Whether by medical recommendation or by one's own decision, the consumption of any substance always entails a series of risks, speaking in terms of the. Vaporizing, as it applies to medical marijuana, is the process of heating dried cannabis to a temperature just below its combustion point of °F. Although. Dec 18, Vaporized Cannabis Produces Stronger High Than Smoking for Infrequent Vaping is often considered a more discreet method of consuming.
These findings are similar to a previous report indicating that only a minority of individuals report vaping as primary method for cannabis use Earleywine and Barnwell, Although detailed data on the marketing of vaping devices for cannabis are not yet available, trends in use and marketing of e-cigs suggest that vaping nicotine is becoming increasingly popular Arrazola et al.
Moreover, the US market for legal cannabis in the limited amount of states having operational cannabis dispensaries nearly doubled from 1. As legalization of medical and recreational cannabis gains momentum and the cannabis industry grows alongside it, one would expect that trends in cannabis vaping will parallel the e-cig trend and increase rapidly.
Repeated monitoring to inform policy-related decisions related to cannabis and vaping devices is essential; the survey method used here, Facebook, offers one avenue for facilitating frequent, low cost monitoring of this phenomenon. Also similar to prior studies Etter, ; Malouff et al. Similar to e-cigs for nicotine Gostin and Glasner, , these perceived positive aspects of vaping cannabis may have both positive and negative implications Budney et al. As discussed above, vaping cannabis reduces the carcinogens ingested with smoking cannabis Pomahacova et al.
However, a major concern with vaping is that its other positive attributes i. Of note, users in the current survey did not generally report an increase or a decrease in use of cannabis since vaping; however, it is important to note that retrospective reports of cannabis use may be biased by a number of factors. Longitudinal studies that include more valid measures of cannabis use are needed to better understand how the increased presence and awareness of vaping impacts initiation, frequency, and problems associated with cannabis use.
Vaporizer users tended to be younger, male, less likely African American, earlier initiators and more frequent cannabis users, consistent with previous findings Etter, , and with cannabis users overall Haberstick et al. A few possibilities for this profile merit mention. First, younger age is generally associated with greater sensation and novelty seeking e.
Third, males are more likely and African Americans less likely to use cannabis in general and males tend to be higher than females on sensation seeking. Replication of these profiles using different sampling methods is clearly needed. Nicotine e-cig use was greater among those that ever vaped cannabis, but relatively few reported mixing nicotine and cannabis in a vaporizer, which is similar to a previous report assessing 96 vaporizer users Malouff et al.
Nonetheless, it remains of some concern that positive experiences associated with vaping cannabis and nicotine individually may negatively impact quit rates for cannabis or tobacco use, especially given the large proportion that report a history of vaping both substances.
A related concern to address is whether vaping cannabis increases risk for initiating e-cigs, and whether this leads to initiation of combustible tobacco use. Last, most respondents who vaped both substances reported mixing flavors with nicotine, but not with cannabis.
Flavored nicotine mixtures are heavily marketed for e-cigs, and presumably appeal to youth and prompt initiation; flavored cannabis preparations for vaping are not currently available to our knowledge.
If the vaping trend continues to escalate, flavored cannabis mixtures or prepared mixtures of cannabis and tobacco may become more widely available. Limitations to this study warrant mention. First, the study comprised a self-selected sample of cannabis users recruited via Facebook. Although the sample represented the geographic regions of the US, it over represented males and underrepresented ethnic minorities, and may not generalize to cannabis users across a broader demographic range, or to those that are less willing to share information online.
Although national survey data suggest that the prevalence of cannabis is greater in males Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality, , it is likely that our recruitment methodology contributed to the specific profile of this sample. Previous studies using Facebook to recruit cannabis users report capturing similar ratios for gender and ethnicity i. Second, data were comprised of individuals across the United States.
Although results were similar to the two smaller international surveys Etter, ; Malouff et al. Questions assessing reasons for vaping were limited to those with vaping experience, so reasons or perceptions of vaping between those who vaped and those who had not could not be compared.
Last, although this survey was distributed to individuals 18 years of age and older, it is possible that some respondents that completed the survey were under the age of Many cannabis users have initiated vaping, but currently few appear to be vaping frequently and report preferring vaping to smoking.
Those that do vape consider it to be a safer, more positive experience than smoking. Increases in availability and marketing of vaping devices, and the changing legal status of cannabis in the United States and other countries may influence patterns of use Daniulaityte et al. Using Facebook or other social media platforms can facilitate rapid, repeated assessments of developing trends in cannabis use.
Future surveys should assess patterns and perceptions at regular intervals in a broader range of the population to better document and respond to the changing landscape of cannabis use. BSC managed online recruitment efforts. All authors contributed to the writing and have approved the final manuscript. This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript.
The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. Author manuscript; available in PMC Feb 1. Crosier , 1 Jacob T. Borodovsky , 1 James D. Sargent , 2 and Alan J. Author information Copyright and License information Disclaimer. The publisher's final edited version of this article is available at Drug Alcohol Depend. See other articles in PMC that cite the published article. Abstract Background Along with changes in cannabis laws in the United States and other countries, new products for consuming cannabis are emerging, with unclear public health implications.
Methods This study characterized the prevalence and current patterns of vaping cannabis among a large national sample of cannabis users. Conclusion Increases in availability and marketing of vaping devices, and the changing legal status of cannabis in the United States and other countries may influence patterns of use. Table 1 Participant Characteristics. Open in a separate window. Conflict of Interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Vaporization as a smokeless cannabis delivery system: The co-occurring use and misuse of cannabis and tobacco: Tobacco use among middle and high school students—United States, Manuscript submitted for publication. Decreased respiratory symptoms in cannabis users who vaporize. Electronic cigarettes and cannabis: E-cigarettes, vaping, and youth.
Prevalence and correlates of alcohol and cannabis use disorders in the United States: Experiences of marijuana-vaporizer users. Cannabis smoke condensate III: Prevalence and co-use of marijuana among young adult cigarette smokers: The interaction between vaporizer use and cannabis consumption also appeared, suggesting that a vaporizer should have more impact on respiratory symptoms in people who use more marijuana. Odds ratios suggest that these effects are relatively small, but interactions often prove difficult to detect at all [ 9 ].
Several important limitations of these data deserve mention, particularly those related to sampling, Internet reporting, limitations of our measures, and the lack of random assignment to vaporizer use. In an effort to find regular users of cannabis, we targeted people with a potential interest in changing cannabis policy. These individuals might have consciously or unconsciously minimized their reports of symptoms that might cast cannabis in a negative light.
Nevertheless, literally thousands of participants admitted to experiencing respiratory symptoms. The symptoms covaried with cannabis use, cigarette use, and the interaction of the two, as work with samples gathered in other ways has revealed [ 6 ]. These results suggest that reports among these participants are comparable to those found in other work. Any bias in reporting remains a problem, and only further work can help address this issue.
Vaporizer users might be more inclined to minimize respiratory symptoms than people who smoke cannabis in other ways. The price of a vaporizer can range as high as hundreds of dollars. Vaporizers also lack some of the convenience of other methods of marijuana use. Users who have spent this much money and effort might minimize reports of their respiratory symptoms, consciously or inadvertently, in an effort to justify their actions.
Only a more objective measure of respiratory function that does not rely on self-report can sidestep this potential problem. Laboratory measures of lung function would make a nice addition to further work on this topic. The use of the Internet for this type of work has advantages and disadvantages as well.
This approach might lead individuals who are unwilling to travel to the laboratory to participate, potentially increasing generalizability. Heavy users with severe symptoms might be particularly disinclined to participate without the convenience of the Internet. Recent work also suggests that people report more drug use while using the Internet than they do on standard paper-and-pencil measures [ 10 ].
Nevertheless, because Internet access was required for participation, these data might not generalize to meaningful subsets of the population without such access. Our measures of vaporizer use and respiratory symptoms could also have been more detailed. A single question about the primary technique used for administering cannabis neglects potentially meaningful variation in vaporizer use. Some participants might use a vaporizer primarily but also smoke cannabis.
In contrast, other participants might use a vaporizer exclusively. Both of these groups of participants would end up in the group who uses a vaporizer primarily. Vaporizers come in several forms, including conduction-style machines that employ a hot plate as well as convection-style devices that use warmed air.
The efficacy of these different machines could vary substantially, but we could not address the question with the current data. These limitations, however, should decrease power rather than create a spurious result. By lumping participants who occasionally smoke cannabis into the same group with those who vaporize exclusively, we actually weaken the ability to detect effects. Including any type of vaporizer, no matter how effective, also has the potential to weaken effects.
In a sense, the current study's estimate of the effect of a vaporizer on respiratory symptoms might be an underestimate of the improvement that could arise from a good vaporizer used as the exclusive method for ingesting cannabis. We also did not assess the length of time each participant had used a vaporizer.
A vaporizer's impact might grow more dramatic with longer use. The assessment of respiratory symptoms was also not particularly elaborate, but the same measures revealed a significant impact of cannabis and cigarettes in this sample and in other work [ 6 ].
Finally, the use of a vaporizer was not randomly assigned. The possibility exists that cannabis users who choose a vaporizer might engage in a host of other behaviors designed to minimize respiratory symptoms, or simply be more health conscious in general.
Like any correlational study, this one cannot address the role of causality. The current data are consistent, however, with the idea that cannabis vaporizers can decrease respiratory symptoms in regular users of the plant.
A better test of a vaporizer's potential for minimizing problems would require recruiting cannabis smokers who report respiratory troubles, randomly assigning a group to use a vaporizer, and assessing any decrease in symptoms.
The current data suggest that such an intervention could prove helpful. Although the use of a vaporizer has the potential to increase the safety of cannabis as far as respiratory symptoms are concerned, pulmonary problems are not the only potential negative consequences of the plant. Cannabis can lead to impaired driving skills [ 12 ], and heavy use in adolescence might create deviant brain structure [ 13 ] as well as decreases in intelligence [ 14 ].
A vaporizer offers no protection against these negative consequences. Nevertheless, a vaporizer has considerable potential for increasing cannabis drug safety by minimizing pulmonary troubles. ME is affiliated with organizations devoted to changing cannabis laws. ME contributed to study design, coordination and supervision, data analysis and interpretation, and drafted the manuscript.
SSB participated in study design and coordination and helped draft the manuscript. This work was funded by a grant from the Marijuana Policy Project. Special thanks to Elana B. Gordis for continued support.
We thank two anonymous reviewers for courteous and helpful comments. National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. Journal List Harm Reduct J v. Published online Apr Mitch Earleywine 1 and Sara Smucker Barnwell 2.
Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer. Received Dec 6; Accepted Apr This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. Abstract Cannabis smoking can create respiratory problems.
Background Cannabis smoke contains gaseous and particulate matter with the potential to create symptoms of respiratory problems [ 1 ]. Method We sought to identify the impact of vaporizers on respiratory symptoms. Participants The 6, people who qualified included 4, men Measures Respiratory symptoms Participants reported respiratory symptoms by answering six questions: Vaporizer use Participants reported the technique they used most frequently when ingesting marijuana, and chose from blunts, joints, water pipes, pipes, edibles, vaporizers, and other.
Marijuana use Although assessing the frequency of marijuana use has proven comparable to assessing the frequency of use for other drugs, assessing the quantity of consumption remains quite difficult. Cigarettes Those who smoked cigarettes 4, began at a mean age of Results A simple chi-square test revealed that vaporizer users were less likely to report respiratory problems than participants who did not vaporize, with of vaporizer users Open in a separate window. Discussion These results suggest that the respiratory effects of cannabis can decrease with the use of a vaporizer.
Competing interests ME is affiliated with organizations devoted to changing cannabis laws. Authors' contributions ME contributed to study design, coordination and supervision, data analysis and interpretation, and drafted the manuscript. Acknowledgements This work was funded by a grant from the Marijuana Policy Project. Respiratory and immunologic consequences of marijuana smoking. Cannabis and tobacco smoke are not equally carcinogenic.
Cannabis vaporizer combines efficient delivery of THC with effective suppression of pyrolytic compounds.
Vaporizer Usage: safety and toxicology
May 3, Vaporizing, also known as vaping, refers to the conversion of a Health- conscious consumers can use a vaporizer to consume dried cannabis. Nov 30, Vaporized cannabis produced greater pharmacodynamic effects and higher . the contents of the pipe to ensure complete dose consumption. Introduction. Cannabis vaporization is growing in popularity among people interested in consuming cannabis in an easy, discreet manner that's healthier than.