Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login
Budweiser's ex-marketing chief: Weed is the new craft beer (syracuse.com)
162 points by fishcolorbrick 11 months ago | hide | past | web | favorite | 133 comments

Just as beer went through it's 'extremes' phase, weed is going through this right now too. Beer was super hoppy, then super stouty, then had loads of coffee, then loads of NO2, then sours, then glassware.

Finally, beer settled on the 'all-day-IPA': a beer that tastes good, and you can bring to your niece's birthday party but not get too tanked to be able to drive her to the hospital after the bounce-house gets out of hand.

Weed needs that for a recreational substance that 'relaxes' but still allows for emergencies to occur. Think a bag of something (bitter orange chips?) that kids won't eat outright, that comes in low/variable dosages just enough to chill with, that will allow you to drive your kids to the hospital should the need arise. It, frankly, needs to be an 'adult' thing, not juvenile and bacchanalian as it is perceived to be today.

Here's the thing: tolerance to alcohol does not increase to nearly the same extent as weed. Compare two people of the same weight and gender with different tolerances to alcohol: the one with a higher tolerance (e.g. someone who drinks an average of four drinks per day) only needs 1.5-2x as much as the first person to reach the same level of desired intoxication. Even an extreme alcoholic probably needs < 4x as much as someone who rarely drinks to feel a similar level of intoxication.

With weed, someone who never smokes might get insanely high off of a single hit (say, 1/6th of a bowl) from a bong. Someone who smokes a few times a week might need to smoke an entire bowl for similar effects. Someone who smokes almost every day might need to smoke 2-4 bowls to get to that level, and if someone smokes multiple times every day, they may need to smoke an entire joint or turn to concentrates to get there. So in this case the heavy smoker wants 20x what the non-smoker wants due to the difference in tolerance. What could get a novice uncomfortably high could be unnoticeable to a heavy smoker.

With regard to " bag of something (bitter orange chips?) that kids won't eat outright, that comes in low/variable dosages just enough to chill with, that will allow you to drive your kids to the hospital should the need arise", in my opinion this product already exists. If you use a vaporizer the intake is so slow that you can simply stop inhaling when you reach however high you want to be. Even with other methods, you can simply smoke a single "hit", wait ~5-10 minutes, see if you want to smoke more, then repeat. And there are definitely low-dose edibles out there in the form of gummies/lollipops that are analogous to your example, except that they're not always bitter. The problem with edibles is that you can't "titrate" them like with other RoA's because the onset is too delayed.

Yes, the method of action is very very different between depressants and hallucinogenics. Booze is HARD on your liver and effects most people pretty similarly as we all have similar blood/liver chemistry. With THC and the like, the methods of action are neuro-genic and the habituation/potentiation will change rapidly in individuals. Those receptors are trafficked in and out of the synapses pretty quickly.

Maybe a series of bags would be better. Like with coffee, you have espressos and shots and the like. You can adjust your tolerance fairly knowably and overdoing isn't a catastrophe. But I think the american palette is such that you need a serious foodstuff/snack in size. One gummy bear isn't 'enough' food, you need a bag of them. You can use a rookie-cookie, but sell them in 3 packs or really big discus-like sizes. People want some heft/size and they don't want to leave a half bag to go stale. Then up the dosages in a series. Red packaging is rookie, Orange is a long movie, Yellow is a half day, Lime is enough for a day'trip', Green is a 3-day weekend, etc. Price them all the same so that way it's about the dosage, not the costs.

Find a way to get a stressed out soccer-mom to eat these weed bon-bons like drinking a Cosmo, something instagram-able and dose-able.

Well, I'd be careful in saying that booze:liver as THC:brain. They both act on the brain and both have a neurological basis for tolerance.

An alcoholic's liver will up regulate enzymes to speed the metabolism of alcohol, but their brain chemistry will also change just as a weed-smoker's. Just as smokers up regulate cannabinoid receptors, alcoholics up regulate GABA (both among others). When alcoholics go through withdrawal, they can die of seizures caused by their brain having too many GABA receptors to properly function without the presence of alcohol.

> Maybe a series of bags would be better. Like with coffee, you have espressos and shots and the like.

A thc flavored inhaler with replaceable cartridges like your medical inhaler: http://criticalcaredvm.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Albute...

I was in a weed shop in Seattle recently. They had THC % written on the bottle. If I was used to smoking I assume I could treat that number like ABV. Like 2 pints of 6% ABV and I’m gonna be past driving.

You have to get stoner culture separated from weed the product. I like cannabis occasionally i do not like being stoned and non-functioning all day.

Forever now its the strongest weed is the best and to your point its just juvenile.

Let me chill out to a cool movie or some friends outside on the porch i don't want to be drooling in my lap.

As someone who has been smoking weed for at least 15 years and who lives in Washington I have never had as much control over how high and what type of high I got. Before legalization if you didn't have a medical card or you didn't know several illegal growers you might be lucky to find a dealer who "stocked" 3 or 4 different strains, but even then it'd be hard to know if s/he knew what they were talking about. Now the percentages of everything I care about plus often a list of pesticides used is printed right on every package.

I am not in a legal state and it seems only the most potent stuff flows out of legal states to us.

Because you’re not in a legal state. Iron law of prohibition and all that.

I don't think this is true any more. For example, /r/trees et. al. are all pretty stoked about microdosing / one-hitters/ on-demand vapes, even the strictly recreational users.

I'm so sick of IPAs altogether. I'm a big fan of sours, which I guess some people find intolerable, but overall I'd just like more choices instead of everything either being mass-market (I mean like Bud or Coors by that) or else an IPA most places you go.

One of the biggest problems with hoppy beers is that they have a short shelf life (less than 90 days even when packaged well, much less when dissolved oxygen is present) but distribution issues and lack of education means that most IPAs are consumed past their prime.

I mean, people keep telling me if I try this or that IPA I'll like it better but they all pretty much taste the same to me.

I love IPA. It’s virtually all I ever drink, and yet I have no interest in fancying myself a connoisseur or going out of my way to try some new special IPA. It seems that most people assume that the former implies the latter.

Having brewed award-winning IPAs I would take issue with that statement but luckily there is much more to the craft beer world than IPAs. You mentioned you like sours but hops are often used to interesting effect in sours as well. Sour beer yeasts and bacteria actually interact with hop oils to create new flavors. It's fascinating stuff although still poorly understood. As an example this sour beer wiki has a fairly detailed article on using hops in sour beers. http://www.milkthefunk.com/wiki/Hops

What I mean to say is, I'm sure they're different, but it's lost on me, because the hop flavor is just so overwhelming to me. I mean, I'm sure my sour-hating friends don't really appreciate the difference between a Rodenbach Grand Cru and a Cuvée des Jacobins either, even though they're quite different.

yes I am not a fan of this supper hoppy craft beers trend lots of places in London especially round silicon roundabout only have this style.

Personally I love Russian imperial stouts but I'm also happy with everything other than sours.

My fear is that one day only sours will be available and that I'll be forced to drink cider :P

Don't nock it some of the best cider I have had has been the local scrumpy - smooth goes down easy but man what a kick -this is where Terry Pratchet got the idea for scumble.

In my experience few places even have a single sour on tap, so I think world domination is a ways off.

I saw a few bars along the frontrange this last summer doing just that. 5 sours and 1 stout, all in tulips. It was hot, I got a sour, it was still beer.

I've heard that some micro-brewers are sick of making IPAs, but they have to make what sells.

One of the interesting effects of the backlash against IPA hegemony and over-saturation is the comeback of the pilsner. Probably better in summer. I'm thinking craft pilsners like Scrimshaw.

My favorite micro-brewery has started flavor-infusing most of their IPAs. They always are iteratively improving upon a standard double IPA as their flagship, but usually have 2-4 options for IPAs brewed with fruits, coffee, lactose, vanilla,, etc. They've done a great job of balancing popular appeal with making really good, really unique beers.

I remember hearing that about Sam Adams, that they didn't really like the idea of making an IPA, but there was no choice.

I like drinking IPAs at home because they make me sleepy, which means I go to bed without drinking too much!

IPA is just another fad.* It was designed to be shipped to India on sailing ships without refrigeration and have a high alcohol content.

It's different than the mass market piss Americans are used to, but there are much better options for the average pallet.

*It's not going away, but it's current popularity is outside of historic norms.

Historic popularity and sailing ships don't matter much here. Many popular IPAs nowadays are being dry-hopped with hop varieties that were selectively bred within the last 20 years. These hop varieties simply taste/smell a lot better than what was used before and many people really like the results. If anything, IPAs are actually trending more towards the average pallet today. Brewers are making more approachable fruity New England style IPAs and fewer bitter, super high IBU double/triple IPAs.

The IPA of today bears little resemblance to the original including differences in hop varieties, process, purity of yeast cultures.

The proliferation of hop varieties and investment in hop research, especially in the last 20 years, means that the juicy IPA of today has no historical precedent.

While IPA may be a "fad" in historical terms, it is the one with the most staying power in the current craft beer boom. Hops aren't going anywhere, just getting used in new and different ways and there are even relatively recent products that are going to change hoppy beer flavors for the better as they see wider usage. See, for example, https://ychhops.com/hop-products/cryo-hops

I have a half dozen microbreweries within 10 minutes of my house and I don't see IPAs going anywhere.

I believe the reason IPAs are very popular is because they are very easy to make compared to other types and quite difficult to mess up.

I have been brewing my own beer for several years now and getting a lager or wheat right is very difficult. My IPAs on the other hand were all very drinkable and did not differ much from what I'd get from a craft brewery.

IPAs keep getting better. The current New England IPA craze is a delicious thing.

Maybe. Beer-dom is moving about still, try getting a ticket the GABF next year. You'll find some pretty crazy stuff. Also, I think the IPA craze is already over, it peaked in 2014 or so. Now it's all sours and martzens. Nearly every brewer I see is doing something with a German brewery or ageing in some whiskey barrel or another.

Try going south of Colfax once in a while.


Just a nit: beer never had loads of NO2. So-called "nitro" pours are pushed with nitrogen gas (N2), not NO2. This is a good thing, since NO2 is rather toxic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrogen_dioxide

Yes! Thank you for the update.

> Finally, beer settled on the 'all-day-IPA': a beer that tastes good, and you can bring to your niece's birthday party but not get too tanked to be able to drive her to the hospital after the bounce-house gets out of hand.

Such a Californian thing to say, the rest of the non-English speaking world in general has settled on very different beers (Pilsners in part of Germany and Czech Republic, Belgian ales in Belgian and part of France, ...)

I'm not in CA all the time. Maybe more of a US/Canada thing then?

Depends on the country but in some places 7% is legal in[others you are lucky to find a 2-4% budweiser brew.

I’ve found that some of the high-CBD strains perfectly fit this profile.

Duh. And on that note, if there are any marijuana entrepreneurs reading this, I'd like to share a product idea with you.

"Session pot" - tastes amazing like this 30% stuff that the kids are breeding these days but with only 3-5% THC so it won't kill me like this 30% stuff that the kids are breeding these days. You're welcome.

edit: the "high CBD" idea is one that I'll look into and thanks all, but for those of us who live outside one of the legal states our options and information about those options are rather more limited.

Prefilled vape cartridges, especially the ones that are more diluted, are almost exactly "session pot". Each hit is a tiny microdose that even a novice could handle a few of.

How is that different than a high CBD strain?

I was never serious about it enough to know what you're talking about. I just used to _really_ enjoy smoking, but am too busy these days to partake, largely because of how strong everything is now.

Look for a CBD strain it's what you're looking for :)

Most people don't like it because it doesn't get them "high" but it gets you feeling good.

Everything was really strong in the past. It's just important that you can choose your strain.

high-CBD is very couchlock-y.

I'd like to have a "sipping cannabis", too. Maybe music sounds 25% better but I can move around..

Something that will relax, but not prevent from taking Grandma to the hospital on an emergency notice.

Build a tolerance, then you'll have plenty of sipping weed!

/s/grandma/toddler, but yes, exactly.

I don't see how you aren't describing the experience of using a volcano vape. Fwiwi, I went to a pop-up restaurant last week where the pairings were all via strain.

Maybe when prices drop it will become more like cigar smoking. Despite the health risks I prefer smoking over vaping because I love the act of smoking. I think it would be entirely satisfying to smoke weed like a cigar, but I try not to waste the smoke because it's still expensive.

I got to try a weed cigar rolled in a palm leaf. Although it was more potent than my body knew what to with, the act of smoking it was as satisfying as you'd imagine.

I prefer something like Jillybean. The more uplifting the better. THC: 15% - 18%, CBD: 1%

I met a guy on a chairlift in Washington a few years ago that was planning on doing this. He said they were making basically a joint where you can smoke the whole thing and just be comfortably buzzed.

> comfortably buzzed

comfortably numb


ahh why don't you just take a smaller dose of higher concentration. Same result less cancer...

If we're taking the beer analogy then I see a difference. My neighbor likes to drink Bud all day (likes the action of drinking). I'd rather have a few IPAs or craft beers (likes the taste). Different people, different preferences.

But if we're talking the big alcohol companies joining the race, I'm sure they will do this and provide a wide variety of products.

Anheuser-Busch already has the slogans they can rehash for weed if they decide to enter the market. Grab some buds, this buds for you, waz-up.

"My neighbor likes to drink Bud all day (likes drinking)."


Will anyone really want herb in a decade though? Vaporizing extracts is just far better than vaporizing herb, nobody wants that chlorophyll and what have you.

Yea but good flower is just so beautiful and smells great (or horrible depending on if you like MJ). I don't think it will ever go away. I recently moved to a legal state and it is nice having access to extracts, but herb seems to always be more cost efficient and usually tastes better.

>herb seems to always be more cost efficient and usually tastes better

This is the case right now, but unless you’re buying poorly trimmed bulk outdoor stuff the extracts will inevitably get cheaper. You can get perfectly good THC and CBD from terrible weed and reintroduce a carefully designed blend of terpenes for the best possible flavor.

Eventually the cutting agents will get better too, delivering much nicer experiences for those that don’t want to puff on 70%+ THC extracts.

The terpenes are the best part.

Not sure if we disagree, but that's specifically where the extracts (will) excel, herb contains a bunch of undesirable stuff that you'd rather not be inhaling. Extracts (will) contain only the terpenes you want.

Great so now instead of alcoholism being the number one reason for an emotionally numbed population now we have weed that makes people emotionally numb. I know I'll get downvoted but I don't think people realize how people are emotionally detached when they are high all the time just like if your friends with an alcoholic. There still your friend but you certainly waren't as close as before.

I'd recommend this Freakonomics episode that analyzes the impacts of alcohol and pot usage. [1]

I'm not arguing in favor of a "numbed population", but all things being equal, I'd honestly rather our numbed population be high instead of drunk.

[1] http://freakonomics.com/2014/04/17/whats-more-dangerous-mari...

A lot of people say that in the abstract, but I vividly recall a bunch of specific examples from my junior high school days in northern California.

It was always a relief when certain older troublemakers that were regulars on the scene showed up at a party high on weed, rather than Coors, because they would tend to sit around and laugh, or at least goof around harmlessly, rather than starting fights and driving their large trucks recklessly and endangering nearby people and property.

It's very hard to quantify, but alcohol definitely "brings out the asshole" in people way more than weed does.

Well yes, alcohol lowers inhibitions. Hence it's common nickname, "liquid courage".

How about not restricting ourselves to a false dichotomy?

This is case-by-case. I have a buddy who is a business owner (retail, to boot) and is baked 24/7. Quite an enjoyable character.

I said this in another thread, but I'm really confused about this idea that weed numbs you emotionally. I have a flat affect normally and cannabis is one of the few things that helps with that.

You also don't need to be high all the time, obviously.

The biggest reason is probably chronic un/underemployment and similar social ills and not marijuana. If you ask me.

Both are symptoms, not causes. If people want to be emotionally detached, we should ask why.

In my experience, such desires are caused by a feeling of lack of agency and/or progress in one's professional and personal life. For example if one is stuck at a dead-end job they are more likely to self-medicate, which can quickly turn into addiction.

> "Persistent cannabis users show neuropsychological decline from childhood to midlife"


(it's 2012 but a good study)

Knowledge workers (in the future, everyone?) should be more skeptical of pot.

Ideally no one should smoke until they are 24-26 years old as their executive functions are still developing.

You shouldn't be drinking either until 26 for the same reason.

I've not seen any study showing damage from people that waited until 26 to consume cannabis.

Studies like this are trash because they imply causation. It doesn't matter what you control for, there can be an infinite number of factors causing usage of marijuana to be correlated with lower IQ scores.

relatedly, my money is on "terpene" to be a trending food word of 2018.

This, so very much.

I've been excited watching the extracts in WA evolve over time -- initially cartridges were just BHO or CO2 oil, then processors started pumping out THC distillates, followed by CBD distillates. Now they're recombining those distillates and adding terpenes back in from various fruits, resulting in a reproducible, adjustable product.

Reminds me of what happened with food in the 20th century. Fruit esters, hydrolyzed yeast, MSG, etc. Predicting the organic farm-to-jar "whole bud" movement 10-20 yrs from now.

Wow. What keywords do you suggest I use to search for more info about this particular topic?

"cannabis distillate fruit terpenes" without the quotes will get you going. Sadly most of the commercial producers are incredibly tight lipped about their processes, but there are some sites like https://skunkpharmresearch.com/ that share information pretty freely.

I wouldn't touch anything that at least doesn't publish a terpene profile.

Cannabis distillates.

I already enjoyed a terpene flavored IPA craft beer this year. It was pretty great.

hops have terpenes as well;most plants do.

Definitely, and they are cousins. In this case, it was specifically a marijuana terpene IPA.

laguinitas? Great brewery; now only if they'd distribute that on the east coast...

How about a new craft weed beer? Seriously, hops and cannabis are in the same plant family. I think it would be a great combo if you had a beer made from cannabis with the effects from both.

They're already available. For one example, Black Hammer Brewing in San Francisco makes Toke Back Mountain which is infused with CBD.

The active ingredients are not water soluble so you’d need to introduce lipids or something, which sounds pretty gross.

Substances that are fat-soluble are alcohol-soluble, in particular cannabinoids, see: green dragon

It'd sell just like butter coffee sells.

I was surprised to see billboards advertising marijuana in my area (northern California). I know that tobacco advertising on billboards is illegal, and marijuana ought to be held to the same standard.

Why? Marijuana use may have some attendant health risks, but they are far lower than those of tobacco use (or alcohol use), across the spectrum.

>I know that tobacco advertising on billboards is illegal, and marijuana ought to be held to the same standard.

Regulation in California tends to treat weed more like alcohol than tobacco. It's not seen as physically addictive like cigarettes. If you're against advertising for it then you should equally oppose beer commercials.

Isn’t it only illegal because of the consent decree from the big lawsuits?

Tobacco advertising? No it's straight up illegal. Weed advertising should be too since it's effects on developing minds is even more pronounced.

Not in all states. The states where billboard advertising is illegal is due to the consent decree.


“Passed in 1997, the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement bans outdoor, billboard, and public transportation advertising of cigarettes in 46 states. It also prohibits tobacco advertising that targets young people, the usage of cartoons (such as the Marlboro Man or Joe Camel) in particular.[69] In the states which have not signed the agreement, billboards are a major venue of cigarette advertising (10% of Michigan billboards advertised alcohol and tobacco, according to the Detroit Free Press[70]).”

> since it's effects on developing minds is even more pronounced.

I've never heard that before.

I still see tobacco ads in magazines like Wired.

It's only a matter of time until big tobacco, big alcohol, and big pharma descend on the cannabis industry.

As a crop cannabis is highly amenable to small scale production, in the same vein as craft breweries.

The realities of logistics and distribution, however, favor connected players with robust systems either consolidating or partnering with smaller producers. Again, much like craft breweries.

I think there is ample room for organic, whole bud, "farmers market" type solutions alongside next-gen concentrates and extracts using high tech delivery systems and convenient options available at the gas station from larger established players.

It's already here. In Colorado founders are being bought out, and consolidation is quietly happening among the major licensees.

He is only thinking about the market here. And if he is looking to make cash then that is always the right way to go. If the wave is getting bigger, the earlier you catch it the better.

Because the US is clearly the only country on the planet.


Well OK, but first maybe they might want to stop using name that's not theirs.

What was the article about?

Meh, in 2017 it's not cool to smoke. Smoking weed doesn't change that.

Yup. I dearly hope they come up with a healthy way of administration. Smoking is really really really bad. Source: I am an ex addict. Both Cannabis and Cigarettes.

somehowbI'd think it's the addiction that's the problem, like smoking wouldn't be nearly as bad as if people weren't abusing, or being abused by the industry, but definitely not by the smoke.

Even if we accept the premise (and people seem to be falling over themselves to visit hookah bars and that kind of crap) there are other ways to consume marijuana.

I disagree. Pot will never be the new craft beer; however, edibles do have potential. The problem with universal pot is that it travels through air, and the smells from some of these strains is unbearable if you are not a pot user. Another problem is contact highs, if your a non smoker you can literally catch a contact high from being in the presence of someone smoking a strong strain. Beer on the other hand is odorless and your usage doesn't directly affect others.

> if your a non smoker you can literally catch a contact high from being in the presence of someone smoking a strong strain.

I have never felt high at all from people smoking strong strains near me. I am a fairly big guy with a high tolerance though (i haven't smoked though).

> Beer on the other hand is odorless and your usage doesn't directly affect others.

This is not true at all. If I haven't been drinking or been around people drinking for a month or two, I can smell if you've had a beer just by walking in the room.

Weed definitely has a stronger smell though. But if you are used to the smell of weed and not the smell of beer, beer has a stronger smell.

> I have never felt high at all from people smoking strong strains near me. I am a fairly big guy with a high tolerance though (i haven't smoked though).

It's you. I'm an average sized guy with low tolerance and contact high is a real thing. I wonder what effect it would have on kids nearby...

Contact high is a placebo-like psychological or psychosomatic effect, unlike a second-hand inhalation high, which is an actual direct drug effect.

Size/tolerance/strength-of-drug are irrelevant to contact high, but relevant to a second-hand inhalation high.

Given the nature of contact highs, strength of the odor of an inhalant might be relevant, but that's not necessarily related to drug strength.

AFAIK, second-hand inhalation highs are basically impossible other than lots of people smoking around you in an enclosed space which prevents dissipation.

This is a myth. This might be a possibility in a tightly enclosed space with poor ventilation, but under realistic circumstances a "contact high" is pretty close to impossible.

The "contact high" is a real thing, but it is not about becoming intoxicated by the drug itself. It's a psychological phenomenon.


Says you. I've experienced it, outdoors in close proximity. People's biology are different. Some people are hyper sensitive, others require massive doses to experience a high. This is true of basically all drugs, btw.

I wasn't there and I'm not you, so I can't comment on your personal experiences, however, studies have shown that what you're describing is very unlikely, particularly outdoors. A psychological explanation is much more likely.

The math involved would say its impossible, the placebo effect is a very real thing though.

There is no generalizable “math” involved. Everyone’s physiology is different and their susceptibility to THC depends on the specifics of their exact metabolic conditions in their own body. Some people get high on a few mg. Some people require 10’s of mg. Someone in close proximity to a smoker or smoking crowd could easily get a mg or two if the others are smoking heavy THC strains. The math checks out on that...

Well sure, I would classify the placebo effect as a psychological explanation.

Probably not much of a risk if you're outdoors.

Personally I've found it to have an effect when indoors, even if there's an open window. (I don't live in an especially warm climate, though. Windows are not typically open all that far.) I had a friend who was a very heavy dope smoker and I'd often feel a bit stoned after leaving his house. Nothing major, just as if I'd had a few drags on a joint.

(I used to be a heavy smoker myself, years ago, so the sensation is quite familiar to me.)

I don't know why it's such a strange idea that this could happen. You are after all breathing in marijuana smoke. Second-hand or not, over a few hours it seems to add up.

being a stoner the hygiene was less than stellar and you got high of the fungus spores from the mold in the trash he didn't bring out in two weeks. no offenxe, just a theory.

I'm sticking with the theory that it was due to breathing in the marijuana smoke. This is after all typically how you get high.

It is strange how people have such a hard time believing this.

> The problem with universal pot is that it travels through air, and the smells from some of these strains is unbearable if you are not a pot user.

Tobacco is worse. It's not going away.

> Another problem is contact highs, if your a non smoker you can literally catch a contact high from being in the presence of someone smoking a strong strain.

Would be really great if true, but is unfortunately a drug scare myth from the 60s.

A couple months after I stopped smoking - and this was years ago - I believe that I got a contact high. It was not like a normal high, it was more like a subtle body-only high. But then if you're sitting in a room with five people smoking steadily for a couple hours I doubt you're really worried about second-hand exposure.

If you are in a room with five people smoking steadily for a couple of hours, that's not a contact high: that's second hand inhalation.

And I'd hazard that it would be mostly the hydrocarbons, which would square with your experience.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact