New Study Reports Up to 99% Lower Harmful Byproducts With Vaporization vs Smoking

A new research paper is adding fresh data to a long-running question in cannabis consumption: how vaporizing compares to smoking when it comes to chemical exposure.

The research—conducted by Richard Rucker, who serves as PAX’s director of product integrity, and Derek Shiokari, a senior chemist and data scientist at the company—compared aerosol generated by PAX’s dry herb vaporization device (FLOW) and its oil vaporization device (TRIP) with smoke from combusted marijuana joints.

Using the same batch of ground Lemon Cake Batter cannabis from Humboldt Farms, the team analyzed 16 harmful or potentially harmful compounds (HPHCs) across both consumption methods. Under standardized lab conditions, the study reports reductions of up to 99% in measured compounds when cannabis was vaporized rather than combusted.

The research focused on compounds commonly associated with combustion, including benzene, formaldehyde, and acetaldehyde—substances also monitored in tobacco smoke due to their potential toxicity.

To ensure consistency, both smoking and vaporization were tested using identical puffing parameters, including two-second draws, consistent airflow, and fixed intervals between puffs. This approach was designed to isolate the effects of combustion itself.

Across the measured compounds, vaporized aerosol showed significantly lower concentrations compared to joint smoke. For example, formaldehyde levels measured in joint smoke were substantially higher than those detected in vapor, with similar patterns observed across several other analytes.

The study also found that smoke from a combusted joint contained a far more complex chemical profile, with nearly 189 compounds identified in qualitative analysis. In contrast, vaporized aerosol consisted primarily of cannabinoids and terpenes, with fewer detectable secondary byproducts.

“Combustion produces harmful byproducts—whether it’s tobacco, wood, or cannabis,” said Rucker in a press release. “By heating cannabis without burning it, vaporization significantly reduces the formation of these toxic compounds. It’s the same plant, but completely different exposure. This research helps quantify the difference, giving consumers clearer information about how their choices impact exposure.”

The differences observed in the study reflect well-understood principles of combustion chemistry.

When cannabis is burned—often at temperatures exceeding 900°C—it undergoes pyrolysis and oxidation, processes that generate a wide range of secondary compounds. These include volatile organic compounds and carbonyls, many of which are considered undesirable from an exposure standpoint.

Vaporization, by contrast, heats cannabis at lower temperatures, typically between 160°C and 230°C, releasing cannabinoids and terpenes without fully igniting the plant material. The study attributes the lower levels of measured compounds in vapor to the absence of these high-temperature combustion reactions.

The findings contribute to a growing body of research examining how different methods of cannabis consumption affect chemical exposure.

The study was conducted by PAX researchers using controlled laboratory conditions and a single cannabis cultivar. While this allows for a consistent comparison between combustion and vaporization, real-world use may vary depending on factors like product type, device settings, and individual consumption habits.

The analysis focuses on the presence of specific compounds in smoke and vapor, rather than long-term health outcomes. As with much of cannabis science, further research will help expand understanding of how these differences translate beyond the lab.

For consumers, the study adds another layer of information to consider when choosing how to consume cannabis.

It reinforces the role combustion plays in producing many of the byproducts found in smoke, while suggesting that vaporization may reduce exposure to some of those compounds under certain conditions.

At the same time, broader questions around health, risk, and long-term effects remain part of an evolving scientific conversation.

As legal cannabis markets continue to mature, conversations around product safety, quality, and consumption methods are becoming more prominent.

Research like this helps build a clearer picture of how different approaches compare, even as the science continues to develop. For now, the discussion around smoking versus vaporizing cannabis remains open—shaped by ongoing study, consumer preference, and a growing focus on informed choice.

More information is available at pax.com/science.

Content Disclaimer: This article reports on findings from a research paper authored and released by PAX. The study has not been independently reviewed or verified by High Times.