Jump to content

Tar Content


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 133
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

all i can say is read the box... on it, it says "Tar 0%" last time i checked 0% means nothing.

but i could be wrong.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The shisha inside the container, uncook/unbaked/unburned/whatever, does in fact, have 0% tar. If you refer to my link through wikipedia, it clarifies that tar is the bi-product of tobacco and non-mentionables.

You guys really belive that the "black puck" produced inside a cashed hookah bowl is infact tarless?!?! Hmmm, I sense some flawed logic. To tell you the truth, I would love the fact that smoking hookah has no adverse effects, but I can't put myself through the denial.

-QM Edited by QuiltedMaple
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (QuiltedMaple @ Feb 3 2008, 10:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The shisha inside the container, uncook/unbaked/unburned/whatever, does in fact, have 0% tar. If you refer to my link through wikipedia, it clarifies that tar is the bi-product of tobacco and non-mentionables.

You guys really belive that the "black puck" produced inside a cashed hookah bowl is infact tarless?!?! Hmmm, I sense some flawed logic. To tell you the truth, I would love the fact that smoking hookah has no adverse effects, but I can't put myself through the denial.

-QM


oh i know its bad for me, but you are more likely to get lung cancer walking outside a busy city on a smoggy day then with smart hookah use. Smart as in not smoking every minute of every day wink.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (QuiltedMaple @ Feb 3 2008, 09:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The shisha inside the container, uncook/unbaked/unburned/whatever, does in fact, have 0% tar. If you refer to my link through wikipedia, it clarifies that tar is the bi-product of tobacco and non-mentionables.

You guys really belive that the "black puck" produced inside a cashed hookah bowl is infact tarless?!?! Hmmm, I sense some flawed logic. To tell you the truth, I would love the fact that smoking hookah has no adverse effects, but I can't put myself through the denial.

-QM


Maybe it doesn't, maybe it is just burned glycerine?

When food burns on a smooth surface it's damn near impossible to get off, especially gooey food.

Food grade Glycerine is used in shisha.

On my glass Mod, there is only that gunk on the outside. On the inside it is smooth and clean. The smoke directly runs over the bottom of the glass, even more than the top.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (EvansLight @ Feb 3 2008, 11:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE (QuiltedMaple @ Feb 3 2008, 10:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The shisha inside the container, uncook/unbaked/unburned/whatever, does in fact, have 0% tar. If you refer to my link through wikipedia, it clarifies that tar is the bi-product of tobacco and non-mentionables.

You guys really belive that the "black puck" produced inside a cashed hookah bowl is infact tarless?!?! Hmmm, I sense some flawed logic. To tell you the truth, I would love the fact that smoking hookah has no adverse effects, but I can't put myself through the denial.

-QM


oh i know its bad for me, but you are more likely to get lung cancer walking outside a busy city on a smoggy day then with smart hookah use. Smart as in not smoking every minute of every day wink.gif


fully agree, i will always stand behind, hookah > cigs , sorry thats how i feel, ive done both, and they both have different effects on me, and feel much healthier now that i dont smoke cigs and i only hookah 3 times a week max. im not in denial though, any smoke is bad thats a fact, but the little damage im causing now doesn't seem like it will hurt me that much in the end.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I might run this experiment: fill my phunnel bowl with pure glycerin. Forget the shisha, I'm smoking vapors.

Anybody ever crumble the black puck after there done smoking? Doesn't the tobacco seem to "ash out" onto the table?

Anybody have to manage their heat because it was getting too harsh? When you take a coal off the top of the bowl seems to smoke more heavily?

So what we're smoking is vapor? Why put a harmful, addictive leaf into shisha when it is the glycerin we're smoking? Oh, but we get the buzz from the tobacco. Hmmmm, so we bake the nicotine straight from the tobacco.

-QM

Guys, we all know it's not healthy. I'm trying to get to you guys that there is tar in smoke shisha. There is tar that we inhale. I brought up the health because when you ignore the fact that there is tar, you ignore the fact that it is unhealthy. "Tar is purportedly the most destructive component in habitual tobacco smoking, accumulating in the smoker's lungs over time and damaging them through various biochemical and mechanical processes." (wiki) Edited by QuiltedMaple
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Stinkyfisherman @ Feb 4 2008, 03:47 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
all i can say is read the box... on it, it says "Tar 0%" last time i checked 0% means nothing.

but i could be wrong.


i think you are wrong. no tar is added but tar is produced when shisha is burned/charred
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (QuiltedMaple @ Feb 3 2008, 11:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I might run this experiment: fill my phunnel bowl with pure glycerin. Forget the shisha, I'm smoking vapors.

Anybody ever crumble the black puck after there done smoking? Doesn't the tobacco seem to "ash out" onto the table?

Anybody have to manage their heat because it was getting too harsh? When you take a coal off the top of the bowl seems to smoke more heavily?

So what we're smoking is vapor? Why put a harmful, addictive leaf into shisha when it is the glycerin we're smoking? Oh, but we get the buzz from the tobacco. Hmmmm, so we bake the nicotine straight from the tobacco.

-QM

Guys, we all know it's not healthy. I'm trying to get to you guys that there is tar in smoke shisha. There is tar that we inhale. I brought up the health because when you ignore the fact that there is tar, you ignore the fact that it is unhealthy. "Tar is purportedly the most destructive component in habitual tobacco smoking, accumulating in the smoker's lungs over time and damaging them through various biochemical and mechanical processes." (wiki)


well im glad you burn the shit out of your tobacco cause my finished bowls never crumble to ash ... ?

as far as tar goes, i think there is some, is it comparable to a pack a cigs, i don't think so but theres gotta be "some" . Edited by zeppyrkr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (QuiltedMaple @ Feb 3 2008, 10:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I might run this experiment: fill my phunnel bowl with pure glycerin. Forget the shisha, I'm smoking vapors.

Anybody ever crumble the black puck after there done smoking? Doesn't the tobacco seem to "ash out" onto the table?

Anybody have to manage their heat because it was getting too harsh? When you take a coal off the top of the bowl seems to smoke more heavily?

So what we're smoking is vapor? Why put a harmful, addictive leaf into shisha when it is the glycerin we're smoking? Oh, but we get the buzz from the tobacco. Hmmmm, so we bake the nicotine straight from the tobacco.

-QM


We definitely smoke the tobacco, BUT it has been washed, on most cases, several times. If it isn't labelled "Washed", is has still been washed.

The glycerine does produce the thick smoke, hence the lack of pure white billowing clouds from Cigarettes or Cigars or Pipes (in which the color is mostly grey or a light black or blue tinted grey).

The tobacco has to be cooked, like you said. The glycerine, though, soaks up alot of the nicotine in the tobacco. '

I could believe the tobacco is prepared in such a way that it is very weak and thin and doesn't produce harsh or tobacco-flavored smoke, and that it is there because it soaks up flavor and acts as something the gooey substance (whatever it happens to be) can stick to in order to be packed in a bowl.

You are smoking, but i can't see (other than amount of smoke) how it could hurt you more than Cigs etc.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

well its not technically hurting you more than cigs if a 45 min session= 2 cigs worth of nic and 1 of tar.. usually a person who smokes cigarettes smokes a half a pack to a pack a day

edit: plus there are a billion are chemicals in cigarettes that cant be good for you. plus the whole water filtration thing has to help the hookah side. either way, there is still tar in hookah smoke IMO Edited by ASUSEAN1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (ASUSEAN1 @ Feb 3 2008, 11:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
well its not technically hurting you more than cigs if a 45 min session= 2 cigs worth of nic and 1 of tar.. usually a person who smokes cigarettes smokes a half a pack to a pack a day


last i checked people were saying a session of hookah is like more then a pack of cigs ? i know there is a supposed study that said something like that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (ASUSEAN1 @ Feb 3 2008, 10:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
well its not technically hurting you more than cigs if a 45 min session= 2 cigs worth of nic and 1 of tar.. usually a person who smokes cigarettes smokes a half a pack to a pack a day

edit: plus there are a billion are chemicals in cigarettes that cant be good for you. plus the whole water filtration thing has to help the hookah side. either way, there is still tar in hookah smoke IMO


Wow i've never heard that before, only 45 min = 100 cigs (very cliche...)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (QuiltedMaple @ Feb 3 2008, 11:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I might run this experiment: fill my phunnel bowl with pure glycerin. Forget the shisha, I'm smoking vapors.

Anybody ever crumble the black puck after there done smoking? Doesn't the tobacco seem to "ash out" onto the table?

Anybody have to manage their heat because it was getting too harsh? When you take a coal off the top of the bowl seems to smoke more heavily?

So what we're smoking is vapor? Why put a harmful, addictive leaf into shisha when it is the glycerin we're smoking? Oh, but we get the buzz from the tobacco. Hmmmm, so we bake the nicotine straight from the tobacco.

-QM

Guys, we all know it's not healthy. I'm trying to get to you guys that there is tar in smoke shisha. There is tar that we inhale. I brought up the health because when you ignore the fact that there is tar, you ignore the fact that it is unhealthy. "Tar is purportedly the most destructive component in habitual tobacco smoking, accumulating in the smoker's lungs over time and damaging them through various biochemical and mechanical processes." (wiki)



I don't think that anyone can deny that there is tar in smoke, but the argument is how much and what from. I don't always smoke through a bowl, and when I finish a bit early there usually isn't much black/charring on the tobbaco, unless I pack it to the top where it would be physically in contact with the coal/screen. It definately is quite a bit dryer though. Maybe I don't keep my bowl as hot as I should, but I manage pretty good clouds IMO. I think a lot of the smoke is from the glycerine and a lot of the chemicals (like heavy metals) found in the tar content are probally from the coals. If you do indeed burn the tobbaco that would add a lot to the tar content though, but I mostly just heat mine up a lot (not to the point of burning) which I think releases the smoke and fumes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okee, I'll be satisfied with this thread if people believe this simple fact:

Smoking tobacco no matter how washed/glycerized/juice up/etc.=tar in even the smallest form. I don't care how much, whatever. There is tar is hookah smoke.

-QM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BAM!
SOURCE: MOUTH CANCER FONDATION

Hookah and Health
The smoke from the tobacco is cooled as it passes through a water-filled glass bowl and then inhaled through a flexible tube. The water in the bowl acts as a barrier for the most harmful substance in tobacco tar.

Tar includes all of the mutagenic and carcinogenic agents in tobacco smoke. For Example Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) which in cigarettes is made through the process of epoxidation and which causes the reaction in tobacco that aids the creation of the tar and the carrying of nicotine, does not occur in hookah or shisha pipes as the process is prevented in water due to saturation of the hydrocarbons in their gaseous state. Although this is a positive there are negatives to shisha pipe smoking as when the tobacco is consumed nicotine (in lesser amounts) is still carried through the water or liquid at the base of the pipe.

believe it or not, sounds pretty damn legit to me.

Come on? no ones going to challenge it? hell i have no idea if its right or not lol but i guess the water might be doing something after all. Edited by zeppyrkr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll believe that source to the fullest when I'm fucking fiending for a hookah come Tuesday:

"But recent studies have found that hookah smokers actually inhale more nicotine than do cigarette smokers because of the massive volume of smoke they inhale." (same source as above)

-QM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah i was going to mention they say lots of bad things about it LOL, but no tar +1 for us, more nicotine -1 for us, its an endless war.

atleast i can stop smoking hookah if i want, and it has higher nicotine. ha hookah smokers have no idea what a real craving is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I question though, if the tar is consisted of Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, why don't we see a layer on oil on top of the water after we are done smoking? The gaseous state of the PAH's would get trapped in the water in a liquid state. We all know hydrocarbons and water don't mix right?

-QM

hookah cravings don't have shit on a cigarette craving. Good thing I'm past that now.


Edit: From the scienc direct website, "Results show that smokers are likely exposed to more “tar” and nicotine than previously thought, and that pyronsynthesized PAH are present in the “tar” despite the low temperatures characteristic of the tobacco in narghile smoking. With a smoking regimen consisting of 171 puffs each of 0.53 l volume and 2.6 s duration with a 17 s interpuff interval, the following results were obtained for a single smoking session of 10 g of mo’assel tobacco paste with 1.5 quick-lighting charcoal disks applied to the narghile head: 2.94 mg nicotine, 802 mg “tar”, 145 mg CO, and relative to the smoke of a single cigarette, greater quantities of chrysene, phenanthrene, and fluoranthene. Anthracene and pyrene were also identified but not quantified. The results indicate that narghile smoke likely contains an abundance of several of the chemicals thought to be causal factors in the elevated incidence of cancer, cardiovascular disease and addiction in cigarette smokers." (http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...)

Long read, but what does everybody think? I stand by my conclusion though, hookah smoke has tar in it. Edited by EvansLight
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (QuiltedMaple @ Feb 4 2008, 12:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I question though, if the tar is consisted of Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, why don't we see a layer on oil on top of the water after we are done smoking? The gaseous state of the PAH's would get trapped in the water in a liquid state. We all know hydrocarbons and water don't mix right?

-QM

hookah cravings don't have shit on a cigarette craving. Good thing I'm past that now.


Edit: From the scienc direct website, "Results show that smokers are likely exposed to more “tar” and nicotine than previously thought, and that pyronsynthesized PAH are present in the “tar” despite the low temperatures characteristic of the tobacco in narghile smoking. With a smoking regimen consisting of 171 puffs each of 0.53 l volume and 2.6 s duration with a 17 s interpuff interval, the following results were obtained for a single smoking session of 10 g of mo’assel tobacco paste with 1.5 quick-lighting charcoal disks applied to the narghile head: 2.94 mg nicotine, 802 mg “tar”, 145 mg CO, and relative to the smoke of a single cigarette, greater quantities of chrysene, phenanthrene, and fluoranthene. Anthracene and pyrene were also identified but not quantified. The results indicate that narghile smoke likely contains an abundance of several of the chemicals thought to be causal factors in the elevated incidence of cancer, cardiovascular disease and addiction in cigarette smokers." (http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...)

Long read, but what does everybody think? I stand by my conclusion though, hookah smoke has tar in it.


i personally never denied that hookah has tar in it, just that tar is produced through the burning of plant matter, namely hookah tobacco and that while yes there is some burning we are mainly vaporizing the liquid in the tobacco and the juices added to it (molasses, gylcerin, flavorings, etc.) instead of burning it directly like a cigarette. Also remember, its kinda hard to set a wet item on fire, or did we forget this little basic idea of science XD Normally we don't get it hot enough to fully burn the baccy. Usually by that point we stop because the flavor is gone since you have vaporized out all the liquid. Kinda makes sense don't it?

I dont doubt that its unhealthy for me, but i do believe its far less harmfull then a cigarette. The sheer fact that we don't become extremley addicted to hookah tobacco should show that there is a major difference between a cancer stick and a bowl of say AF Grape. Yea its still smoke, and yea its gonna screw you over in some way, but look how many long term hookah smokers are going through far less problems then long term cigarette smokers. And 99% of the scientific "studies" i read on the web about hookah i don't believe. Even if based in science, most of them are biased towards hookah one way or the other. The ones in favor say a sessions is equal to a few cigs, while the ones against say 400. Its hard to get a real good idea of how bad this stuff really is for ya.

I would love to see that one guys experiment (the one in the video with 400 cig's and there tar content) done with a hookah. I'm not going to make any premature guesses, but if i had to bet i would say you would see a far less amount of tar in the end. Ive used to have 12+ hour long sessions, and if the same principles in his video hold true, then my water should have at least been turning color by that point due to the tar in the hookah smoke, right? I will tell you this, i never had anything put crystal clear water come out in those sessions. At worst there would be some black or grey in it due to coal dust falling through the shaft and into the water (i used a funnel bowl with a hole over the middle in the foil, ash tends to fall down sometimes).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The scientific study above says something about using filters. Did they actually use the standard filters that they sell to fit on the end of the hose or are they talking about something else? Also did they measure the smoke before or after the said filter? I have one of those filters around and I use it when I have mouthpieces around, but it won't fit into my hose without the mouthpiece. And I would really like to see that scientific study done with just the coal sometime and no tobacco so we can see what the coals contribute.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most studies talk about the nicotine being higher but i can assure you from my experience i don't know anyone who is addicted to shisha (ignore my forum name!) or struggles to quit smoking shisha. I have gone maybe a couple of weeks or more without it from smoking on a daily basis without a problem. Compare that to cigarettes? No one can claim that smoking shisha is not harmful because any form of smoking is but the harmful effects are not as bad as cigarettes, no matter what any study claims! Most of the studies are very unreliable to say the least! In terms of tar our shisha tobacco is exposed to far less heat than the direct burning of tobacco in cigarettes, that is the difference. So much less than cigarettes but there will be some!

So smoking shisha is harmful. To what extent? We wont know for many years yet until our shisha smoking culture in the West gets older and feels its effects! It is worth noting that in the middle east before we had flavoured shisha their tobacco was quite different and many use to smoke directly with the coal on the tobacco!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm. I'm going to take some time to read that link given above.

I'm no scientist. but what is left in the bowl is most certainly not what I would consider burnt. I can identify stems in the 'puck' and often there is still a little moisture left in the very bottom (not much mind you, but still).

A cigarette becomes pure ash when smoked. This I believe is a significant difference. The water probably has a small cleansing effect. But I don't believe it does an awfull lot. The smoke is not in contact with the water for very long and it is not exactly over agitated.

If the water was to have real impact I think somehow agitating the smoke, or using some kind of difusser might help (Small bubbles - theorically the smoke has more contact with the water?)

Also the water does not smell very bad or appear to contain and/or become discoloured (Apart from juice from the tobacco from time to time).

Anicdotale evidence regarding addiction can easily be attitubuted to teh setup time and clean up times of Nargile. I can often go a week just because I'm a bit tired and can't be arsed with the setup and/or clean up. Granted I don't resort to cigarettes.


Just my 2penith worth.

JD Edited by Johnny_D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...