I smoke pipe tobacco and the other night after breaking down some weed I decided to mix the two. I put more tobacco than weed so neither the smell nor appearance would be too obvious. This way I can have it and nobody will think about what it could be. When I go to work I put some tobacco in a bag so nobody would know the difference if it had weed mixed in as well. I think I'm going to try this. A friend of mine swears that when he mixed weed with clove tobacco it gave him some sort of extra high. I don't know the name for doing this but I've heard it is common/popular some places.
Comments
But yeah, it does make a mix go a bit further...And the instant rush after a bong hit is definitely an addictive feeling.
But that's ok 'cause I don't like tobacco anyway.
I guess I'm not a huge fan of tobacco, I only really enjoy clove cigarettes sometimes and privately grown/cured tobacco leaf. I really savor the flavor of weed though, and it is important to me to preserve it, and that is why I smoke glass on glass 95% of the time (and get good, well grown, well nutrient flushed, well cured bud). Mixing with tobacco just kind of ruins it for me, unless joints are involved, they're a whole different ballgame . If I want that little rush, ill smoke after wards.
Mixing tobacco with weed, namely making "spliffs", is much more prevalent in Europe than anywhere else. I'm sure pockets of humanity in other countries followed the trend/ did it on their own, but it is kind of a Europe thing.
Anyone who is a forum junkie and has been catching drug conversation for a while will notice this.
People on a forum saying one thing from their extremely narrow field of experience does not equal the rest of mankind's view, opinion or experience in any way.
And you're the exception?
I agree with that guys statement that a lot of Europeans on forums seem to smoke 'spliffs'....I just don't believe people on forums make up the majority of smokers, and that this is unquestionably true. I think everyone could agree on that...Hence, there is no exception.
You don't have to be most people to know what most people do, and most Americans don't smoke Spliffs.
"We have found that tobacco increases the amount of THC inhaled per gram of cannabis from 32.70 +/- 2.29 mg/g for a 100% cannabis cigarette to 58.90 +/- 2.30 mg/g for a 25% cannabis cigarette. This indicates that tobacco increases the vaporization efficiency of THC by as much as 45% under the conditions tested."
Only small rolling-machine cigarettes were tested, but it makes logical sense that if a 3:1 ratio of tobacco:marijuana increases inhaled THC by 45% in identical rolling conditions, this advantage will hold true (to a larger or lesser extent) in other rolling conditions.
I always mix tobacco with my weed, as does everyone I know (Brit here, 99% of my smoking is through a spliff). It lasts longer, it burns more evenly, I prefer the high and it's more efficient. I figured it was more efficient before I ever found that study, too; when you figure that 100% of the wasted (non-inhaled) smoke from a pure weed smokeable is THC-containing smoke, and only 25% from a 3:1 tobacco:marijuana smokeable is THC-containing smoke, the choice is obvious.
But making your judgement based on what forum-goers say is not going to be very accurate.
If you've lived extensively in a foreign country and hung out with a lot of weed smokers, then it would hold more credibility.
Lol. Stoner myth.
http://www.ukcia.org/research/AdverseEffectsOfCannabis.pdf
"Bloom and colleagues reported similar additive effects
on bronchitic symptoms in an epidemiological study of
the respiratory effects of smoking “non-tobacco”
cigarettes in 990 individuals aged under 40 years in
Tucson, Arizona, USA. Non-tobacco smokers reported
more coughing, phlegm production, and wheeze than
non-smokers, irrespective of whether they also smoked
tobacco. Those who had never smoked any substance
had the best respiratory functioning, followed in order of
decreasing function by current tobacco smokers, current
non-tobacco smokers, and current smokers of both
tobacco and non-tobacco cigarettes. Non-tobacco
smoking alone had a larger effect on respiratory function
than tobacco smoking alone, and the effect of both types
of smoking was additive."
There are plenty of other properly-conducted studies too, and respiratory effects aren't the only ones there's evidence for. Believe it or not, scientists know how to eliminate confounding variables from their research. Yes, 'non-tobacco' smokers is a euphemism for weed smokers*. Note particularly how current smokers of marijuana alone show more respiratory impairment that current smokers of tobacco alone, although less than current smokers of both substances.
Marijuana may not be as harmful as other substances, but to say it has no proven detrimental effects and is perfectly safe to use is just plain wrong.
*from the Bloom et al. study cited; "The questions referred to "non-tobacco cigarette" smoking because of the illegality of marijuana use."
Studies have found that moderate cannabis use is a protective factor against lung, head and neck cancers. Also, many of the constituents of marijuana show potential in cancer treatment.
What to you mean? I live in the states, and spliffs are less common here (We smoke blunts) than they are in common wealth countries and parts of Europe.
Quite true. Moderate alcohol use reduces your risk of heart disease and abnormal blood pressure, as well as a host of other diseases. In fact, the health benefits of alcohol are much more numerous and well-documented than the health benefits of marijuana.
That doesn't mean it's correct to say that alcohol has no adverse effects on a drinker, just as it isn't correct to say that marijuana has no adverse effects on a smoker.
I mean when people make these claims they are just generalizing and actually have no idea since their assumption is based purely on what happens in their own town and have no way of knowing what happens in the rest of the USA.