Isolation of THCA

Sam_Skunkman said:

I knew that terpenes modified THC I have felt that for decades, this was the first chance I had to test my hypothesis. Rob was in agreement with me. I think I will publish it in O’Shaughnessy’s as Fred is a friend and they have wanted me to publish it for years. Until then you need to wait. When you see the list of subjects you will understand why we waited, at their request.
The work started 15 years ago with the first 100% pure THC 25 mg being tried by vapeing by just me and Rob, then we tried 25 mg of a 50/50 mixture of pure THC and dry sifted resin that was 50% THC, and 25 mg of the 75% THC mix was stronger then the pure THC. We thought we knew why..... we were right.
-SamS

Click to expand...

Certainly understandable I am just interested in the data and the potential for learning something from it. Whenever that happens Ill be the first to contribute my fair share to get to lay my eyes on the data. Thanks for sharing the general outcome however that is more than helpful all by itself.

SB

youareaniceguy said:

Eaten dronabinol which I am prescribed. I'm aware it is synthetic and coupled with sesame oil.

Did you like it? As a recreational product?

Also gone through the isomerization process and have tried vaping the extract.

That I suspect is not pure THC or pure THCA what was the source of the THC? Was it really pure THC, nothing else even delta 8 or CBD?? Was it tested in a lab?

THC acetate as well.

Same question did a lab confirm it was only THC acetate? Nothing else? Lab tested?

I would describe it as medicinally very beneficial. Antiemetic, anti inflammatory, lowered bp and heart rate.

And is a lesser amount of THC with terpenes just as useful, that is what I am saying.

On another note which pharma are you speaking of? I did have an opportunity to try sativex when I was living abroad however I thought that contained CBD as one of its main selling points over dronabinol.

Click to expand...

Yes Sativex does have CBD, no I am not referring to Sativex. I know Sativex very well.
Can you show me where I mentioned a Pharma?


One last point you can't really compare smoked and eaten THC as eaten delivers mostly 11 Hydroxy THC to the blood and brain and smoked delivers mostly THC.
They are similar but not the same in effects.
-SamS

I guess I assumed it was pharma since it was controlled and you got it legally, I now realize there are other means of satisfying both of those conditions sans pharma, my mistake.

Nope, nothing tested. I didn't screw up either process, but I'll accept that I don't have proof so dronabinol only it is.

I enjoy dronabinol more than bho but it is much more expensive.

As for a lesser amount of THC with terpenes being just as useful, unfortunately it isn't the case for me or I wouldn't continue to bother with dronabinol and other alternatives that are more of a hassle than bho.

BHO is not a very good source of terpenes, Dry sift is best as is herbal Cannabis.
I know many people that add terpenes to BHO or water hash to make it better.
-SamS

I don't think it's the terpenes for me. BHO helps more than the equivalent dose of dry sift, and flowers have never helped me at all. BHO does work well, but not as well as dronabinol, for me at least.

If you have suggestions on something I haven't tried already I'm super eager and interested to try it. Thanks for your suggestions thus far.

Was i the only one excited that sam and gray were posting in the same thread?lol i was like oh shit,i was secretly hoping they disagree.would of been an epic debate.
But great m8nds think alike. Anyways i like my stuff with flavors.not only is it pleasant to the senses.it modulates the "high"

I have not yet smoked with anyone I respect that does not agree. Or come to think of it smoked with anyone that did not agree. That said it is possible for medical users or people with maybe very different metabolisms to be this way, to their loss.
Almost anything could be.
-Sams

Thanks for the response to this topic. I was mainly concerned about the chemistry theory involved, but Sam and Grey Wolf do have great insights on the uses of end product, which I honestly did not give much thought. After giving it some thought, I still think it could have some use.

First, I will address the chemistry. The link in the link posted by G.O. Joe shows that a very similar procedure has been done using hashish of unknown potency and diluted NaOH. The idea with the sodium bicarbonate is that it would selectively remove only cannabinoid acids but not delta-9 or CBN, leaving mostly THCa and CBDa. Since fatty acids are removed during initial extraction(winterization and possible activated carbon rinse--as in GW Pharm patent) then there would be minimal in final product. This also would hopefully mean very minimal emulsion would form. Other then that, I feel this would work and I plan on testing it but will take time as I lack the majority of the supplies. The input here has definitely helped. I am very interested as I could not find that it had been done and seems to be a common way of extracting carboxlic acids.

Now to the use of said product if said product using this method would work lol:

I completely agree with the majority here, which is that terpenes are very important to the pleasurable effects as they seem to modulate the effect of delta9-THC. On advantage, I see is that you can control the amount of delta9-THC in a dose more readily then extracting straight from cannabis as you have greater control of the conversion to THC and dreaded CBN. Given that THCa could be useful as the base cannabinoid with terpenes possible added at given ratio to give a controlled effect. Terpenes could be distilled from an extract of cannabis, or mixed together from other plant sources.

Another idea could be that you decarb the THCa to given THCa:THC ratio for edibles for a good controlled dose. THEN as needed for the given ailment, smaller breakthrough doses of a specific strain could be used to modulate THC already present to given the wanted effect.

Sam_Skunkman said:

I have not yet smoked with anyone I respect that does not agree. Or come to think of it smoked with anyone that did not agree. That said it is possible for medical users or people with maybe very different metabolisms to be this way, to their loss.
Almost anything could be.
-Sams

Click to expand...

To our loss? Why?

I know you've stated that your experience is boring/flat and all of your testers agreed but why does that anecdotal evidence appear to, from your wording, hold more water than my own anecdotal experience? I could quote experiences of others in support groups that have echoed the same sentiment as my own however it really adds nothing of value to the case.

I agree that out could be different metabolisms, etc , and anything could be, but I do not understand the insinuation intended by 'to their loss'.


Also, what was your source of pure THC, you haven't said yet? I shared my sources and would like to further understand the differences in our experiences. Possibly the differences stem from the source so it would be valuable information.

Sam_Skunkman said:

First you did not describe if you ate it, smoked it, sub-lingual, up yer keyster, or how?
I tried it many times with and without terpenes, mostly vaped, I know pure THC.
We all took (a dozen subjects) it first thing in the morning before any smoking of Cannabis. and only one test a day, 25mg THC vaped with or without Terpenes all double blind with a 100 question organoleptic survey before and after the test. All subjects were in agreement abut the effects of pure THC. We also tried THC alone and/or with the top Cannabinoids pure, like THCV, and the top ten terpenes with and without pure THC 25 mg THC in each case.

What was the THC you took? I ask because you are the first person that has said they took pure THC? Where did you buy it? What brand? Many people have asked me where they could get it. Mine was a controlled substance I obtained legally here in the EU with a license, but I have special access.
How would you describe it? 100% pure THC? You have not said. Was it compared with a same amount of THC but with terpenes? Like in a dry sift resin or herbal Cannabis?
To me pure THC is boring compared to THC in resin in dry sift, that is great! I did the work with Rob Clarke he and I were in agreement.
All the subjects agreed on pure THC, they were all heavy smokers except one, but he agreed also, they were mostly fairly well know consumers of Cannabis that understand Cannabis very well. Did you ever try pure THCA? Orally? I will let you say what you think before I comment.
The 2nd real proof was 25mg pure THC vaped and then an hour later .25 mg of an equal mix of pure THC and a THC dry sifted resin that was rich in terpenes and was 50 % THC by weight so the mixture was 75% THC, and 25 mg was about twice as strong to subjects then pure THC. The resin does need the right terpenes to potentiate and modify the THC, we used dry sift resin from Skunk #1 it worked.
And all commented that pure THC was flat and boring compared to the same amount of THC in a joint or resin that was also terpene rich.
-SamS

Click to expand...

He mentions it in this post

weedaholic721 said:

He mentions it in this post

Click to expand...

Kind of but not really. Its a controlled substance that I obtained legally in the eu with a license does not answer much at all. I was asked brand, where I acquired said substance, was it tested, what was the source of THC and other canabanoids etc. I suppose I could've just answered, 'I have a legal means of obtaining this schedule 1 substance' and left it at that, but that doesn't really give anyone any info.

In my case since we are throwing out THC acetate and only looking at the synthetic version in dronabinol it would be useful to compare all the same factors that were asked about my source of THC.

weedaholic721 said:

Thanks for the response to this topic. I was mainly concerned about the chemistry theory involved, but Sam and Grey Wolf do have great insights on the uses of end product, which I honestly did not give much thought. After giving it some thought, I still think it could have some use.

First, I will address the chemistry. The link in the link posted by G.O. Joe shows that a very similar procedure has been done using hashish of unknown potency and diluted NaOH. The idea with the sodium bicarbonate is that it would selectively remove only cannabinoid acids but not delta-9 or CBN, leaving mostly THCa and CBDa. Since fatty acids are removed during initial extraction(winterization and possible activated carbon rinse--as in GW Pharm patent) then there would be minimal in final product. This also would hopefully mean very minimal emulsion would form. Other then that, I feel this would work and I plan on testing it but will take time as I lack the majority of the supplies. The input here has definitely helped. I am very interested as I could not find that it had been done and seems to be a common way of extracting carboxlic acids.

Now to the use of said product if said product using this method would work lol:

I completely agree with the majority here, which is that terpenes are very important to the pleasurable effects as they seem to modulate the effect of delta9-THC. On advantage, I see is that you can control the amount of delta9-THC in a dose more readily then extracting straight from cannabis as you have greater control of the conversion to THC and dreaded CBN. Given that THCa could be useful as the base cannabinoid with terpenes possible added at given ratio to give a controlled effect. Terpenes could be distilled from an extract of cannabis, or mixed together from other plant sources.

Another idea could be that you decarb the THCa to given THCa:THC ratio for edibles for a good controlled dose. THEN as needed for the given ailment, smaller breakthrough doses of a specific strain could be used to modulate THC already present to given the wanted effect.

Click to expand...

Meds decarbed to a specific level, unless that level is 100%, are unstable and will change with time, increasing the oral effects.

Some processes, like the one Growgodess propounds, ages the extract for extended periods to naturally decarboxylate and retain the monoterpenes.

youareaniceguy said:

To our loss? Why?

Because if terpenes did work for you they would help you that is all I meant. Nothing more.

I know you've stated that your experience is boring/flat and all of your testers agreed but why does that anecdotal evidence appear to, from your wording, hold more water than my own anecdotal experience? I could quote experiences of others in support groups that have echoed the same sentiment as my own however it really adds nothing of value to the case.

Maybe because I do not know what your level of experience is, while I know and respect Rob Clarke and the others, understand?

I agree that out could be different metabolisms, etc , and anything could be, but I do not understand the insinuation intended by 'to their loss'.

I answered that above pretty clear.


Also, what was your source of pure THC, you haven't said yet? I shared my sources and would like to further understand the differences in our experiences. Possibly the differences stem from the source so it would be valuable information.

Click to expand...

You will not have access to the source we had, we also have the ability to synthesize compounds and we were fully licensed to make, or isolate any Cannabinoid, does that help you?
We never sold any Cannabinoids we isolated ever.
-SamS

youareaniceguy said:

Kind of but not really. Its a controlled substance that I obtained legally in the eu with a license does not answer much at all. I was asked brand, where I acquired said substance, was it tested, what was the source of THC and other canabanoids etc. I suppose I could've just answered, 'I have a legal means of obtaining this schedule 1 substance' and left it at that, but that doesn't really give anyone any info.

In my case since we are throwing out THC acetate and only looking at the synthetic version in dronabinol it would be useful to compare all the same factors that were asked about my source of THC.

Click to expand...

Yours was Sativex, "Marinol" and THC acetate but you did not say where you bought them or how you were able to obtain them either. As for pure THC. It is unobtainable in the USA by patients. As Gray Wolf says THC is unstable so we used THCA frozen and in stored in an inert gas vial, that when opened started to break down as you could see, it was a clear thick gel that when exposed to air and light started turning purple/violet and then to yellow/orange /red after a few days. t also had zero smell or taste, if you put a tiny drop on your tongue it had zero taste al all, anyone that thinks they have pure THC see if it has color, smell, or taste if so it is not pure THC. But you do not have access to it regardless.
-SamS

I tried sativex while abroad, however I stated that was CBD/THC. Dronabinol is pure THC with sesame oil and is available to patients in the U.S. I mentioned that I was prescribed this medication so I thought it would follow that I got it from a pharmacy. As for the THC acetate, it was not bought, it was made in our own lab when we had one, we know what we are doing.

I'm interested in discussing this matter further, not getting to your source. You say you have a 'source' and you also say you have the ability to synthesize compounds, so, is there a difference in the process or product made by your 'source' and the compounds which you choose to synthesize yourself? Why be so vague, especially if you are or were at the time licensed to obtain them?

Eh, scrap it, this isn't getting me or this thread anywhere so maybe we should just return to the topic and I'll stop my derailment. Thank you to Sam for the discussion and apologies to OP for being an attention hog.

I think supercritical Co2 with varying concentrations of EtOH cosolvent is by far the most efficient selective extraction technique. As MostlyMe pointed out, you would need a phase transfer catalyst to bring THCA into the aqueous phase. If said PTC even exists it's certainly not cheap.

Never really thought about pure THC, I'm much more concerned with conserving terpenes than removing them

weedaholic721 said:

Ok so I have an idea for a extraction technique that could theoretically yield fairly pure THCa and by extension delta9-THC.

The basis of this procedure relies on the fact that THCa is carboxylic acid. Carboxylic acids generally have a low pka, meaning a weak acid will remove the hydrogen for the carboxylic acid forming an ion that is water soluable. ...

Click to expand...

Verwey, A.M.A.; and Witte, A.H.; A rapid method of preparation of THC by Isolation of THCA from hashish; Pharm. Weekblad, 107:415-416, 1972.

Patent(s) referencing the above citation said:

In 1972, Verwey and Witte reported a method for the preparation of THC by isolation of THC acid from hashish. The hexane extract was shaken with 2% NaOH solution as well as 2% sodium sulphite in an extraction funnel. The alkaline layer was rendered acidic with H2SO4(pH<2), thus precipitating the cannabinoid acids. The oily layer as well as the oily deposits on the wall were extracted with ether. The acid-base extraction process was repeated. THC was obtained from the impure acids by heating the ether solution containing the acids on a sand bath with a temperature of 300° C. The ether being evaporated, the evaporating dish was for a moment kept on the sand bath, in this way causing decarboxylation of THC acid. The THC was cleaned by preparative TLC.

Click to expand...

I've been recreational user (or so I thought) for years/aeons...Fell down the med rabbit-hole when oldest son was diagnosed with a glioblastoma. Now, I'm chowing down on every scrap, parcel and splinter of information that I can find to gnaw on...medical studies, anecdotal evidence, misinformation, disinfomration - it's all grist for the mill. Life in wartime. Keeping in mind that due to the forces of Prohibition, much remains like the resemblance of a mirage of quicksand and I try to be discerning. Lots of anecdotal evidence points to something is going on - even if we don't know what it is, do we Mr. Jones?

Long way of saying that at one point in my son's odyssey, he was incredibly fucked-up by the tender mercies of western medicine...while the tumor is non-operable, he had gone through a number of insults to the brain including radiation, biopsy and the installation of a shunt due to edema caused by the radiation and biopsy. As well as horrifying steroid but that's another story. At about this time, I was able to speak with two trusted providers who both recommended treating the swelling and what have you with THCa pills...the reason given by both -independently of one another- is that THCa is a VERY strong anti-inflammatory and it would be best -given his deficits- to tread the swelling and liquid immediately and deal with the tumor after.

Whether THCa is a proven, peer-reviewed, potent anti-inflammatory or not in the medical world, I can tell you that my son's considerable symptoms started abating immediately upon taking the THCa and progressed to the disappearance of almost all of his major deficits. Not quite but astounding - and I'm not a cheap date. Can this be attributed to other things? Undoubtedly - although I understand that the neuro-onc was excited and delighted. At the least, however, it has made me very interested in both the administration of individual cannabinoids, as well as, the entourage effect of the entire band jamming at once.

So - long and short, this is a fascinating discussion. While I'm still firmly rooted in the belief that recreational IS medicinal, I am VERY interested in learning about the individual components and the possibilities they may hold.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25311884

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2219532/

https://books.google.nl/books?id=hP...age&q=does THCA bind to CB1 receptors&f=false

As Far as I know THCA does not bind to the CB1.