don't reply to this thread. When you vaporize your bud, you heat it at around 380 degrees farenheit, in order for the resin in trichome form to evaporate but still cool enough for the plant matter not to combust.

When you smoke hash you heat a glob of resin which is a mass of trichomes stuck together.

I see confusion may exists on what hash is. Kief is hash, but to my understanding kief is hash made by breaking off the trichomes from your bud (or leaf) by using a screen and bouncing/scraping the dry plant material on it. "kief" would be a lot less pure because this method causes much more plant material to get mixed with the resin. In this case I mean water extracted hash which can attain a very high purity if done correctly.

I didn't say this for nothing, this is a hypothetical question, but cold water extracted hash can actually be very close to 100% purity.

My opinion is that it is very similar, the differences are when you smoke your hash you run the risk of inhaling butane fumes, the smoke is hotter but besides this the two processes are similar. I want to know your opinion (as long as you fully understand what I'm talking about)

This guy is right.


Like if u watch the greenhouse seeds videos they will say stuff like this plant has exceptional resin production which is production of CBD THC THCA etc.

I dont think it would be the same cause your still using combustion as your method of activating the THC rather then vaping.

Damn, I get you bro... seems to be lots of quick assuming in this thread.

Like the BuddaKing who had the most purified cannabis concentrate with something like 98 or 99% purity. Virtually microscopic ammounts of plant matter left over.

No, this does not mean it is 99% THC like some fools claimed about Budda. It is 99% pure cannabis oil, as in 99% pure liquid cannabiniods, but there are many other cannabinoids other than THC.

With a product that pure, taking knife hits (like the BuddaKind does) does not seem to pose any more of a health risk than vaporization, as in both cases the only thing being inhaled is vapor.

__________________
peace, ahimsa

VOTE DR. RON PAUL- LEGALIZATION


Disclaimer: None of the information posted under this screen name or this IP address is to be taken seriously, nor do the authors advocate any illegal activities, as posts in these forums are for entertainment purposes only.

Exactly my point that's what I think, also one of the reasons I just purchased a bubblebag kit from fresh headies woot!

remind me ppl what exactly is carcinogenic about marijuana, from my understanding its NOT

if your reffering to fact that you are inhaling carbon, then you must be mistaken because while its not good to have dirt in your lungs its not gonna give you cancer

Anything is potentially carcinogenic, if it is "foreign matter" it can cause cancer. When I say cause cancer, I mean potentially, not that it will happen in your lifetime. When I mean potentially I mean for example with an enormous dose in mice a certain product can cause cancer cells. This has been shown for example with aspartame (the sugarless sweetner in many products, namely chewing gum), it has never "knowingly" caused cancer in humans, but in mice it causes cancer in very high doses. Smoking weed can generally be regarded as not carcenogenic because of many factors, mainly that even chronic smokers smoke very little compared to the ammount that would potentially cause cancer, but the fact is that the vaporized tar contained in the plant matter is carcinogenic. Recent research also shows some link between THC and the inhibition of cancer, so most likely it is near impossible to get cancer from smoking weed alone but the fact of smoking anything is not "healthy". Smoking hash if done without inhaling butane vapors should therefor be the least harmful for you next to vaporizing.

I believe the initial question was whether smoking [hypothetically] pure hash would be similar to vaporizing regular plant-material marijuana. It's not. When you burn the hash, regardless of purity, you are still generation combustion, which, regardless of materials involved, creates several by-products including carcinogenic chemicals (and yes, there ARE carcinogenic substances in ALL combustion reactions involving plant matter, just some have a considerable amount more, such as tobacco).

However, when you vaporize, no combustion occurs, so few if any carcinogenic substances are released/generated. Knife hits, while very close to vaporizing, still create a very slight combustion directly on the surface of the knife, but with such a limited amount of actual burning material still maintains a very safe method of consumption.

__________________

i think its a load of horse shit unless there are specific chemicals within it that have been proven to cause cancer in humans (ie asbestos) its all a bunch of inconclusive hoo-hah

and btw way its all the chemicals in ciggs that make them carcinogenic

saying foreign matter is potentially carcinogenic is like saying i can get cancer from dirt in a cut

you cant believe everything the medical indestroy says for the reason that its an indestroy (not a typo)

There are chemicals in cannabis that can cause cancer.

__________________
"I smoke a lot of pot"

btw... Inhibition of Cancer Cell Invasion by Cannabinoids via Increased Expression of Tissue Inhibitor of Matrix Metalloproteinases-1 -- Ramer and Hinz, 10.1093/jnci/djm268 -- JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute

I believe it to be the 'act of burning something' that is responsible for most of the carcinogens released.

There are chems in cigs that are carcinogenic, but there are also carcinogens created through combustion (burning the tobacco) as well as some from the polonium in the soil as someone pointed out the other day.

It is very unlikely that smoking a jay or two a day is going to the be the cause of cancer if you ever get it (not likely either) but it might still be good to do some research on it

peace

__________________
peace, ahimsa

VOTE DR. RON PAUL- LEGALIZATION


Disclaimer: None of the information posted under this screen name or this IP address is to be taken seriously, nor do the authors advocate any illegal activities, as posts in these forums are for entertainment purposes only.

What do you burn when you bubble your hash? I fail to see the combustion here, water doesn't burn when you boil it, why does hash burn if its pure resin and you heat it at around 380 degrees, thr point where it evaporates

also yes it is hypothetically possible, but when I say hypothetically understand that this isn't going to happen, but when you understand the mechanism by which you get cancer it doesn't even take much necessarily. You can even get cancer from nothing at all, your cells can make errors when copying themselves which can lead to cancer depending on many factors.

I understand evaporating hash without a vaporizer can be difficult to do at a certain precise temperature, but theoretically you could I guess.

you cant get cancer from cannabis but smoking too many rolling papers or leaves from blunts is not as good for you.

__________________
"I'm rolling up a sweet,
I'm fillin' it with kief,
I'm too high to talk bitch,
Keep it real brief."
-Birdman, "Cali Dro"

You read me wrong, I said burning hash, not vaporizing it, causes obvious combustion and therefore is quite different than vaporizing, which was your initial question (you asked BURNING hash vs VAPING). REGARDLESS of how pure the hash is, you are still setting it on fire and breathing in the results, which is less healthy than only breathing in the vapors generated without ignition

And for those of you who honestly believe there are no carcinogens created when you burn a carbon-based plant, you very clearly don't know enough about the chemical formula of plant combustion to continue offering your opinion. Yes cannabis has cancer-fighting properties, but if you think that means there aren't carcinogens that come with it, you need to do a little more reading (btw, if i sound rude i dont mean to be, just havent smoked in way too fucking long)

__________________

Lite dat sheeeeit up fool

Great Edwards' quote in your signature by the way. Such a same nice guys like that can't compete with all the corrupt (but VERY wealthy) politicians that always seem to get so much attention...

peace

__________________
peace, ahimsa

VOTE DR. RON PAUL- LEGALIZATION


Disclaimer: None of the information posted under this screen name or this IP address is to be taken seriously, nor do the authors advocate any illegal activities, as posts in these forums are for entertainment purposes only.

I'm not sure either Obama or Clinton are corrupt.

They're definitely less populist than Edwards which leads to all sorts of issues involving potential special interest groups but I'm kinda glad this goaround, everyone seems to be on the up and up (at least on the left side)