The numbers on single solvent dewaxing? not good

[whiterasta]

Hey ya'll, Some thoughts for ya. Has anyone looked into the allowable amount of paraffin as vapor http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/npgd0477.html
Even being extremely generous about the process of SSD having a residual of 1-3%, given the average lung volume of 6L and that 1M3=1000L every inhalation no matter how small exceeds the limits set above. Alcohol winterization and lyotropic crystallization when done with precision can remove especially the paraffinic components with extreme efficiency. As the wax fraction is co-soluble with many terpenes their loss is directly proportional to the amount of co-soluble wax during lyotropic crystallization. Only partially polar and wax insoluble terpenes are carried over in the process. That said even a crude steam distillate would replace many lost terpenoid fractions and still be of a passable exposure limit for paraffin vapor in a thoroughly winterized resin. Bottom line is due to their co-solubility wax and terpenes will be gained or lost together except by distillation.
I point this out as eventually vaporized resin will need to be shown to be a "pure" product. A known noxious adulterant in quantities that exceed exposure limits can not pass as a "pure" product. I can provide links to paraffins on cannabis if needed by I suspect it is already well known by reading all 12 pages of another thread on the topic.
WR

 

[Rickys bong]

Please provide complete referenced research data (preferably mass spec. analysis) as to the specific constituents of cannabis extract as direct chemical analogues of petroleum distillates. Put another way, what people commonly perceive or refer to as "wax" being a highly complex product of plant lipids and fats may not be directly comparable on a molecular spectrum to something that candles are made of. Candles and shit, as such being made from a component of, and distilled from previously crude oil. Or in my region of the planet a particularly nasty substance commonly called tar sands.

I only refute your prose based on the wonderfully tantalizing assertion that "vaporized resin will need to be shown to be a "pure" product".

Well, in such a case the product being referenced thus needs a reference.
Some proponents would certainly have issues with "pure" product being synthetic THC would they not?

"pure" is such a salacious protuberance of marketing bullshit but so gleefully absorbed by recent generations collectively wanking themselves unconscious in the narcissistic need to be superior to their fellow patrons of pot. "pure" is going to need a reference yo.

How we seem to viciously berate some hapless newb on the color imperfections of their extracts when we haven't the slightest tangible clue as to what we are actually basing our comparisons on. My own mind goes full retard as to what "pure" could mean to eleventy different minds.

Holy shit it's hard not to go off on a rant here.... (deep breath)

Anyhoo, I just don't see your point.

(preceding rant may have been influenced by slightly elevated consumption of certified "pure" pale ale)

Peace out, RB

/discuss

 

[whiterasta]

here you go in the PDF is all the information you asked for. I suggest you go back to the first link in the OP and compare the limits for paraffin exposure to the representative numbers in the paper provided. As for pure, well a product with a noxious adulterant in it is hardly pure. So pure resin here is resin containing mostly cannabinoids and some related sequiterpenes and flavinoids but no paraffin if for vaporization. The numbers do not lie. Over exposure to paraffin has health consequences. and since there are set limits to this exposure there is no reason to think they will not be applied to cannabis

 

[whiterasta]

Also note the study is for bast fiber which is the has a much lower wax/resin content than the flowers. As for exposure @ 2mg/M3(M3=1000L) a contamination of 1% wax in a .05g dab is .5mg. Average lung capacity is 6 liters so at a 1% contamination exposure is 41x allowable limit of .012mg /lung full

 

[Daub Marley]

Are you assuming that 100% of the wax is absorbed into the lungs?

Sorting out all of the good from the bad is a very long and winding road. Just look at coffee. I commend your efforts though.

 

[whiterasta]

Are you assuming that 100% of the wax is absorbed into the lungs?

Sorting out all of the good from the bad is a very long and winding road. Just look at coffee. I commend your efforts though.

No assumptions made, the exposure limits are posted in the OP and the math of the exposure of a single average toke is accurate. It makes no difference what is absorbed it is exposure that is measured. I realize this is a kick in the nuts to dabs but better me than a regulatory agency,eh?

 

[jdee]

I'm not sure I follow...

SSD is to remove epicuticular plant wax but you refer to paraffin wax (a white or colorless soft solid derivable from petroleum, coal or shale), where does the paraffin come from?

You mention 1-3%, so it sounds like it's from the solvent and that the product is not completely purged, if so why is not removed from the solvent prior and why is the product not assumed to be completely purged?

Looking at the MSDS for paraffin doesn't mention any serious health risks for inhalation, do you have any links to peer reviewed scientific papers showing the long term health risks associated to inhalation of the wax you say is dangerous (is it plant derived or petroluem)?

 

[whiterasta]

C-39 is C-39 whether plant derived or petroleum as are the remaining waxes listed. An aliphatic long chain is a paraffin. Please look up what paraffin is. The numbers are from the 12 page post on SSD and are purposely lower than what is reported to show that low wax content is just not good enough to pass exposure limits for paraffin. The health risks are lipoidic pnuemonia and alveolitis.
http://digitalfire.com/4sight/hazards/ceramic_hazard_paraffin_toxicology_364.html
Please understand I am a professional chemist and have researched this fully. I am fully prepared and submitting a document to the IACM on the subject for peer review. I would expect this issue to be looked at in the near future when concentrates are looked into seriously so folks can either remain in denial or change their process. I do not make concentrates for vaporization so have no skin in this except as a public service to the industry.And as I said I have thoroughly researched this far beyond a cursory Google search. I would suggest the concentrate industry take this seriously and rather than try to debunk the facts, instead get educated on them.

 

[NorCalHawaii]

So what you are saying is that inhaling a vapor from plant concentrates derived from petroleum extraction and washed in alcohol could be bad for my health? Thanks for that.

 

[whiterasta]

Yeah that is it.... SMH I am saying a non-polar raw gum has enough paraffin to be considered an health hazard by the NIH. As such expect it to be examined and judged harshly by any regulatory agency that cares to look.

 

[jdee]

Having trouble finding any conclusive studies showing consumption of cannabis in any form leads to alveolitis or lipoidic pnuemonia.

 

[whiterasta]

That river in Egypt is strong here

 

[jackgastche]

I've actually been warned by two doctors about this, although other doctors have told me they weren't concerned and the tests have shown that my lungs are fine (I have just over a decade of vaping oil only in my history).

That said, I quit vaping and switched to oral medication a few months ago and my lungs have improved greatly (never had problems before, but there is a measured improvement since quitting vaping and it scares me a bit). Very interested in this thread and will do any reading you can send my way.

 

[whiterasta]

I came to question due to the persistent incidence of "cup cough". This in my opinion is a mild form of alveolitis/lipoid pneumonia due to the excessive amount of plant paraffins in a non-polar concentrate. Researching the composition of cuticle and trichome wax I found a large amount of aliphatic waxes present. Researching exposure to wax has lead to the limits on exposure. Some quick math proves even a small amount of concentrate exceeds this. The hindrance is the lack of research on the effects of concentrates. However the information I provided is directly relevant to what we know about the constituents of the plant as well as the effects of those constituents in a work place and limits for them. That a NP concentrate greatly exceeds these numbers should be a cause for investigation and study not denial and ignorance. I will pass along the paper I am submitting when complete.

 

[Weird]

interesting stuff

 

[hairetsu]

It's clear that smoking anything is bad for you. Can it lead to long term health issues? Sure! Smoking the plant i'm sure is much worse for the lungs than smoking a dab. Though i might be confused as to how bad all the other carcinogens are compared to the paraffins left in a dewaxed batch of oil. vaporizing? well then that might be different. still vaporizing a plant doesn't make things healthy.

To argue the fact that PURE means it can't contain paraffins, is the funniest claim in the world as far as America goes.

Pure is just a marketing term.

Organic isn't even organic these days. people use some "based off organics" shit. Organix brand names to trick a purchaser to think its really Organic.

The only thing you can REALLY trust in smoking anything is that its not entirely great for you.

Carry on

 

[hairetsu]

Disclaimer to above: I'm just stating my opinion on this matter.

I'm not shooting this argument down at all. I'd love to see a study comparing the health risks of smoking/vaping the plant vs smoking/vaping a dab.

 

[Elements001]

I find this quite interesting.

So in the OP, if you were to properly winterize the product with ethanol you would be removing most of the parrafins and the product would be considered safer?

 

[jd2]

....a contamination of 1% wax in a .05g dab is .5mg.....

How did you come up with this 1% number? What is the extraction rate correlated to?

Do it this way, assume 1 oz of starting material, 25% combined extraction by weight and 25% terp composition of the extraction; what would be your expectation for C20-C50 waxes?

Is it the general consensus of the health community, that paraffin wax fumes are a real or manufactured issue? (There certainly are dissenters).Is the threshold correct in your opinion? (if i read correctly, that would be a yes).

Are you personally advocating that several big fat “doobies” are less of an issue?

Finally, do you personally feel the government should regulate what some dip-shit “pothead” sucks into his lungs???

It's one thing for the government to inform --- a completely different issue to advocate and push for control in personal decisions.

 

[hairetsu]

I also can't compare such report to any strain grown for smoking. I would need to such results and studies using a plant material that is inhaled.

I just have to question the fact on what kinda material is being analyzed. If you are testing hemp fibers, I'm thinking they are using material that wouldn't otherwise be used in a proper resin extraction from cannabis we would smoke.

Also my math goes like this if you consider this .5% is lipids in your material.

100grams of weed is a total of .5grams of lipids total

.5 grams of lipids in a avg yeild of 20% would mean 20 grams of extract with .5 grams of lipids in it assuming you haven't used super chilled tane, and chilled tubes to blast at all, and you're pulling 100% of the .5% lipids into your solution.
So lets say you've now managed to have a 40:1 ratio non-lipid to lipids. 2.5% total lipids in your solution.

Now lets say someone is dewaxing properly, they manage to grab a mere 75% of the lipids out of the product leaving 25% of 2.5% you'll be left with .625% lipids in your new total extracted ratio being 156:1 or .125 grams of lipids and 19.5 of other total extract.

avg hit being .05 even though thats a fairly large hit for normal smokers,

.05g(50mg) out of 19.625g(19625mg) = 392 hits
divide your .125g(125mg) by that 392 hits, and you're now looking at taking about 3mg of lipids per hit. under 12mg.

lets say no dewaxing occured, all the lipids stayed in place. youre still looking at 12mg per hit max.

To say the flowers and such have more "lipids" i'd love to see analysis that shows this for sure. I need a concrete number of avg testings for lipids in non-SSD'd product to even compare anything but the numbers you provided.

correct me if im wrong anywhere!