So I Bought A Smokerlyzer

[mattarios2]

I don't want to bash on anything or claim something that isn't but I mean, we kinda breath in CO regardless, especially depending on the area in which we live. Smog, pollution, fumes, exhaust, smoke, all these elements are in our everyday air that we breath, that is prolonged exposure to CO that we cannot help. According to a chart I read, 35ppm results in headache and dizziness after 6-8 hours of CONSTANT exposure. You are not smoking hookah for 6-8 hour straight, at least I'm not. I don't see how those levels have a detrimental effect on the body since our bodies are used to taking punishment and filtering out toxins on a regular basis. I can see how putting a label and a number on something creates a scary scenario but there are bigger things at work than just that, lots of variables that depend on the individual as well. Here's something to put in perspective: 12,800ppm results in unconsciousness after 2-3 breaths, death in 3 minutes of that exposure level. 100 ppm results in a slight headache after 2-3 hours of constant exposure... With water, open air, and food, I think we are fine. I mean it is the vice that we choose to do, were you really expecting anything different? I think the levels are a lot less than people really expect them to be. I know I'm not concerned.

 

The average PPM for a human is 1-5, so you think 40-120 is normal for however many hours you smoke? And then roughly 20-30 hours before it is out of your system. Look, just because we breath in extremely EXTREMELY low amounts through our daily life, makes it ok for us to breath in levels of 40-120 in one sitting of smoking which is 3-12x more than an average cigarette smoker. Just because you don't get a headache doesn't mean jack. The point is when you breath in the levels of CO that hookah produces it decreases oxygen flow to the heart, lungs, and vital organs. Over time that causes them to weaken AKA heart disease, cardiovascular disease. Using the argument that oh, we breath it daily so what's the big deal is a cop out and a bit ludicrous to be honest, not sure if that is what you were portraying.

 

Just because you don't feel an issue such as a headache does not mean the levels aren't extremely high. Now I think we can all agree hookah is safer than cigarettes but the one big downfall that appears w hookah is the CO levels. Roughly 40-50 cigarettes = 30-50ppm in your blood stream. After I took 60 full hits over the course of 2 hours I was at 48 with half coconut coals. That is roughly 40-50 cigarettes worth of CO ... you are ok with that? Also keep in mind my setup is setup with CO in mind and doing all the things I can to reduce the CO. A smaller hookah, with a small hose, smaller bowl, full coconut coals and not halves etc etc raise the numbers DRASTICALLY, roughly 2-300% so now you are looking at 80-100ppm easily.

 

A headache is severely decreasing your oxygen levels to the point of concern. But that doesn't mean that what a hookah produces is low by any means.

 

CO is one of those things that I look at similarly to cholesterol or high blood pressure ... when you have high blood pressure you don't know it. Over time of either not exercising, consuming too much salt, stress, etc, you get high blood pressure, do you know it's there? No, but when it gets really high, IMMEDIATELY dangerously high, you get a headache as well as other things. So the point is just because you don't feel it may mean you aren't creating a IMMEDIATE danger, but that doesn't mean it isn't causing damage over time.

 

Eric has always said to me years ago when we used to PM each other a lot before he got super busy, that the biggest danger with hookah is cardiovascular disease/heart disease ... because of the CO levels hookah produces it destroys cigarettes in terms of CO.

[mattarios2]

And as I have said previously with a 31 inch elmas kafesli, a tangiers medium phunnel (50g) starting with 5 japanese charcoal, elmas hose, I have attained the lowest results of a 60% decrease in CO vs everything the same but with half coconut coals and a 30g tangiers bowl. So a increase of 20g of tobacco and switching to Japanese coal the numbers have decreased 60%. With just switching to Japanese coal I found roughly a 20% decrease in CO.

 

Of course there are tons of variables but it still gives you an idea of what is better and what isn't.

 

I also stated previously in the thread that it appears people who work out 3 or more times a week have roughly 50% the CO of people who don't work out. I have now tested 3 friends who took the same sized hits as me, same space of time, etc etc, they blew 72ppm, 75ppm, and 80ppm I blew 32ppm. I also had a couple friends test who do work out and their numbers were in line with mine.

[â€On]

If you switched from an elmas to a km of a similar height, how does it affect the results (keeping all other factors the same)?

[Hassouni]

Well I suspect John might say the Elmas would be better because of the copper core, but it would be good if he tested non-Elmas pipes too (I have pipes with brass and SS cores in addition to my Elmas pipes)

[mattarios2]

If you switched from an elmas to a km of a similar height, how does it affect the results (keeping all other factors the same)?

 
I will be testing this, I just want to run through all of my test ideas with 1 pipe so everything is consistent, then I will try other pipes, etc.
 

Well I suspect John might say the Elmas would be better because of the copper core, but it would be good if he tested non-Elmas pipes too (I have pipes with brass and SS cores in addition to my Elmas pipes)

I will get to it. I have 1 SS KM and 1 Copper KM, I will try with both.

[â€On]

Well, the main reason I ask is the increased airflow. Elmas/certain syrian/etc. have not only a narrower stem/downstem, they also have tighter hose ports. While the copper might be beneficial, is the tighter draw detrimental? I have been using my brazilian pipe more than anything specifically because it allows me to use more water and still have the same draw (which in my mind means more filtering through the water). And on that topic, how does a diffuser affect these numbers?

[mattarios2]

I did smoke a KM early on in the testing and it didn't seem to affect the results at all, but haven't tried a KM with a big bowl and the other things I have tested.

Keep in mind Aeon I am using a elmas but with a phunnel bowl so the pull is effortless. I also have a crownhookah glass tip on the end of the elmas hose instead of their restrictive wood tip so the pull is literally effortless.

But I will get to all of those things after I have done all the testing on the things I want to do with the same setup.

I don't have a diffuser.

Once I am done testing different sized phunnels (in the next couple days I will be done) I will also be testing ice water vs warm water.

I have been thinking, one big thing I think that causes high CO too is the fact that the bottom of the coals turn black while smoking, if we could find something instead of foil that would allow for the coals to breath better I would think that would lower co levels if we were able to keep the entire coal red.

[Hassouni]

A sort of mesh might work - perhaps placed on top of the foil, so that there's a tiny pocket of air beneath them

[mattarios2]

I was thinking the same.

[dizzbizz]

I always thought the bottom of the coals turned black because of the shisha juices rising and burning on the coal. Probably wrong though. Haha

[mattarios2]

Nah, I mean that can happen, but it happens because of bad air flow through the bottom of the coals.

[DrSmokes]

Would size of holes matter much? I believe Eric has said to have big holes with Tang...not sure if it would make any difference with CO...so many variables...

[mattarios2]

You're telling me Justin. I will be testing all of those things. Tonight I am testing to see if holes in the center of the spire make a difference. I would THINK that it would but we will see.

All of my testing for now will be with a medium phunnel since that has made the most drastic change along with change of coals from coconut to Japanese style. Oh and by the way, still no patina coming out of my copper pipes with the Japanese coal where as with coconut coal I get a ton of green patina from the pipe ... IMHO opinion that really tells you a lot about the difference between the two styles of coal.

[mattarios2]

Holes in the middle spire with a phunnel are way higher than without. I did everything the exact same, weighed both bowls, same water, same amount of coals at the same time, and hit it at the same times and etc etc and at 40 hits with no holes in the spire in a medium phunnel 50g I was at 23, with holes in the spire I got to 38 ... I have always done no holes in the middle, it just always made sense to me but figured I would test to make sure. Once again, I will upload all my data at the end of my testing, For now I will just be posting my results this way,

[â€On]

That one is surprising. You would think just the opposite, but it does confirm my original thoughts on that, that by putting holes above the spire, the air is taking the path of least resistance (straight down) instead of passing through/over the coals (which would thereby increase CO). 

[mattarios2]

EXACTLY aeon!

[Codyb88]

done

Dammit I forgot to send them when I went to the PO yesterday. I'll try to send them another day.

[mattarios2]

done

Dammit I forgot to send them when I went to the PO yesterday. I'll try to send them another day.

No worries, whenever you have a second is fine, I appreciate it.

[mattarios2]

Would it make any sense that if too over packed the CO is higher?

I am finding at 50g the medium phunnel gave amazing results, but at 54 it was higher, and at 56 it was even higher than 54 ... smoking length is very close and same amount of puffs in all 3 tests ...

I'm thinking if it's too overpacked the top of the bowl chars and makes like a blockage if you will, so the coal heat can't go all the way through the bowl and just goes right into the phunnel hole instead ...

[tjmitch]

Would it make any sense that if too over packed the CO is higher?

I am finding at 50g the medium phunnel gave amazing results, but at 54 it was higher, and at 56 it was even higher than 54 ... smoking length is very close and same amount of puffs in all 3 tests ...

Was the level of the tobacco the same? Higher tobacco level means even less airflow under the coal, means restricted oxygen for the process of combustion, means more CO and less CO2. Just a thought.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[mattarios2]

That is what I was thinking TJ ... it appears the level is the same but that wouldn't matter bc as it cooks it rises so the more tobacco = the quicker and higher the tobacco rises, causing the effect that we wouldn't want.

So it seems too over packed and too under packed both result in the same high CO levels, but a happy medium = win.

[Samwww]

Could you take a picture of your packs beforehand?

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

[tjmitch]

That is what I was thinking TJ ... it appears the level is the same but that wouldn't matter bc as it cooks it rises so the more tobacco = the quicker and higher the tobacco rises, causing the effect that we wouldn't want.

So it seems too over packed and too under packed both result in the same high CO levels, but a happy medium = win.

Interesting, so the co levels vs tobacco density are a parabolic relationship? Like packing 48g in the medium gave higher CO than 50g?

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[mattarios2]

Could you take a picture of your packs beforehand?

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

Lol no, sorry but it is a pain in the ass enough to do this testing every x amount of hits. I have been purposely weighing the bowls and adding/subtracting each session to test. And it does seem to overpacked or too underpacked greatly effects the results. My best results consistantly with nakhla mizo are when water vs tobacco is 77% so if your bowl holds 50g of water before it flows through the spire, you want to pack 38.5 grams give or take a gram or two shouldn't matter but 5+ grams or -5 grams makes a BIG difference.

[mattarios2]

That is what I was thinking TJ ... it appears the level is the same but that wouldn't matter bc as it cooks it rises so the more tobacco = the quicker and higher the tobacco rises, causing the effect that we wouldn't want.

So it seems too over packed and too under packed both result in the same high CO levels, but a happy medium = win.

Interesting, so the co levels vs tobacco density are a parabolic relationship? Like packing 48g in the medium gave higher CO than 50g?

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

45g was just as bad as 55g in the medium but 50g was very low CO results. So you need enough tobacco for the CO to be absorbed in the tobacco it seems? But with too little it gets through the tobacco and into the spire too easily and too much clogs the air flow of the charcoal.