HippyInEngland
Smoke Free Zone.
- Joined
- May 24, 2007
- Messages
- 8,624
- Reaction score
- 14,098
This is from a book I have, I have permission to share
EATING IT VERSUS SMOKING.
Smoking is one of the many bizarre rituals of mankind. It is practiced universally, more or less, in both primitive and sophisticated societies. Who can say whether it is natural or not? Perhaps, at least for some of our species, it is as much a genetic imperative to smoke as it is for spiders to spin and lemmings to drown. Many of us feel, however, that it is not in the best interest of our lungs to inhale vast volumes of cinders. The heat, tars and harsh smoke from any material, be it tobacco, pot or gentle herb, irritates, interferes with oxygen intake and may hasten pulmonary disorders in persons predisposed to these. The logical alternative to smoking grass is to ingest it. Convenience, however, often motivates our choice. It is simpler to light a joint than to spend an hour over a hot stove and another hour waiting for the product of our labour to take effect. Furthermore, many of us are so programmed for compulsive smoking that it is unlikely that we would change the pattern for any reason so minor as the well-being of our breathing apparatus. So, unless the reader is some kind of health nut with a fetish about maintaining the function of his lungs, why would any decent, normal, pot-smoking citizen want to switch to eating?
It may be enlightening to examine the relative advantages and disadvantages of these two methods of getting stoned. Smoking, as we have already indicated, is irritating to the throat and lungs. If one is already a user of tobacco, he will at Least be mentally inured to taking in smoke. If one is not a cigarette smoker, he will probably fail to inhale the pot smoke properly and in sufficient volumes to achieve the desired state. The ingestion of grass is hedonistic rather than masochistic. Ingested in normal amounts, there are no unpleasant side effects. Consumed in excessive quantities it may cause a listless feeling and bloodshot eyes the following day. When cannabis is smoked, the effect is almost instantaneous. Some so-called "creeper" grasses may take five minutes or so to come on completely, but some of the high is usually felt right away. The high from smoking usually lasts from one to two and a half hours, and can be recaptured when it is waning by taking a few more tokes. When cannabis is ingested, a person must wait thirty minutes to an hour and a half before the first stages of the high are even noticed. After this, the euphoric state continues to increase. It may then last from four to eight hours, and in some cases even longer. This long high can be of great value to a person who is going to be in a place where he cannot conveniently re-stone himself with the difficult to conceal smoke. It is always such a contra-hedonistic bother, for instance, to try to sneak a few hasty booster tokes in the toilet stalls during the intermission at a double feature. If the theatergoer ingests rather than smokes his pot, he can stay deliciously high even through an entire Wagnerian opera and still feel like he's in Valhalla upon arriving home. Although ingested cannabis may take as much as 90 minutes to take effect. Because of their different avenues of absorption, the psychopharmacological effects of ingested cannabis are bound to be somewhat different than those from the smoked material. A good amount of the active components are altered or destroyed during combustion when smoked. The various enzymes and other digestive fluids which must work on the cannabis resins before they can be assimilated alter the structure of the active materials somewhat, and no doubt also the subtle qualities of the high. These differences, though they are subtle and perhaps too susceptible to subjective description to be reported here, will be clearly observable even to the novice connoisseur. Other differences which are more easily described are due to the delayed reaction after ingestion. The effects here will be less pronounced during the initial stages than those from smoking. But as the minutes progress, the "hash eater's" high may become far more overwhelming than anything that the smoker has ever experienced. This may be furthered by the fact that the eater does not get the same immediate signals which tell the smoker that he has had enough. So when he finally comes on, he may really come onand still keep coming on.
EATING IT VERSUS SMOKING.
Smoking is one of the many bizarre rituals of mankind. It is practiced universally, more or less, in both primitive and sophisticated societies. Who can say whether it is natural or not? Perhaps, at least for some of our species, it is as much a genetic imperative to smoke as it is for spiders to spin and lemmings to drown. Many of us feel, however, that it is not in the best interest of our lungs to inhale vast volumes of cinders. The heat, tars and harsh smoke from any material, be it tobacco, pot or gentle herb, irritates, interferes with oxygen intake and may hasten pulmonary disorders in persons predisposed to these. The logical alternative to smoking grass is to ingest it. Convenience, however, often motivates our choice. It is simpler to light a joint than to spend an hour over a hot stove and another hour waiting for the product of our labour to take effect. Furthermore, many of us are so programmed for compulsive smoking that it is unlikely that we would change the pattern for any reason so minor as the well-being of our breathing apparatus. So, unless the reader is some kind of health nut with a fetish about maintaining the function of his lungs, why would any decent, normal, pot-smoking citizen want to switch to eating?
It may be enlightening to examine the relative advantages and disadvantages of these two methods of getting stoned. Smoking, as we have already indicated, is irritating to the throat and lungs. If one is already a user of tobacco, he will at Least be mentally inured to taking in smoke. If one is not a cigarette smoker, he will probably fail to inhale the pot smoke properly and in sufficient volumes to achieve the desired state. The ingestion of grass is hedonistic rather than masochistic. Ingested in normal amounts, there are no unpleasant side effects. Consumed in excessive quantities it may cause a listless feeling and bloodshot eyes the following day. When cannabis is smoked, the effect is almost instantaneous. Some so-called "creeper" grasses may take five minutes or so to come on completely, but some of the high is usually felt right away. The high from smoking usually lasts from one to two and a half hours, and can be recaptured when it is waning by taking a few more tokes. When cannabis is ingested, a person must wait thirty minutes to an hour and a half before the first stages of the high are even noticed. After this, the euphoric state continues to increase. It may then last from four to eight hours, and in some cases even longer. This long high can be of great value to a person who is going to be in a place where he cannot conveniently re-stone himself with the difficult to conceal smoke. It is always such a contra-hedonistic bother, for instance, to try to sneak a few hasty booster tokes in the toilet stalls during the intermission at a double feature. If the theatergoer ingests rather than smokes his pot, he can stay deliciously high even through an entire Wagnerian opera and still feel like he's in Valhalla upon arriving home. Although ingested cannabis may take as much as 90 minutes to take effect. Because of their different avenues of absorption, the psychopharmacological effects of ingested cannabis are bound to be somewhat different than those from the smoked material. A good amount of the active components are altered or destroyed during combustion when smoked. The various enzymes and other digestive fluids which must work on the cannabis resins before they can be assimilated alter the structure of the active materials somewhat, and no doubt also the subtle qualities of the high. These differences, though they are subtle and perhaps too susceptible to subjective description to be reported here, will be clearly observable even to the novice connoisseur. Other differences which are more easily described are due to the delayed reaction after ingestion. The effects here will be less pronounced during the initial stages than those from smoking. But as the minutes progress, the "hash eater's" high may become far more overwhelming than anything that the smoker has ever experienced. This may be furthered by the fact that the eater does not get the same immediate signals which tell the smoker that he has had enough. So when he finally comes on, he may really come onand still keep coming on.