Is This Just Another Stupid Article Trying To Bash Hookahs?

[chromecarz00]

old school stuff usually found in india and pakistan...you gotta mix the honey or molasses in it.. and put the coals directly on it.. you think tangiers is bad one hit of this and your floored

been there done that;
basically its not tobacco, its like...some other shit...no flavor, not harsh but its like literally dirt. my amigo just came back from india (im brown (paki) but straight up american...yee-haw!) he had it over there, and he came over, he was like DAMN i missed you lol
foil is there though now at least, dunno about the old days...
BUT i had my first hookah in pakiland so its good memories... Edited February 12, 2008 by chromecarz00

[HookahDude831]

maybe they take ciggy tobacco and pack it in the bowl?

[guyt]

I like your sig hookahdude. Its kinda ridiculous but hella funny.

[Foos]

Reading this thread is like having dejavu for the 20th time.

[Johnny_D]

HAs anyone pointed out to them the flaws in there comments?

[gr!m]

Wow, just reading the comments on that article made me want to bash heads. I mean, it's smoking, it is bad for you... (duh!) One truth that can be told is the 0% tar thing can b put on the box, tobacco doesn't make the tar, heating it or burning it does. So I am SURE there is a little tar in there mixed with other delicious poisons! But you know what, I don't care! Id rather enjoy my smoke, and smell like mint or mango breathe, then sit around smoking a cig or cigar which I can't stand now that I hookah. CHEERS and keep smoking!

[OBY]

HAs anyone pointed out to them the flaws in there comments?

I posted a long one

[Tom1]

a new form of inhaled death is taking shape

new? lululul

[Bulldog_916]

There's another one as well, check the most recent news story.

The more they say it's more dangerous than cigarettes, the less seriously I take their information. Real studies havent even been done yet, each story rehashes the same information from the same SINGLE study as the previous story. Until something COMPREHENSIVE has been done, they wont get me away from smoking shisha through a hookah. Even if they do, I dont think I'll stop. I dont feel that living longer will necessarily be the same as living better. I'm already experiencing body aches and pains related to my job and past jobs. I eat relatively healthy. I stay in shape and exercise as much as I can. Even non-cigarette smokers get cancers related to environmental factors, health, and a wide variety of other factors. So, until something comprehensive comes out and is available to the masses to read and understand, I take these stories with a grain of salt.

[alice]

Too long, rather smoke than read this hogwash.

Hah, agreed.

[St. Goodypants]

I have also submitted my own comment which I feel is significantly more informative than the actual article.

That really isn't saying very much.

[OBY]

I have also submitted my own comment which I feel is significantly more informative than the actual article.

That really isn't saying very much.

I enjoyed reading your comment more than the article.

[Perrj99]

Kathryn from: United States us Jun 12th, 2007 at 5:04 pm I work in a hospital. Last week I saw a gorgeous young man, whom had been a first year graduate student. He previously excelled in sports; football, basketball, track. He sufferred a minor heart attack while smoking a hookah, and then a grand mal seizure. He is confused, and needs a cane to walk presently. I was surprised to see the hookah smoking in the medical record, but now I understand there may be a cause and effect here. I suspect the carbon monoxide build up. What a tragedy.

Bwahaha. What a load of fucking shit. I hope this bitch gets raped by a bear.

[St. Goodypants]

I have also submitted my own comment which I feel is significantly more informative than the actual article.

That really isn't saying very much.

I enjoyed reading your comment more than the article.

Thank you. I did some serious researching.

And perrj, that was the comment that made me pissed enough to write my own comment. What a stupid thing to say. Edited February 13, 2008 by St. Goodypants

[Yamin]

My great grandfather smoked the old school "dirt" style tobacco for all 80 some odd years of his life...he died of natural causes...

silent killer my ass...

Ahh the men of old. I remember smoking with my mom's uncle and being called a pussy for using foil. Those were the days

[Sethram]

Kathryn from: United States us Jun 12th, 2007 at 5:04 pm I work in a hospital. Last week I saw a gorgeous young man, whom had been a first year graduate student. He previously excelled in sports; football, basketball, track. He sufferred a minor heart attack while smoking a hookah, and then a grand mal seizure. He is confused, and needs a cane to walk presently. I was surprised to see the hookah smoking in the medical record, but now I understand there may be a cause and effect here. I suspect the carbon monoxide build up. What a tragedy.

Bwahaha. What a load of fucking shit. I hope this bitch gets raped by a bear.

Wow, that is bad. I saw it happen once so it must be true of everyone! Forget about anything else in this guy's medical history. And hell, let's forget that you're not supposed to even use the term Grand Mal anymore, they're Tonic Clonic seizures :X

[Teissenb]

St Goody:

I posted two responses on that blog, one clarifying remarks attributed to me about cigarettes, the other addressing your statements about the science behind the article that was posted. I am reprinting that second response here:

"Also, the details St. Goody requests are available by reading the scientific articles on which the comments were based. You may need to go to a library to get the full text, but the relevant abstracts can be found here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1245373...Pubmed_RVDocSum

and

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1577800...Pubmed_RVDocSum

Both of these articles were reviewed by experts prior to publication, and both used state of the art methods that mimic, to the best of current knowledge, the way in which waterpipe users smoke (based on detailed observation of waterpipe users in Beirut, Lebanon). In short, this work is not casual, fly-by-night research by some amateur. It is high quality science. I am certain it can be improved, and we are working to improve on it. Nonetheless, it deserves to be read and understood before it is critiqued."

I mean no disrespect to you and I agree that the article could have referenced its sources more clearly. I do want to assure you that there is science behind the statements that were made, that this science can be defended, and that it most assuredly can be improved. We are working to identify what is in hookah smoke and what gets from the smoke into the users. Already it looks as though what is in the smoke is nicotine, "tar" that contains several well-known carcinogens, carbon monoxide, and a variety of heavy metals. Nicotine and CO have been measured in hookah smokers immediately after they smoke (the article refers to these studies as well, they were conducted in Jordon and you can find out more about them by using PubMed to search for "Shafagoj" the scientist that conducted the work). Now, we can quibble about the methods, and I'll grant you again that they can be improved. However, there is no argument that these smoke constituents, when inhaled, are dangerous to humans. Period. My goal is to inform people of the risks, and that is why I pursue this work. What you do with the information, whether you choose to believe it or act upon it -- I agree completely that these issues are for you and not me to determine. Edited February 13, 2008 by Teissenb

[OBY]

My large commented was deleted. Noting bad was in my comment... How dare they!

[mattarios2]

My large commented was deleted. Noting bad was in my comment... How dare they!

Wow, they deleted it, what bizznatches

[sss8789]

I think I am going to print the article out, pour shisha on top of it, shove it in a bowl, and then smoke it ...maybe not, I think it will taste like a big pile of shit... with mint

[sss8789]

do they even use foil

[St. Goodypants]

St Goody:

I posted two responses on that blog, one clarifying remarks attributed to me about cigarettes, the other addressing your statements about the science behind the article that was posted. I am reprinting that second response here:

"Also, the details St. Goody requests are available by reading the scientific articles on which the comments were based. You may need to go to a library to get the full text, but the relevant abstracts can be found here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1245373...Pubmed_RVDocSum

and

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1577800...Pubmed_RVDocSum

Both of these articles were reviewed by experts prior to publication, and both used state of the art methods that mimic, to the best of current knowledge, the way in which waterpipe users smoke (based on detailed observation of waterpipe users in Beirut, Lebanon). In short, this work is not casual, fly-by-night research by some amateur. It is high quality science. I am certain it can be improved, and we are working to improve on it. Nonetheless, it deserves to be read and understood before it is critiqued."

I mean no disrespect to you and I agree that the article could have referenced its sources more clearly. I do want to assure you that there is science behind the statements that were made, that this science can be defended, and that it most assuredly can be improved. We are working to identify what is in hookah smoke and what gets from the smoke into the users. Already it looks as though what is in the smoke is nicotine, "tar" that contains several well-known carcinogens, carbon monoxide, and a variety of heavy metals. Nicotine and CO have been measured in hookah smokers immediately after they smoke (the article refers to these studies as well, they were conducted in Jordon and you can find out more about them by using PubMed to search for "Shafagoj" the scientist that conducted the work). Now, we can quibble about the methods, and I'll grant you again that they can be improved. However, there is no argument that these smoke constituents, when inhaled, are dangerous to humans. Period. My goal is to inform people of the risks, and that is why I pursue this work. What you do with the information, whether you choose to believe it or act upon it -- I agree completely that these issues are for you and not me to determine.

I agree wholeheartedly that hookah smoking is hazardous to your health. However, I disagree strongly with the implied effects of hookah smoking.

Also, the information within the two links seems quite vague for a research paper. The statement "results using a common mo'assel tobacco mixture" does not tell you which brand, type, or flavor the shisha is. The comparison to the smoke in an entire hookah session using 1.5 coals and 171 puff
s to a single cigarrette is also highly flawed, as the amount of tobacco smoked in a session with 1.5 coals is much larger than what is in cigarrettes. The usage of the term "nicotine free dry particulate matter" does not state how much of the said particulate matter is toxic. I am not certain what kind of mo'assel was used for that experiment, but lead does not occur in shisha. That is most likely a result of the pipe that was used, which is another piece of information which is left out.

Once again, I must protest the use of unreferenced "experts" in any supposedly valid research paper. Anyone at all can claim to be an expert on a subject.

I think that the interpretation of the severity of the results needs serious rethinking, and that any scientific conclusion is not valid until it is repeatedly shown true. I also think that informing people of the risks and using misleading information to affect people's opinions are two completely different things.

I will post this response on the site as well in the hope of informing people of the risks of not investigating claims.


With respect and hope,
St. Goodypants

[Bulldog_916]

St Goody:

I posted two responses on that blog, one clarifying remarks attributed to me about cigarettes, the other addressing your statements about the science behind the article that was posted. I am reprinting that second response here:

"Also, the details St. Goody requests are available by reading the scientific articles on which the comments were based. You may need to go to a library to get the full text, but the relevant abstracts can be found here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1245373...Pubmed_RVDocSum

and

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1577800...Pubmed_RVDocSum

Both of these articles were reviewed by experts prior to publication, and both used state of the art methods that mimic, to the best of current knowledge, the way in which waterpipe users smoke (based on detailed observation of waterpipe users in Beirut, Lebanon). In short, this work is not casual, fly-by-night research by some amateur. It is high quality science. I am certain it can be improved, and we are working to improve on it. Nonetheless, it deserves to be read and understood before it is critiqued."

I mean no disrespect to you and I agree that the article could have referenced its sources more clearly. I do want to assure you that there is science behind the statements that were made, that this science can be defended, and that it most assuredly can be improved. We are working to identify what is in hookah smoke and what gets from the smoke into the users. Already it looks as though what is in the smoke is nicotine, "tar" that contains several well-known carcinogens, carbon monoxide, and a variety of heavy metals. Nicotine and CO have been measured in hookah smokers immediately after they smoke (the article refers to these studies as well, they were conducted in Jordon and you can find out more about them by using PubMed to search for "Shafagoj" the scientist that conducted the work). Now, we can quibble about the methods, and I'll grant you again that they can be improved. However, there is no argument that these smoke constituents, when inhaled, are dangerous to humans. Period. My goal is to inform people of the risks, and that is why I pursue this work. What you do with the information, whether you choose to believe it or act upon it -- I agree completely that these issues are for you and not me to determine.

This has nothing to do with personal choice or belief. It has to do with the government trying to ready itself for a war on hookah pipes the likes of which is being seen in cigarettes and NHs. They are looking for a reason to ban said tobacco paraphenalia and that's what your research is going to be used for. If you make the full report public, allow us to critique it fairly. Give us EVERY bit of information. If the coals arent burning right, you're going to burn the shisha and that will affect the result. What shisha you use affects the result. Amount of shisha used affects the result. We dont even know what part of the smoking is most dangerous. The variables need to be isolated. Until every piece of the puzzle is present it wont look like a complete picture. It will be just a jumbled glimpse into how the activity MIGHT or MIGHT NOT affect the human body.

[erufiku]

This seems to be a problem with the sum of the research that has been done on hookah smoking: none of the researchers have ever done it themselves. Sure, if you take cigs and mo'assel, it's tobacco in both cases but then how come we have at least a few new threads on how to improve flavor/smoke quality/etc on an everyday basis? Has anyone ever seen (heard) a question on how to light up a cigarette? There are many factors that will (and do) influence the amount of heat, ergo potential chemicals being produced while smoking the mo'assel.

[gaia.plateau]

i smoke hookah all the time, i tried one puff of a cigarette recently and it was addicting, much more then hookah smoke.. so trying to say that hookahs have 2-4% nicotine is BS

Oh I know, 2-4% is a complete lie. And I mean if you are smoking 2 hour sessions at a time once a day, I mean I would think that is pretty bad, but I mean Give us some testing information. What tobacco was used, how it was set up, how it was tested, yada yada yada, and then maybe I will believe them. But when they just throw out ubserd numbers it aggravates me, and I feel like they just want the world to be tobacco free.

I regularly smoke 2-4 hours a day: I haven't had a puff of hookah in nearly 2 weeks because of tonsillitis, and haven't felt the slightest urge or need to smoke (mind you, I want to smoke it; it makes research so much more bearable). And I've been addicted to cigarettes for ten years (haven't smoked one in 6).

Hookah can be addictive, I'm sure, just like an other pleasurable experience imaginable. But it's no where near as addictive as cigarettes. Edited February 14, 2008 by gaia.plateau