The numbers on single solvent dewaxing? not good

[whiterasta]

Thats a study on hemp bast fibers, we are extracting flowers for resin. What about the waxes similar to these under c40

http://lipidlibrary.aocs.org/Lipids/waxes/index.htm
Table 1. The major constituents of plant leaf waxes.

n-Alkanes CH3(CH2)xCH3 21 to 35C - odd numbered Alkyl esters CH3(CH2)xCOO(CH2)yCH3 34 to 62C - even numbered Fatty acids CH3(CH2)xCOOH 16 to 32C - even numbered Fatty alcohols (primary) CH3(CH2)yCH2OH 22 to 32C - even numbered Fatty aldehydes CH3(CH2)yCHO 22 to 32C - even numbered Ketones CH3(CH2)xCO(CH2)yCH3 23 to 33C - odd numbered Fatty alcohols (secondary) CH3(CH2)xCHOH (CH2)yCH3 23 to 33C - odd numbered β-Diketones CH3(CH2)xCOCH2CO(CH2)yCH3 27 to 33C - odd numbered Triterpenols Sterols, α-amyrin, β-amyrin, uvaol, lupeol, erythrodiol Triterpenoid acids Ursolic acid, oleanolic acid, etc

Hemp is Cannabis Sativa and the bast fiber is the one of the lowest lipid portions of the plant. The lipid fraction is not different from drug cannabis except drug cannabis is usually higher in resin therefore waxes also.

 

[whiterasta]

Have you smoked 99.9% resin head dry sift? I have smoke dabs that seem stronger in THC but THC alone is boring, terpenes are the key..
I never press my hash, taste is much better to me when it is unpressed.
As for enough terpenes, according to who? I guarantee that higher terpene levels found in dry sift give a stronger and better high, then water hash or extracts which are terpene poor.
No question. Have you ever vaped 100% pure THC alone, or any of the other Cannabinoids, with or without single terpenes added?
-SamS

I have smoked pure THC and THC acetate and like marinol they are lacking. As to your statement about terpenes I agree to a point. I guess you did not read the point that one can easily steam distill out a potent terpene fraction to add back to an extract deemed lacking. Also as I said a second solvent product is NOT devoid of effective terpenes it is just lower. This is for a vaporized product though only all a fully terpenated product does in an edible is make it bitter then you stomach denatures them.
And yes I have added back linalool, mycene , limonene and pinene to the product and found an interesting effect from single moieties that has led to an emerging theory of a triphasic entourage effect that includes the flavinoids that modulate the receptor bed

 

[whiterasta]

Okay some things are starting to click here; the sock puppet comment specifically --- I’m "jd2",(only because jd was already taken), I am not "jdee". I started to wonder if that’s what you were poking at when jdee posted right behind me the other day.

I don’t know anybody here. I have a professional career, and don’t feel comfortable stating much about my personal life on this forum.

I almost called you “Jimmy”, but decided not to after your response re one of the other guys who did. So I take it, Jim is okay?

I really do think you missed judged where people were coming from in response to your open statement.

In a forum like this, it’s difficult to fully judge “intent” just based on text which is void of emotional expression. Your title didn’t help much.

Simply put, and I hope it’s clear to you now; people aren’t reacting to a discussion on process appropriateness in terms of improving product, as much as to the apparent hypocriticalness because of the way you started the discussion, subject title and you’re apparent inability to understand what people were reacting to.

In retrospect it’s all kind of silly; in face to face discussions the stupid stuff gets solved a lot easier. (well sometimes)

Not an excuse but I have Asberger's and often come off wrong. Living example of having a lot of skill and no social ability for the most part. Once I get the flow going however I am very accomidating. And I soooo agree that ext is a block to real understanding. The same presentation that came off poorly in text if delivered with my facial expressions and the vibe of my intent present...well I would do better in a lot of things I f i could do that in some situations. FWIW again I am NOT against concentrates or vaping them, only against the waxes found in solvent extracts.

 

[whiterasta]

Need to explain that there is a huge difference between the waxes in a natural separation opposed to a solvent strip. For one thing the pellicle waxes are oriented with a polar moiety at one end which clings to the pellicle and a NP end that is presented outward. In a natural separation this orientation is undisturbed. In a solvent strip the polar and non-polar moieties are free and will form chains and complexes not found in natural plant material.As well the substituted lipids can be easily altered by solvent suspension, especially in the presence of some of the terpenes. Bottom line is if you want to have chemical reactions having the stuff in a solvent is how to do it. There is a real chemical reason a solvent strip is a different extract than a mechanical one.

 

[whiterasta]

I may have been a bit harsh on you but your methods for starting a discussion are a bit... umm... just odd.

There have been so many individuals who have tried to denounce extracts and particularly butane extracts in the past with arguments like "All butane has mercaptan in it no matter what" blah POISON blah blah WAaaahhh!... etc. etc. that your agenda seemed to be to demonize concentrates in general.

When someone who doesn't often post in the concentrates forum comes in with a particularly strong tone, sorry but zee pitchforks come out man.

That being said I'd like to see more objective analysis on the subject.
Most of us extract at as low a temperature as possible to minimize wax. What's optimal vs practical? What does that temp/dissolution curve look like?

What can be expected from single solvent dewax done in the freezer over several days? What are the results with ethanol vs. acetone? What is left after dual solvent processing?

A crowd funded open source mass spec. would also be nice...

Anyway, one of the aspects of your arguments against any level of wax in concentrates (which you really, really didn't outline) was that in natural cannabis or hash the presence of beneficial terpenoids such as azulene fully counteract the presence of parrafins.

While that may be 100% true, it is a ....bit of a stretch to make don't ya think?

Smoking hash with all the paraffin in it is OK but ingesting concentrate with (pick a number) percent paraffin in it is bad.

The number of people throwing up the "Are you fucking serious?" flag might be... well... significant.

Look, at this point I'm not trying to be harsh at all, but the research needed to even make a slightly believable case for that theory could take twenty years due to the number of variables involved. (and really, you might be right...)

Let me put it in another way: (in jest, redneck television commercial version)

"Folks, y'all know how we've told you smoking is bad? Like fer the past twenty years? Well.... gosh darn it, but we dang found a natural compound that makes it safe to smoke again! Smoke weed or tobacco with this added compound all yer want!"

That's how I see a lot of people perceiving such a notion. Before we start trying to get wax levels in concentrates into the parts per million level we need to look at a whole lot of other things beforehand. And if there is a case to reduce wax content to that level by regulation, consumer driven need or other market forces present it in such a way that the entire community can look at it objectively and make their own decisions on it.

We all would like to see more use of, and research into this amazing plant but the public is going to need a bit of time to absorb the notion of it.

TL;DR

meh, some of your points may have merit but there's a much bigger picture to consider okay?

RB

We got off on the wrong foot and I am sorry for it. I welcome your questions and will do my best to address what I can. I ahve an appointment on the Adam Dunn Show today in a few and will touch base later. FWIW there is a much bigger picture to consider and I hope to show you what I believe it is.

 

[KiefSweat]

Need to explain that there is a huge difference between the waxes in a natural separation opposed to a solvent strip. For one thing the pellicle waxes are oriented with a polar moiety at one end which clings to the pellicle and a NP end that is presented outward. In a natural separation this orientation is undisturbed. In a solvent strip the polar and non-polar moieties are free and will form chains and complexes not found in natural plant material.As well the substituted lipids can be easily altered by solvent suspension, especially in the presence of some of the terpenes. Bottom line is if you want to have chemical reactions having the stuff in a solvent is how to do it. There is a real chemical reason a solvent strip is a different extract than a mechanical one.

not being a chemist, what type of reaction is going on? in other types of solvent extracts you need to use harsh acids and other chemicals to see a reaction to convert one molecule to another.

does SFE co2 have the same problem as well?

 

[whiterasta]

if you will open the document I attached note the fatty acids and alcohols? in a solution they will form esters (column on the right) but what is formed is a crap shoot unlike those produced in the plant which are carefully formed with specific enzymes and processes.In a randomized solution ,as in an extraction the esters formed will be random and largely unknown. Another is rancidity or oxidation of the fatty acids which can happen to aged plant material also but is greatly increased when the structures of the plant which protect them from O2 are removed by a solvent strip. The number of reactions possible is quite large. The actual amount of reaction occurring will only be know by analysis of the lipid fractions.Which by this information I hope to influence labs to test for them. When you add up the analysis numbers on a report and just say it is 70% total measured cannabinoids and terpenes. What is the other 30% and why is it not known and reported? This is what I would like to see change. I am not an evangelist and am not here to "save" anyone from themselves...as long as they are making an informed decision, Adults can do what they will. But if you are selling a product to the public it is different and ones responsibility is different. the contents of the product cannot have an "X" the unknown in an analytical report and the consumer has a right to know what it is.

Oh and CO2 is a Non-Polar like butane when run S/C or even Sub S/C so the same issues with less terpenes than butane at the start so very low if winterized and washed.
Hope that helped

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

I think it is apples and oranges to compare a mechanical separation and a chemical one. They remove completely different fractions. And if you are getting waxes in the dry sift in addition to the trichome pellicle, over agitation?

Yes it is except to measure the amount of wax you will get in an solvent extraction from the three sources of materials, resin, dry buds, and leafy materials to get the targeted 75 grams of THC.
No I do not get epicuticular wax in a dry sift that is 99,9% resin heads.

-SamS

 

[whiterasta]

Yes it is except to measure the amount of wax you will get in an solvent extraction from the three sources of materials, resin, dry buds, and leafy materials to get the targeted 75 grams of THC.
No I do not get epicuticular wax in a dry sift that is 99,9% resin heads.

-SamS

I guess I still am not getting what your point is. Are you wanting to determine which has a higher wax load from a solvent extract?. Not really sure it matters if the waxes are removed but the quality of a leafy extract will be less than the bud even winterized and be reflected in the flavor.
Curious how the 99.9% number was developed. To my knowledge there are no assays for this. is this a number you developed? if so I would love to know the technique as I love sift and would like a way to assay purity.

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

I have smoked pure THC and THC acetate and like marinol they are lacking. As to your statement about terpenes I agree to a point. I guess you did not read the point that one can easily steam distill out a potent terpene fraction to add back to an extract deemed lacking. Also as I said a second solvent product is NOT devoid of effective terpenes it is just lower. This is for a vaporized product though only all a fully terpenated product does in an edible is make it bitter then you stomach denatures them.
And yes I have added back linalool, mycene , limonene and pinene to the product and found an interesting effect from single moieties that has led to an emerging theory of a triphasic entourage effect that includes the flavinoids that modulate the receptor bed

So you did add single terpenes to 100% pure THC? You are the first to repeat my work done a decade+ ago. I did maybe 12 terpenes each alone and with with THC, I also tried the top 10 Cannabinoids alone and with pure THC, did you ever try pure THCV?
Which terpenes did you try? Which Cannabinoids did you try?
I tried vaping 100mg pure CBD and was shocked to find I could not get high on THC the rest of the day. Ever do that?
I did not try the terpenes orally I would of next. Same with the 23+ flavinoids found in Cannabis. Flavinoids, did you smoke or Vape them? Which ones did you try? Effects in modifying THC if any,
as I suspected they might?
Pure THC is really need to judge all the modiying effects of the terpenes. Without it you are guessing.
My first test was just with 25mg pure THC, flat boring and lacking all individuality, then later 100% pure THC and an equal wight of a dry sift that was 50% THC by weight, the effects of the 25mg 75% THC in the THC/drysift was twice as strong as 100% pure THC. So then I got terpenes and started testing them with pure THC.
I find this very interesting, my goal was to make single terpene Cannabis varieties that people could try and help determine the terpenes they want and do not want in a variety for a specific end goal, once they had a good idea what they do want, it could be pretty easy to tailor a variety with just those terpenes at the correct ratios and no others you do not want. I would just use the single terpene/THC varieties as the building blocks. I started work and then my health failed and I am now all but retired, but I know others will design and breed custom tailored THC/terpene varieties in the future.
I was just a decade or more ahead of my time.
Like with the single Cannabinoid varieties we developed.
-SamS

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

I guess I still am not getting what your point is. Are you wanting to determine which has a higher wax load from a solvent extract?. Not really sure it matters if the waxes are removed but the quality of a leafy extract will be less than the bud even winterized and be reflected in the flavor.
Curious how the 99.9% number was developed. To my knowledge there are no assays for this. is this a number you developed? if so I would love to know the technique as I love sift and would like a way to assay purity.

I do not have an essay for the 99.9% number it is just a guess by eyeball with maco photos. With a good macro photo you can easily count the heads vs debris if any, I have tested my dry sift via my GC-FID at over 70% THC and it is terpene rich.
It could be counted with a laser optical particle counter if really needed.
-SamS

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

We got off on the wrong foot and I am sorry for it. I welcome your questions and will do my best to address what I can. I ahve an appointment on the Adam Dunn Show today in a few and will touch base later. FWIW there is a much bigger picture to consider and I hope to show you what I believe it is.

Say hi to Adam for me, when he came to Amsterdam I and RCC helped him get started in the Seed biz.
-SamS

 

[KiefSweat]

So you did add single terpenes to 100% pure THC? You are the first to repeat my work done a decade+ ago. I did maybe 12 terpenes each alone and with with THC, I also tried the top 10 Cannabinoids alone and with pure THC, did you ever try pure THCV?
-SamS

sorry to get off track here for a minute
What about cbd? There was some crystallized cbd-acid at the past cup, does cbd itself have that cherry/medicinal flavor? While with all the high cbd oils ive tried there is a slight variation depending on ultimate terp content the effect is the same with all of them. Its rather amazing stuff

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

sorry to get off track here for a minute
What about cbd? There was some crystallized cbd-acid at the past cup, does cbd itself have that cherry/medicinal flavor? While with all the high cbd oils ive tried there is a slight variation depending on ultimate terp content the effect is the same with all of them. Its rather amazing stuff

!00% pure CBD has no or little taste or smell, slightly medicinal. When you smoke it, it turns to an oil and bubbles.
Glad you like it, I do not, it screws up getting high, I don't need CBD or want CBD, I have bred away from it for decades.
That said I do have a high CBD only variety, for medicinal end use, it is 10% CBD at the most with almost zero THC, I have had it for years. Try first smoking 100 mg of pure CBD and then try to get high with THC, good luck, I could not neither could RCC and many others that tried it. Funny because CBD does not bind to the CB! or the CB2 receptors, CBD if smoked with THC does get you high like most Afghan hash and most dry traditional sifted hash world wide, I have even recently heard that 100 mg of CBD smoked will bring you down from a THC high, I did not do it but someone I know and trust did do it. I do not call that amazing, I call it horrible.....
I understand the need for CBD for patients, or folks that do not really want to get to high. That is not me.

-SamS

 

[jd2]

if you will open the document I attached note the fatty acids and alcohols? in a solution they will form esters (column on the right) but what is formed is a crap shoot unlike those produced in the plant which are carefully formed with specific enzymes and processes.In a randomized solution ,as in an extraction the esters formed will be random and largely unknown. Another is rancidity or oxidation of the fatty acids which can happen to aged plant material also but is greatly increased when the structures of the plant which protect them from O2 are removed by a solvent strip. The number of reactions possible is quite large. The actual amount of reaction occurring will only be know by analysis of the lipid fractions.Which by this information I hope to influence labs to test for them. When you add up the analysis numbers on a report and just say it is 70% total measured cannabinoids and terpenes. What is the other 30% and why is it not known and reported? This is what I would like to see change. I am not an evangelist and am not here to "save" anyone from themselves...as long as they are making an informed decision, Adults can do what they will. But if you are selling a product to the public it is different and ones responsibility is different. the contents of the product cannot have an "X" the unknown in an analytical report and the consumer has a right to know what it is.

Oh and CO2 is a Non-Polar like butane when run S/C or even Sub S/C so the same issues with less terpenes than butane at the start so very low if winterized and washed.
Hope that helped

Jim, re your philosophical position; I’ve got a smile on my face.

Assuming we’re talking about adults, we just aren’t going to agree;
My definition of personal responsibility/accountability includes doing minimum “due diligence”. Unless you have a contractual agreement of some sort,ie, labeling, the “burden” is on the user to confirm what it is he/she is shoving down his/her throat. That’s what labs are for.

The only way to successfully do what you suggest is to apply “pharma” type regulations to this industry.

A terrible option in my opinion.

Don’t get “sideways” on me now --- for me this is akin to arguing about religion/politics --- nothing useful is generally accomplished. To me, this isn’t worth any time arguing about. Okay, I’m done, I made my comment. (However, sometimes it can be a lot of fun).


I am interested in a polite technical discussion, if you don’t mind?

I’ve been struggling with your conclusion re that hemp article you posted. I now believe it’s not necessarily an “apples to apples” argument.

Here’s why; Let’s see if I can make my case.

That study looked at hemp fibers in the stalks.

You’re claim is that this is a fundamental “indication” of equivalency to the composition of the “glandular” heads used in BHO extractions when it comes to wax content.


I’m skeptical, here's why;

There is a company that sells a national product based on hemp stalk extraction.

This was motivation enough for me to attempt a stalk extraction for CBD content from some fresh harvested Harliquin.

The lab potency results were disappointing; essentially zero correlation to head content. Of course there was no lipid or fat analysis.

So the question is, have you completed your own lab work that confirms your theory of correlation for wax and fats?



My second question has to do with your comments re the difference between physical vs solvent extraction of components.

First off, let’s talk about the reactive process that you describe in solution; I assume the solvent is acting as a catalyst and not a reactant, is that correct?

Secondly, are the major acidic cannabinoids subjective to this conversion of long chain esters as well? Seems like they would have to be.

Finally, why does it matter? This seems to be more of an “efficiency” issue than anything else. i.e., obviously this isn’t a 100% conversion, so the stuff that does convert just cuts into output.



Maybe this would make more sense to me if you could answer this;

If I have a single glandular head, composed of 50% of long chain waxes, 25% thc-a, 10% cbn-a, 15% mixture of monoterps.

If I successfully dissolve the head in nbutane, (and have zero residues from the solvent), what’s my resultant product?

Do I ultimately end up with more long chain waxes, less or equivalent?


Is this task calculable, can it be simulated, or is this ultimately an empirical endevor?



Okay think of this as a conversation with a curious friend over a cup of coffee.
Regards and thanks.

 

[jd2]

!00% pure CBD has no or little taste or smell, slightly medicinal. When you smoke it, it turns to an oil and bubbles.
Glad you like it, I do not, it screws up getting high, I don't need CBD or want CBD, I have bred away from it for decades.
That said I do have a high CBD only variety, for medicinal end use, it is 10% CBD at the most with almost zero THC, I have had it for years. Try first smoking 100 mg of pure CBD and then try to get high with THC, good luck, I could not neither could RCC and many others that tried it. Funny because CBD does not bind to the CB! or the CB2 receptors, CBD if smoked with THC does get you high like most Afghan hash and most dry traditional sifted hash world wide, I have even recently heard that 100 mg of CBD smoked will bring you down from a THC high, I did not do it but someone I know and trust did do it. I do not call that amazing, I call it horrible.....
I understand the need for CBD for patients, or folks that do not really want to get to high. That is not me.

-SamS

Sam re your CBD strain, is that something you bred?

Do you mind talking about it a little more?

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

Jim, re your philosophical position; I’ve got a smile on my face.

Assuming we’re talking about adults, we just aren’t going to agree;
My definition of personal responsibility/accountability includes doing minimum “due diligence”. Unless you have a contractual agreement of some sort,ie, labeling, the “burden” is on the user to confirm what it is he/she is shoving down his/her throat. That’s what labs are for.

The only way to successfully do what you suggest is to apply “pharma” type regulations to this industry.

A terrible option in my opinion.

Don’t get “sideways” on me now --- for me this is akin to arguing about religion/politics --- nothing useful is generally accomplished. To me, this isn’t worth any time arguing about. Okay, I’m done, I made my comment. (However, sometimes it can be a lot of fun).


I am interested in a polite technical discussion, if you don’t mind?

I’ve been struggling with your conclusion re that hemp article you posted. I now believe it’s not necessarily an “apples to apples” argument.

Here’s why; Let’s see if I can make my case.

That study looked at hemp fibers in the stalks.

You’re claim is that this is a fundamental “indication” of equivalency to the composition of the “glandular” heads used in BHO extractions when it comes to wax content.


I’m skeptical, here's why;

There is a company that sells a national product based on hemp stalk extraction.

This was motivation enough for me to attempt a stalk extraction for CBD content from some fresh harvested Harliquin.

The lab potency results were disappointing; essentially zero correlation to head content. Of course there was no lipid or fat analysis.

So the question is, have you completed your own lab work that confirms your theory of correlation for wax and fats?



My second question has to do with your comments re the difference between physical vs solvent extraction of components.

First off, let’s talk about the reactive process that you describe in solution; I assume the solvent is acting as a catalyst and not a reactant, is that correct?

Secondly, are the major acidic cannabinoids subjective to this conversion of long chain esters as well? Seems like they would have to be.

Finally, why does it matter? This seems to be more of an “efficiency” issue than anything else. i.e., obviously this isn’t a 100% conversion, so the stuff that does convert just cuts into output.



Maybe this would make more sense to me if you could answer this;

If I have a single glandular head, composed of 50% of long chain waxes, 25% thc-a, 10% cbn-a, 15% mixture of monoterps.

If I successfully dissolve the head in nbutane, (and have zero residues from the solvent), what’s my resultant product?

Do I ultimately end up with more long chain waxes, less or equivalent?


Is this task calculable, can it be simulated, or is this ultimately an empirical endevor?



Okay think of this as a conversation with a curious friend over a cup of coffee.
Regards and thanks.

I will butt in for just a point. I have 99.9% resin head hash that is over 70% THC by dry weight. So I suspect the cannabinoid contents by weight is more then the wax or terpenes for sure, also I have never seen that much CBNA in a fresh Cannabis or resin analysis or a dried one, unless really really old. I understand your were just posting a made up example, but I am just giving you some made up advice to go with it.
-SamS

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

Sam re your CBD strain, is that something you bred?

Do you mind talking about it a little more?

I have had it for almost 20 years or longer, it is a result of searching gene banks world wide with a minimum of breeding and selection on my part for CBD% content, it is early and can be grown outdoors easy in Holland and the UK and is legal as it has no THC.
I grew a bunch years ago to supply the Brazilians with CBD for some of their anti-psychotic studies.

-SamS

 

[whiterasta]

Sam, JDee,etc. I am doing production this AM and will address you posts this evening.
Sam. I would very much like to discuss my work on a triphasic entourage effect with the flavinoids. Also your work on dominance of cannabinoid expression.

Jdee, I can give you some of the chemistry behind the "soup" and the many possible reactive species. I need to check the literature on lipid esters so I can give examples of reactions and their products. The bottom line is the pyrolisis products of the secondary lipids not paraffinic are really as bad or worse than paraffin. There is just no work done on exposure as it can only occur when smoking a waxy substance. The analysis of cannabis smoke is the closest thing to a survey of what is formed but due to cncentration the data is not comparable. As I said I really want to discuss these points and will when my workaday is done. Some really good questions and I welcome discussing them. Thanx

 

[KiefSweat]

I notice a mental effect from cbd besides the anti-inflammatory properties. These are from oils that test 75% cbd 2-3% thc from flowers that test under .5%thc

it may bring you "down" a bit but i don't find it inhibits further uptake of thc, later this summer when more oil is available i will have to do more tests.