What did your friend have tested?
-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
-
Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!
98% THC Budder fact or fiction?
- Thread starter Gray Wolf
- Start date
What did your friend have tested?
thats a bold statement with very little data to back it up.
to say something is true, you need better proof, or dont go there.
94.64%
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=4725758&postcount=5496
"So the test results are in. The sample of BHO that I had tested (My trim, another IC members extraction) came in at 94.64% Delta 9 THC with another 0.84% other cannabinol present. That leaves 4.5% other substances. Of those substances I had the report limited to the top 40. Here are a few of them and there values as well as a few short notes. I am still researching these compounds but my first guess is that the benzene although present in very small quantity is going to be a doozie. Although I cannot perform a combustion test to see how much is actually present after burning / smoking
Here you go:
0.21% .alpha. – bisabolol : a known anti inflammatory and is possibly has cancer fighting properties. There are a few papers written on it and it is being further researched as we speak
0.09% caryphyllene : an essential oil and terpene
0.11% 1H-Indole, 5-methyl-2-phenyl : Fragrant
Now for the not so good
0.56% 1,2 – propanediamine : propane residue and butane isomer
0.23% bicyclo [3.1.0] hexane : toxic
0.14% benzene : toxic
0.10% 2H- 1-benzopyran – 5 – ol : toxic
0.41% zh – 1 – benzopyran – 5 – ol : toxic"
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=4725758&postcount=5496
"So the test results are in. The sample of BHO that I had tested (My trim, another IC members extraction) came in at 94.64% Delta 9 THC with another 0.84% other cannabinol present. That leaves 4.5% other substances. Of those substances I had the report limited to the top 40. Here are a few of them and there values as well as a few short notes. I am still researching these compounds but my first guess is that the benzene although present in very small quantity is going to be a doozie. Although I cannot perform a combustion test to see how much is actually present after burning / smoking
Here you go:
0.21% .alpha. – bisabolol : a known anti inflammatory and is possibly has cancer fighting properties. There are a few papers written on it and it is being further researched as we speak
0.09% caryphyllene : an essential oil and terpene
0.11% 1H-Indole, 5-methyl-2-phenyl : Fragrant
Now for the not so good
0.56% 1,2 – propanediamine : propane residue and butane isomer
0.23% bicyclo [3.1.0] hexane : toxic
0.14% benzene : toxic
0.10% 2H- 1-benzopyran – 5 – ol : toxic
0.41% zh – 1 – benzopyran – 5 – ol : toxic"
U
Ultra Current
Thanks for that. I want to try for myself and get some things tested sometime to see whats up.
eloquentsoution
Member
will you scan and post the actual test?
The purity of this mythical budder seems to be mostly due to good marketing and the most highly over-enthusiastic interpretation of dubious test results.
Shmalphy posted "well I stand corrected. It was 99.6 % cannabinoids, of which 80-90% were THC, so it was more like 90%.."
Now if there's a 10% error window, where do we take the upper limit of that result and push that as the actual result?
Hornby has stated that the budderking has grossly inflated the actual test results...
All that aside HPLC testing can be subject to a huge error window from several key areas.
1- sample weighing precision
unless a very large sample is prepared we're talking about taking a few Milligrams of oil and diluting it in a quantity of methanol. Scale calibration and technique introduce a large possibility of error at this point.
2- dilution and injection: the precision to which the sample is diluted and the amount of that sample which is then injected into the HPLC contributes another error window. The sample injection is normally farking Micro-Liters too! How does a human operator repeat a 5 microliter sample to under 1% error?
3- Calibration: The use of certified standards to calibrate the HPLC and making sure the machine is frequently re-calibrated is critical.
4- Repeatability: Unless several tests are done on the same sample and they all give similar results then the accuracy is simply not believable.
Just taking one test and calling that a definiative result is bullshit.
Several tests should be performed on a sample and the average taken.
I've looked at the various labs that do testing but haven't found any that offer any details on their test methodology or provide even an error window on their results.
Does anyone have a typical error window for HPLC testing?
Peace
RB
Shmalphy posted "well I stand corrected. It was 99.6 % cannabinoids, of which 80-90% were THC, so it was more like 90%.."
Now if there's a 10% error window, where do we take the upper limit of that result and push that as the actual result?
Hornby has stated that the budderking has grossly inflated the actual test results...
All that aside HPLC testing can be subject to a huge error window from several key areas.
1- sample weighing precision
unless a very large sample is prepared we're talking about taking a few Milligrams of oil and diluting it in a quantity of methanol. Scale calibration and technique introduce a large possibility of error at this point.
2- dilution and injection: the precision to which the sample is diluted and the amount of that sample which is then injected into the HPLC contributes another error window. The sample injection is normally farking Micro-Liters too! How does a human operator repeat a 5 microliter sample to under 1% error?
3- Calibration: The use of certified standards to calibrate the HPLC and making sure the machine is frequently re-calibrated is critical.
4- Repeatability: Unless several tests are done on the same sample and they all give similar results then the accuracy is simply not believable.
Just taking one test and calling that a definiative result is bullshit.
Several tests should be performed on a sample and the average taken.
I've looked at the various labs that do testing but haven't found any that offer any details on their test methodology or provide even an error window on their results.
Does anyone have a typical error window for HPLC testing?
Peace
RB
Thanks for the post bro! I asked for a full scanned print out of the report on the thread that you referenced. If you can help on that, it would be greatly appreciated and might aid in sorting it out.
In short, it opens more questions than it answers. Ricky has touched on a few, and I would like to know more about their standards.
For instance, when I ask to have anything special checked besides the cannabinoids, they have to have a standard to reference the peaks against. I can't just say, "Check for pesticides", without raising the question, "Which pesticides?"
Identifying the contents above, suggests that they had standards for and were testing for all of the above, which typically would be an expensive test in these parts and unusual.
I also would like to know more about the process and materials that produced the product, so as to better understand where some of this stuff came from. If you could add some insight in that area, it would also be appreciated.
Thanks!
Wow i need to up my metallurgy game
Luckily, the wikipedia article for "alpha case" was two sentences long.
i understand how the alpha casing affects the metal's strength,but what is the relationship to off gassing? (vacuum means no gas to trap in metal during creation? therefore no gas or reaction to escape?)
But I like what I'm hearing, I think
Alpha case is titanium dioxide, which is formed by the titanium's reaction with oxygen. Titanium rust.
It is brittle and crack prone, so it is usually avoided or removed from titanium before use in structures. A crack in the alpha case can easily propagate into the parent material with time and cyclic stresses, and cause parts to break.
In the case of vaporizing, being cyclic fatigue crack prone, is not an issue, unless you decide to bend the metal for some reason and you will find that it becomes glass like.
It is non toxic and is the white pigment you see in almost all paints and glazes.
What I was saying is that Ti by itself is inert at the temperatures generally encountered in vaporizing and is going to be coated almost immediately with increasingly thick alpha cases, which are inert as well.
Ti is actually an extremely reactive metal and will burn like magnesium if you get it hot enough in the presence of oxygen or even nitrogen.
The extremely thin oxide and nitrate layer that forms instantly when a fresh Titanium surface is exposed to oxygen and nitrogen, is tough and protects the Ti from further oxidation, unless the temperature is elevated to reactive ranges.
When Ti burns in Nitrogen, it forms titanium nitrides as a bi product. Titanium nitrides are also inert and so extremely hard, that they are often used in metal cutting tools for hard to machine alloys.
Because Ti is so reactive in its molten state, it must be melted and poured in a vacuum, which means that there are no entrapped gases, as there may be in an air melt alloy.
That may not be the case with some Titanium alloys containing aluminum and vanadium, so understand that I am talking about commercially pure titanium, not one of the more common structural alloys.
So in summary, nothing present on a spanking new commercially pure ti skillet or wand should be giving off vapors or liberating any trapped gasses at the temperatures we are operating at.
Last edited:
eloquentsoution
Member
thanks for the schooling, gw!
C
Chamba
Now for the not so good
0.56% 1,2 – propanediamine : propane residue and butane isomer
0.23% bicyclo [3.1.0] hexane : toxic
0.14% benzene : toxic
0.10% 2H- 1-benzopyran – 5 – ol : toxic
0.41% zh – 1 – benzopyran – 5 – ol : toxic"
and "now for the not so good"..damn, that's an understatement!
and this is from a very pure sample! sheeesh! You guys inhale this shit on purpose?
I wonder just how many readers here who are into smoking resin dissolved in petrochemicals are now just a little hesitant to continuing doing so?
0.56% 1,2 – propanediamine : propane residue and butane isomer
0.23% bicyclo [3.1.0] hexane : toxic
0.14% benzene : toxic
0.10% 2H- 1-benzopyran – 5 – ol : toxic
0.41% zh – 1 – benzopyran – 5 – ol : toxic"
and "now for the not so good"..damn, that's an understatement!
and this is from a very pure sample! sheeesh! You guys inhale this shit on purpose?
I wonder just how many readers here who are into smoking resin dissolved in petrochemicals are now just a little hesitant to continuing doing so?
Wow, you believe everything you see TYPED on the internet? I could sit and type my own analysis of my bho and say that its 98% and 2% other cannabinoids. Would you believe me?
I don't even know if all of those things are in butane. Any one care to tackle that one?
how do you know, did you make it, did you purge the butane out of it yourself? and as it was said to be from trim, it is quite possible it was a large batch and trapping butane is much easier when doing large amounts.
The issue I've raised in the past is that the MSDS data for the "good" brands of butane look pretty much identical to the MSDS data for the "bad" brands.
What are they filtering out with their 5x process and how much is left behind? Why are these things not listed on the unfiltered brands?
Seems we may finally be getting the answer.
Mia
Active member
If i have some extra cash around in a the next couple months I'll do a run, get it tested by one of the local labs and post it up.
I'll let everyone know ahead of time, so that I can gather input.
I'd be doing this more for my curiosity about what possible toxins are in the commercial butane, as has already been mentioned, not so much for THC nhumbers, but I'll try.
Maybe get hammalamma to do it since he's light years more experienced than me in running.
No guarantees though.
I'll let everyone know ahead of time, so that I can gather input.
I'd be doing this more for my curiosity about what possible toxins are in the commercial butane, as has already been mentioned, not so much for THC nhumbers, but I'll try.
Maybe get hammalamma to do it since he's light years more experienced than me in running.
No guarantees though.
lol, all the information is 100% factual
