[HN Gopher] Drug Users Use a Lot of Drugs
___________________________________________________________________
Drug Users Use a Lot of Drugs
Author : feross
Score : 88 points
Date : 2021-06-09 19:17 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (astralcodexten.substack.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (astralcodexten.substack.com)
| zafka wrote:
| Thank you. While there is no data to back up some of these
| numbers, at least they are offered up. I have often wondered what
| amounts Meth addicts were using do cause their severe issues.
| wincy wrote:
| My neighbors teeth are falling out. Salesman, honestly pretty
| successful guy, making 6 figures. Apparently he takes 120mg if
| Adderall to wake up in the morning. At that dose, he's
| basically just getting Walter White quality meth for his
| morning pick me up.
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| His teeth are far more likely to be falling out because of
| bad oral hygiene for a decade earlier in life than they are
| because of a low dose of Adderal or anything.
|
| If 120mg of Adderal made your teeth fall out then tons more
| people would have their teeth falling out.
| thebean11 wrote:
| lol at 120 being a low dose. You start on 10-20.
| wincy wrote:
| To be clear, 120mg is what he takes first thing in the
| morning. He takes more throughout the day. I'd guess he
| takes 500+ in a day.
| arthurcolle wrote:
| That is impossible. There is no one someone's heart would
| be able to take that. I take 60 mg daily of Vyvanse and
| I'm pretty wired all day. I can't even fathom the effects
| of that on a human body.
|
| Is he like 300 lbs?
| cwkoss wrote:
| 500mg/day was the figure cited for heavy users in the OP
| article.
|
| You're right that 500mg is far into overdose territory
| for novice users. But, he probably has been using for a
| long time and has a very high tolerance.
| kache_ wrote:
| Are there "tons of people" seriously taking 120mg of
| adderall?
| arthurcolle wrote:
| No, that is far beyond the daily dosage threshold.
|
| Even 90 is extremely high for XR, and would probably be
| broken into 2 45 doses throughout the day.
| boomboomsubban wrote:
| The max approved prescribed dose is 60mg per day, so at that
| point he's probably doing something illegal.
| wincy wrote:
| Oh for sure, the reason I found out about it is that he
| asked to buy mine, and I declined. I have too much to lose,
| a wife a kid and a good job, to be slinging Schedule 2
| drugs for a couple hundred bucks a month. Plus I actually
| take my dose as prescribed. He moved away though, thank
| goodness.
| trestenhortz wrote:
| I watched a documentary about ketamine use by party people.
|
| It profiled a young guy who had destroyed his bladder and needed
| to use a pump and hole in his belly to urinate.
|
| Really disturbing.
| PicassoCTs wrote:
| Oh, that is just peritoneal-dialysis. Lots of people do that
| when there kidneys are shut and they want to continue a
| "normal" life without constant blood dialysis via machine.
|
| The real con here is that you must limit your intake of fluids
| drastically
| vmception wrote:
| My problem with that, and this article, is that it doesn't say
| what dosage does that?
|
| It just skips right on to meth, and dosages, and never mentions
| Ketamine again.
|
| We get that 280mg a month mostly doesn't, and 90,000mg a month
| can.
|
| But are these "party people" the _same_ as the people doing
| that higher amount prorated to daily? More specifically, are
| the "party people" I've been around secretly having bladder
| problems and getting a hole in their belly and not really
| ubering home but ubering to the hospital?
|
| Let me know when you, or anyone passing by, find that article
| kriskrunch wrote:
| I've known many users over the years, many OD while others
| decay over a few years.
|
| One customer in particular used ketamine heavily. Due to a
| string of poor decisions, he was on federal probation and
| subjected to random drug tests.
|
| He determined two drugs were not detectible by the tests at
| that time: ketamine and GHB. And he frequently consumed them.
| I remember him stumbling around my store, sipping caps of G
| every so often... sniffling behind tall pallets to suck up
| another key bump.
|
| Over a year or so, he developed severe problems with his
| bladder, but wouldn't / couldn't stop his drug use, even
| after I broke it down to him plainly; "Bro, you are killing
| yourself."
|
| From what I can tell, users don't keep track of doses, or
| much of anything. Their objectives are short term in nature:
| get high asap.
|
| I suspect any such article that provides hard numbers like
| what you want will provide guestimates at best.
| vmception wrote:
| So we can improve the data by regulating the supply chain,
| serving sizes, and points of sale
|
| Doesnt seem to support enforcing varying levels of
| prohibition
| cwkoss wrote:
| I think another major factor that this article didn't point out
| is drug purity - and what those specific impurities are.
|
| Particularly with drugs like meth, which can be manufactured
| clandestinely by people who don't understand chemistry well,
| there are a lot of intermediates or potential reaction byproducts
| which are orders of magnitude more cardiotoxic or otherwise more
| harmful than pure methamphetamine. And that's before you get into
| the potential toxicity of any intentionally-added cutting agents.
|
| I think ketamine synthesis is more involved, so it's likely that
| illegally manufactured ketamine is comparatively cleaner than
| illegally manufactured meth, but illicit ketamine is still
| probably harder on your body than pharmaceutical grade for the
| same reasons.
|
| Illegal drug manufacturers have a moderate economic pressure to
| increase purity, but - short of not immediately killing users and
| losing your customer base - they have little economic incentive
| to ensure that the impurities that remain in the final product
| are safe or inert.
|
| Yes, 500mgs of meth a day is almost certainly not good for your
| health. But these studies are usually not able to control for
| purity of the meth that is consumed, so I expect for these
| studies finding adverse effects of chronic use - at least some
| portion of this effect size is a result of purity issues rather
| than purely based on dosage.
| heisenbit wrote:
| Drug processing in the body can sometimes be surprising. I
| learned recently about first pass effect which means the drug
| heads first to the liver and only what passes through is
| available to the body. So if one ups the dose and the liver
| processing is saturated a double dose can deliver much more punch
| than two single ones. The body has many non-linear features and
| extrapolating several orders of magnitude is often not possible.
| cwkoss wrote:
| Yep, this is why "boofing" (intrarectal) dosing has found
| rising popularity in the 'research chemical' scene over the
| past couple decades.
|
| The liver's effects on drugs is really fascinating. Grapefruit
| has a chemical that can inactive liver enzymes, so some drug
| addicts regularly drink grapefruit juice to 'get more bang for
| their buck'. Plain old black pepper (in large doses)
| inactivates a different enzyme IIRC.
|
| There are also some interesting anecdotal cases of people who
| claim to have found regimens of essential oils, which when
| consumed at the right schedule saturate liver enzymes to the
| extent that otherwise inert substances can produce
| recreationally psychoactive effects.
|
| Source: i have a morbid fascination with the 'frontier non-
| medical drug use' communities and follow their subreddits
| (/r/researchchemicals and /r/peptides being among the most
| interesting). There a lot of people who choose to make
| themselves guinea pigs quite recklessly and, thankfully for
| scientific advancement and future harm reduction, post in-depth
| reports of how these novel chemicals or preparations effected
| them. Recently, broad cheap availability of novel benzos have
| led many posters to deep addictions of such great magnitude
| that they struggle to convince doctors assisting with detox
| that they've _actually_ been consuming equivalents of 1000x
| typical prescribed doses... until the doctor gives them massive
| doses of valium to detox and they still have severe seizures.
| whymauri wrote:
| >There are also some interesting anecdotal cases of people
| who claim to have found regimens of essential oils, which
| when consumed at the right schedule saturate liver enzymes to
| the extent that otherwise inert substances can produce
| recreationally psychoactive effects.
|
| Are essential oils literally oils? Because I doubt they can
| have a metabolic effect due to their size and lipophilicity.
| My main concern is adsorption. But if they're small and
| greasy, then they may be promiscuous binders.
|
| Or do the essential oils carry other molecules along?
|
| Edit: I see now that individual oils carry many diverse
| constituents, including some small-to-medium sized lads.
| That's a pretty interesting shotgun strategy for controlling
| your metabolism, lol.
| Alex3917 wrote:
| Somehow he managed to ignore the data showing that a non-trivial
| percentage of people with KLUTS get it after only doing doses
| comparable to the psychiatric dose, and sometimes after only
| doing it once or a handful of times.
|
| https://erowid.org/chemicals/ketamine/ketamine_article2.shtm...
| loves_mangoes wrote:
| I'll add my anecdote to the pile. I don't use ketamine a lot
| (it is not very good for headaches, pretty good for dulling a
| mosquito bite until it fades away naturally, excellent for
| dancing).
|
| I've taken about 1000mg over the course of several months, at
| irregular intervals. While it is somewhat higher than Scott's
| 280mg/month, it's not an order of magnitude higher. Certainly
| nowhere near 90,000mg/month.
|
| I can report one event of pain while peeing, a few days ago. So
| it looks like my body is not built to handle even moderate
| levels of ketamine use, and I'd have to stay closer to
| 100mg/month or lower to be on the safe side.
|
| That said, let me reiterate, this is anecdote. I only think
| it's interesting because there is no other reasonable
| explanation for my recent urinary pain, and I didn't expect
| such low doses of Ketamine to have noticeable effects.
| Alex3917 wrote:
| Yeah I think I gave myself some minor bladder damage just by
| drinking iced mint tea (since it's such a strong diuretic),
| so I can't imagine I'd react well to ketamine even in small
| doses.
| cwkoss wrote:
| > pretty good for dulling a mosquito bite until it fades away
| naturally
|
| Applied topically? Or in the sense that the anesthetic
| disassociative effects dull most sensations?
| loves_mangoes wrote:
| I did try rubbing some crushed powder to the bite, but
| could not notice any effect before I got impatient.
| Ketamine on my tongue has an instant numbing effect, but to
| my knowledge nothing transdermaly.
|
| I took it insufflated, the short duration of action and
| general anesthesia makes it decently practical.
|
| (Of course it sounds pretty silly to recommend Ketamine for
| a small everyday itch. But that's what I had on hand, and I
| happen to dislike mosquitos with a very particular
| intensity =] )
| canary1 wrote:
| This article is mostly weak opinion. There was one important
| takeaway, which is notable to anyone interested in ketamine:
|
| > I hesitate to say the risk of bladder injury from a normal
| psychiatric dose of ketamine is literally zero
| daperor630 wrote:
| >I hesitate to say the risk of bladder injury from a normal
| psychiatric dose of ketamine is literally zero.
|
| The author's hesitation to make such a claim is very important
| to this quote.
| Impassionata wrote:
| It's hard to read Scott once you hear about how he courted the
| alt-right on purpose and his communities became full of open
| racists as a result.
| arijun wrote:
| Do you have a source for that? Beyond the NYT piece, which is
| so laughable it does hit pieces a disservice by being grouped
| with them.
| wizzwizz4 wrote:
| The NYT piece didn't even say that; it said that he supported
| genocide (??), which is similar, but I don't remember it
| saying that he courted neo-Nazis. (Or was that one of the
| heavily-implied things I was oblivious to?)
| arijun wrote:
| Perhaps it was more implying they were welcomed?
|
| > The voices also included white supremacists and neo-
| fascists. The only people who struggled to be heard... were
| "social justice warriors."
| Impassionata wrote:
| There's some leaked emails where he plainly states he's
| chasing that audience. https://web.archive.org/web/2021021719
| 5335/https://twitter.c...
|
| I wouldn't say he's racist but it's almost worse. He didn't
| think about how this would go down, which is to say, when you
| court an audience that has a reputation of being overtly
| racist, your audience will become more and more racist,
| driving good people out.
| arijun wrote:
| I couldn't read Scott's email at your link but I could
| here: https://twitter.com/arsonatdennys/status/136215319110
| 2677001
|
| I don't think his reasoning is that crazy here--I certainly
| don't see it as the smoking gun that you or the person who
| tweeted it do. I also haven't noticed a huge amount of
| racists in his comment section, although I have to admit I
| haven't spent all that much time on the blog.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| It shouldn't be hard for a grownup to read his texts even if
| that were true.
| Impassionata wrote:
| It's not that it's hard to read his texts, and sometimes
| there's still some good stuff in there. It's that once
| someone shows bad judgment you have to think about how that
| manifests, and that manifests in poor thinking that's well-
| disguised.
|
| Once you know a clock is broken don't use it to tell the
| time.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| Yeah, I guess I somewhat deliberately misinterpreted you. I
| should know better...
|
| I'm pretty sure you've been lied to about this though.
|
| That Twitter link is mostly unreadable, but what's in human
| font size is just vague gossip from some angry dude on
| Twitter.
| agentwiggles wrote:
| I also followed up on the link. I was able to open the
| image links in separate tabs to get them to load. There's
| a whole bunch of commentary from Scott there that I'd say
| is worth reading to understand where impassionata is
| coming from. I don't personally agree with their take,
| but there _is_ actual substantive content at the link.
| commandlinefan wrote:
| And that's "Mr. Alexander" to you, GP.
| Impassionata wrote:
| ... nah.
| agentwiggles wrote:
| I've read a lot of his stuff and have never heard about that.
| Would you want to provide a link that supports your claim, so I
| can make an informed decision about continuing to read his
| generally good, substantive, and interesting content?
| Impassionata wrote:
| There's some leaked emails where he plainly states he's
| chasing that audience. https://web.archive.org/web/2021021719
| 5335/https://twitter.c...
|
| I wouldn't say he's racist but it's almost worse. He didn't
| think about how this would go down, which is to say, when you
| court an audience that has a reputation of being overtly
| racist, your audience will become more and more racist,
| driving good people out.
| agentwiggles wrote:
| I read through the comments he made in the images attached
| to those tweets, and I don't personally find what he's
| saying there to be especially problematic. I certainly
| don't read anything he's saying there as being motivated by
| racism, hatred, or alt-right political views.
|
| I still really appreciate you backing up your post with a
| link and the chance to dig into his sources. Thanks for the
| link.
| Impassionata wrote:
| >I don't personally find what he's saying there to be
| especially problematic.
|
| And you're right in theory; in _theory_ it 's fine to
| give people a chance to express their opinion. In
| _theory_ the out-of-mainstream views have some insight
| that 's worth the questionable bits.
|
| But in practice, what Scott Alexander did was cultivate a
| community of racists. He provided a platform, he provided
| cover for them.
|
| From a purely consequential point of view Scott
| Alexander's political writing has been a detriment.
| Surely no one would consider "My community is well known
| as a racist gathering spot" a successful outcome.
|
| It's not just the cost of doing business with regard to
| free speech norms, it's a poor application of free speech
| norms reproducing basic racism.
| [deleted]
| newbie789 wrote:
| Former meth addict here.
|
| > The average crystal meth addict uses about 500 mg a day. And
| they snort it, which probably produces about double the peak
| plasma level as taking it orally. So they're getting the
| equivalent of 1000 mg oral amphetamine daily...
|
| 500mg sounds about right, but from my experience the most common
| route of administration (in the western United States at least)
| is smoking, not snorting.
|
| _Because_ so many people smoke meth rather than snort it, a lot
| of meth is sold as methamphetamine base rather than
| methamphetamine hydrochloride.
|
| This means that it's often not particularly water soluble, which
| makes it a poor choice for snorting since it doesn't get through
| your nasal mucosa and actually kicks in after it drips down into
| your stomach. It's not actually much different from eating it in
| many cases.
|
| I like this article overall but I get irritated when I read stuff
| about drug users that is clearly written by somebody who hasn't
| done a lot of drugs.
|
| Edited for spelling. Also if anybody has any questions for me,
| I'm pretty knowledgeable on this topic (though no expert), so
| feel free to ask away!
| sharken wrote:
| Must admit the specifics of doing drugs is not that interesting
| to me, it's more interesting to ask the question:
|
| How does someone stop doing drugs?
| agentdrtran wrote:
| You may get the best answer to that question from people who
| have stopped rather than never started.
| newbie789 wrote:
| I was incredibly lucky. I got to a point where I felt like I
| wanted to stop (which happens often to a lot of addicts),
| which coincided with an opportunity to move far away from my
| hometown, and then also coincidentally found myself
| surrounded by a fantastic support system. It's the addict
| equivalent of flipping a quarter 50 times and having them all
| come up head.
|
| As for a general answer to your question, there isn't one
| that I'm aware of. Everyone I know that's gotten clean has
| wildly different stories.
| bufordtwain wrote:
| Can you provide more details on what the "fantastic support
| system" consists of?
| newbie789 wrote:
| I found myself in a very accepting friend group of people
| that didn't use drugs and (for my situation this was key)
| didn't know where to get them.
|
| Aside from that, there was no shaming and very little
| drama. Essentially, my previous situation was that I was
| surrounded by extremely abusive family and dangerously
| messed up friends. I more or less made friends with
| "normal" people, got away from a really bad situation and
| it all just sort of... worked out.
|
| There's absolutely no secret sauce or trick in my getting
| clean. I can't count the number of my old friends that
| tried stuff like I did and it didn't work out.
|
| It was literally just luck.
| brutal_chaos_ wrote:
| A strong desire to quit and a big support network (family,
| friends, recovery centers, etc). We tend to look down on
| addicts, when in fact, we probably should be looking to help.
| And the more help there is, the better chance someone will
| have quitting/recovery. Support also means real support, not
| a parent there because they have to and so they have disgust
| on their face, nope nope nope, that can make things worse.
| beebeepka wrote:
| Do regular users also get super horny but unable to perform
| due... shrinkage?
| newbie789 wrote:
| Yes. Erectile dysfunction drugs were common in my friend
| group.
| tomcam wrote:
| Might be a regional thing? I was raised in Southern California,
| where is smoking is also the preferred method. I believe OP is
| from New York City. For all we know perhaps inhaling what his
| upper middle class cohort does.
| marton78 wrote:
| OP is from California.
| grawprog wrote:
| This article isn't bad, but it's a very shallow, narrow view of
| things.
|
| In general it seems to make no distinction with addicts using
| high doses to overcome tolerance levels with recreational drug
| users in general.
|
| Methamphetamines and amphetamines are not the same chemical,
| despite being similar.
|
| https://methoide.fcm.arizona.edu/infocenter/index.cfm?stid=1...
|
| The small differences between the molecules allow it to penetrate
| the blood brain barrier more efficiently, has longer lasting
| toxic effects and acts more as a central nervous system stimulant
| and
|
| >less peripheral nervous system and cardiovascular stimulation
| activity. Another difference between amphetamine and MA is that
| amphetamine stimulates the CNS indirectly by activating the
| release of catecholamines and inhibiting their breakdown and
| storage. In contrast, MA stimulates the postsynaptic
| catecholamine receptors directly.[2]
|
| Increased dosage is only one part of the difference between
| Methamphetamine and Amphetamines. Street meth is also far more
| likely to have fillers, leftover solvents and a bunch of other
| things that are not good for you.
|
| >In general, recreational drug users take their drugs at doses so
| much higher than psychiatric patients that they're basically two
| different chemicals
|
| Recreational drug users come in a wide range. The first two
| sections of the article speak about addicts doing extremely large
| doses, then seems to lump 'recreational drug users' altogether
| with that.
| rogerclark wrote:
| "The most important reason meth makes your teeth fall out and
| ruins your life but Adderall just makes you study a little harder
| is that the meth users are taking 50x higher doses"
|
| The reason meth addicts have bad teeth isn't because of the
| dosage of the drug. It's because stimulants make you want to eat
| candy and drink sugar water, because meth addicts lose track of
| oral hygiene in favor of doing meth or something else more
| interesting, and because they're smoking it (along with other
| drugs).
| canary1 wrote:
| Regardless, I think the author's point is that the massive dose
| is more responsible for that negative outcome than the chemical
| is itself.
| peanut_worm wrote:
| Stimulants suppress your appetite but they also make you clench
| you jaw and grind your teeth involuntarily.
| beebeepka wrote:
| You mean amphetamines, not stimulants in general. I've seen
| people do much worse when they mix this shit with alcohol,
| the worst offender that is still perfectly legal
| peanut_worm wrote:
| What non-amphetemine stimulants are people doing
| recreationally?
| MagnumOpus wrote:
| Cocaine? MDMA?
| loves_mangoes wrote:
| 2C-B. Cathinones and other pyrovalerones.
|
| Some people even seem to enjoy absorbing Coffee through
| their nose.
| newbie789 wrote:
| Meth does not make you crave any type of food. If that were the
| case Desoxyn would not be FDA approved for weight loss.
|
| "Meth mouth" is caused by the fact that it dries your mouth
| out, you grind your teeth a LOT, and is often observed in
| people that have used drugs long/hard enough to find themselves
| no longer taking care of their health in general, let alone
| oral hygiene. This often is coupled with financial ruin and
| utter alienation from society. Somehow, mysteriously, all of
| the rich house wives and Silicon Valley coders that use it
| develop meth mouth at a lower rate.
| whymauri wrote:
| The reason there's confusion in this thread about dosage is
| that the author didn't use precise terminology (the author is
| technically correct, but there's ambiguity). I'm pretty sure he
| means that the recreational dose is relatively larger compared
| to the effective dose (ED) with meth than with Adderall.
| bawolff wrote:
| Adderall is also a stimulant(?) The authors suggestion is it
| would cause the same effect if taken in the same dosage.
| treeman79 wrote:
| I was on Adderall 10mg a day. Worked as advertised. ADHD
| under control. Chronic fatigue fixed.
|
| Every portion of my body felt like it was being burned from
| the inside. I had to start tramadol to counter act the pain.
|
| It also upped cranial pressure. Causing a lot of secondary
| problems.
|
| This was made much worse as dosage went up.
|
| I had to stop it before downward spiral completely destroyed
| me.
|
| Vyvanse was a mild version of all this.
|
| Can't imagine anything more intense.
| skummetmaelk wrote:
| They are both amphetamines.
| TX0098812 wrote:
| ...because they're taking 50x the dose?
| shredprez wrote:
| Also: dehydration and dry-mouth secondary to stimulant use,
| classic accelerators of bacterial overgrowth and consequent
| tooth decay.
| KingMachiavelli wrote:
| Truth. It's highly variable but even Adderall will accelerate
| tooth decay. It's quite necessary to drink water very
| frequently.
| kingTug wrote:
| This isn't correct. Meth, when smoked, is incredibly toxic. The
| toxic smoke that causes "meth mouth"
| volkl48 wrote:
| While I am certainly willing to believe that illicit meth
| is...bad for you/toxic and the smoke is as well, I'm not
| finding much to support the idea of it being the primary
| cause of (or major contributor to) "meth mouth" in a quick
| search.
|
| In contrast, every source I find cites the things the prior
| poster mentioned as the causes.
|
| For example:
|
| https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-
| reports/meth...
|
| > The dental problems may be caused by a combination of poor
| nutrition and dental hygiene as well as dry mouth and teeth
| grinding caused by the drug.
|
| I would think they would be mentioning that the toxic smoke
| is a cause or contributor if there was evidence to support
| it.
| Nuzzerino wrote:
| Street meth also has a lot of adulterants, contaminants, or
| byproducts that can accelerate the damage.
| golergka wrote:
| There's recreational drug users, and then there's recreational
| drug users. Turns out some people I know who microdosed
| amphetamine took doses exactly in the ballpark of what doctor
| would prescribe them.
| dnate wrote:
| There always are, for any drug.
|
| There is the person that uses amphetamines to get high SAT
| scores, high college grades and stops after landing a FAANG
| job.
|
| There is the person using alcohol as "social lube". Never
| drinks alone, never gets wasted.
|
| There is the person using LSD and other party drugs few times
| per year or less in a controlled setting
|
| And then there are the extremely addicted people. And
| everything in between. It's a sliding scale. People need to be
| educated to learn the risks and recognize harmful behavioral
| patterns.
|
| Simply telling people "drugs are bad for you" might be the
| abridged version of the truth. But is as effective as the "war
| on drugs" in reducing drug abuse.
| droopyEyelids wrote:
| This is a great article, and it could be also be expanded to
| include the 'whale' effect.
|
| I'm not just talking about how a small percent of users spend the
| most on loot-box games, but also how the top 10% of drinkers
| consume 50% of all the alcohol sold in the USA.
|
| I also believe it must apply to people who use cannabis, as a
| 'dab' setup allows a heavy user to inhale in one breath what
| would literally be 50 sessions worth of doses for an infrequent
| smoker.
|
| This isn't necessarily the same topic as what the author wrote,
| but I'd like to see someone explore the connection.
| oogetyboogety wrote:
| I mean, not literally 50. Like 3 times the potency, maybe 5 or
| 6 times the potency of whatever your state average black
| market, grey market, or illegally grown crop is.
|
| It's important to clear up the FUD here because it has led to
| some backwards progress for legalization in states like
| Colorado recently.
| droopyEyelids wrote:
| Let's say you use a 0.5 g dab which has a THC content of 70%
| (most dabs are either 1-gram or 0.5 g). The wax has 0.35 g
| (350 mg of THC), but you could lose up to one-third of it
| when vaporizing. If this happens, you'll end up with roughly
| 235 mg of THC per hit (if you can finish the whole dab in one
| hit).
|
| Someone without a THC tolerance will be completely satisfied
| with a 5mg dose, total.
|
| Thats 47 doses out of the 236mg the stoner _absorbed_
| sgspace wrote:
| I don't know anyone who is doing half gram dabs lol. That's
| like $25 in one hit. A gram of concentrate is supposed to
| last a while (20+ dabs) not a single hit or two.
| notional wrote:
| A gram of wax lasts me probably 50+ hits. It seriously
| lasts a long time. A tiny little crumb you can pinch out
| of the jar is more than enough for a big hit
| abstractbarista wrote:
| Just have to say, a half gram dab is a _fat dab_. I 'm sure
| some people do vaporize all of that at once. However, even
| with complete inhalation and 'swishing' it in their lungs,
| they will be wasting a lot of it on the exhale.
| Zutano wrote:
| 'Swishing' in their lungs? I've never heard of that, how
| does someone even do that?
| pixelbro wrote:
| I presume he's referring to repeatedly exhaling and
| inhaling a tiny amount to keep circulating smoke in the
| lungs without losing any to the air. Can't speak for its
| effectiveness.
| chasebank wrote:
| I bought and smoked a 'CBD' joint the other day. 0.47% THC,
| 15% CBD. I think the lady told me a typical joint is 15-25%
| THC. I was uncomfortably high.
| meetups323 wrote:
| FWIW, it's not like a cigarette, you don't need to smoke
| the whole thing in one go. You can get little storage
| tubes and take a couple puffs and you should be much
| better off. I've had J's last multiple days like this.
| jjulius wrote:
| Had you ever smoked marijuana prior to that?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-06-09 23:03 UTC)