Comments on: It's So The Man Can See Your Weed

Question: It's So The Man Can See Your Weed

BitterOldPunk — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 21:12:27 -0800

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.)

By: edgeways

edgeways — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 21:47:24 -0800

This wiki article has some links at the bottom that may be of help, sounds like it is no more, or less harmful (or so the thought is as of now) but some companies are claiming it is less harmful (basicly an untested assertion.

By: BitterOldPunk

BitterOldPunk — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 22:29:59 -0800

So more arsenic from the concentrated cellulose. OK. A little arsenic never killed anybody.

By: ninjew

ninjew — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 23:21:09 -0800

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 ;)

By: lilywing13

lilywing13 — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 23:32:07 -0800

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?

By: box

box — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 07:05:02 -0800

(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!

By: Espoo2

Espoo2 — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 11:10:10 -0800

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.

By: solipsophistocracy

solipsophistocracy — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 17:55:31 -0800

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.

By: zennie

zennie — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 16:50:43 -0800

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.