It's So The Man Can See Your Weed
October 19, 2007 9:12 PM Subscribe
UnFilter(ed): What's the deal with transparent rolling papers?
A friend left a packet of transparent rolling papers at my house. I like them. They don't have the acrid tang of paper, they burn more slowly, and, hey, they look cool. Plus, they're ungummed and they tighten up when heat is applied, making for a better draw. The package says "...the production process skips the chemical treatment phase that turns paper white" which may be true, but is nonetheless misleading, because unbleached paper is light brown, not transparent, and they don't feel like paper at all. The Google tells me they are likely made of extracted cellulose, glycerin, and water. My question is:
Given that I choose to smoke and risk lung damage, is inhaling tiny amounts of burning glycerin any different, healthwise, from inhaling the chemicals used in regular rolling papers? If so, how so? (Like, I wouldn't use a plastic pipe, for chrissakes, and when we made the ol' beer-can-pipe in high school, I wouldn't use it, because I didn't like the idea of smoking paint.)
(Please note that nothing you say in this thread is going to make me quit smoking, so don't bother saying it, but thank you for thinking of my health. I'd like to hear from smokers who have used these papers and from people who know how glycerin breaks down when burnt.)
A friend left a packet of transparent rolling papers at my house. I like them. They don't have the acrid tang of paper, they burn more slowly, and, hey, they look cool. Plus, they're ungummed and they tighten up when heat is applied, making for a better draw. The package says "...the production process skips the chemical treatment phase that turns paper white" which may be true, but is nonetheless misleading, because unbleached paper is light brown, not transparent, and they don't feel like paper at all. The Google tells me they are likely made of extracted cellulose, glycerin, and water. My question is:
Given that I choose to smoke and risk lung damage, is inhaling tiny amounts of burning glycerin any different, healthwise, from inhaling the chemicals used in regular rolling papers? If so, how so? (Like, I wouldn't use a plastic pipe, for chrissakes, and when we made the ol' beer-can-pipe in high school, I wouldn't use it, because I didn't like the idea of smoking paint.)
(Please note that nothing you say in this thread is going to make me quit smoking, so don't bother saying it, but thank you for thinking of my health. I'd like to hear from smokers who have used these papers and from people who know how glycerin breaks down when burnt.)
Response by poster: So more arsenic from the concentrated cellulose. OK. A little arsenic never killed anybody.
posted by BitterOldPunk at 10:29 PM on October 19, 2007
posted by BitterOldPunk at 10:29 PM on October 19, 2007
I've often wondered about mostly the same thing, as it relates to those flavored papers.
At this point, I try to only use water filtration ;)
posted by ninjew at 11:21 PM on October 19, 2007
At this point, I try to only use water filtration ;)
posted by ninjew at 11:21 PM on October 19, 2007
I tend to like the hemp papers, when I can find them. THey are kind of transparent (and tear too damned easily for my liking), but do have the glue edge.
Perhaps those are a good choice?
posted by lilywing13 at 11:32 PM on October 19, 2007
Perhaps those are a good choice?
posted by lilywing13 at 11:32 PM on October 19, 2007
(I've used these papers, and my opinion is that) if taste is important, and you don't like that flavored crap, hemp papers are the way to go. If stealth is important, you're probably best with a plain-Jane white paper like a Zig-Zag or whatever. But I don't think the transparent ones will kill you or anything, so, hey, smoke up, Johnny!
posted by box at 7:05 AM on October 20, 2007
posted by box at 7:05 AM on October 20, 2007
I've smoked Bali Shag tobac in those things before... I must say, I didn't really like it, after a few. Has a kind of sticky sweet taste that just didn't jive with the tobacco.
I have no idea about the health risk though.
posted by Espoo2 at 11:10 AM on October 20, 2007
I have no idea about the health risk though.
posted by Espoo2 at 11:10 AM on October 20, 2007
I've been really curious about this too. What the hell does "...the production process skips the chemical treatment phase that turns paper white" mean? I don't think that paper is naturally clear, is it? I like these papers though. The rate at which they burn is good if you like to extinguish and re-light later.
posted by solipsophistocracy at 5:55 PM on October 20, 2007
posted by solipsophistocracy at 5:55 PM on October 20, 2007
Smoke contains so many chemicals (I think the figure is upward of 4,000 for cigarettes) that we don't really know what they all are, let alone which of them cause the adverse health effects. Intuition says that burning something with fewer ingredients will yield a chemical mixture that has fewer ingredients. However, how do you know whether you are reducing any of the problematic ingredients?
Also, are the mass (size and thickness) of the transparent papers and normal papers are equal so that they produce equal amounts of smoke, and does a prolonged burning time alter the chemical composition of the smoke?
Without further information, it's probably better to assume they pose the same risks.
posted by zennie at 4:50 PM on October 22, 2007
Also, are the mass (size and thickness) of the transparent papers and normal papers are equal so that they produce equal amounts of smoke, and does a prolonged burning time alter the chemical composition of the smoke?
Without further information, it's probably better to assume they pose the same risks.
posted by zennie at 4:50 PM on October 22, 2007
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by edgeways at 9:47 PM on October 19, 2007