b. caapi 30x extract

[lightwill]

You need to have it professionally analyzed to know just how pure it actually is. Any number of things could have precipitated out with the alkaloids.

for some reason i was expecting you would say that. does that mean you think banisteriopsis caapi only has 1/2% total alkaloids? if so, i am sure there is some 'professional' research data available on the internet which indicates actual alkaloidal content of assayed banisteriopsis spp. as i said previously, i have not done much research on this topic except for my own experiments... then again, i wonder if there actually is any factual data readily available in net land.

in any case, professional or not, i know for a fact caapi has more than 1/2% alkaloids. is would be simply ridiculous to assume otherwise.

 

[69ron]

98% purity is very high. I wouldn’t claim 98% purity for an actual product until a third party analyzed it that specializes in such tests.

Banisteriopsis caapi is pretty complex. There are a whole bunch of alkaloids in it that could mess up the purity tests. It’s not going to be easy to test the purity because it’s not 1 alkaloid you’re extracting, it’s a bunch of them.

 

[lightwill]

I understand what you are saying and I agree. 98% is pretty high especially using the method that was used as there is a margin for error due to unwanted compounds precipitating.

However, insolubility in ethanol would be one way to prove the carbonate is not in the finished product. not the easiest way because it is a hassle to dehydrate 190. a much simpler way would be to measure a sample of the almost finished product and a/b extract, as I said. this would yield only alkaloids because nothing else is soluble in a non polar solution at alkaline ph. at least in the case of an alkaloidal mixture + some possible carbonate contaminate, as would the case here.

and i know there is a bunch of alkaloids in caapi, thats the point right? when I speak yield percentages for banisteriopsis caapi i am speaking of total yield of mixed alkaloids. thats the desired product in this case, that is what i am referring to.

a brief look at a search engine about alkaloidal content of caapi yielded this:


All reported percentages are by dry wt.
(Other alkaloids, if present, are not included in this list.)
Locale Country People Name Collector or #
Part Total alkaloid harmine harmaline tetrahydroharmine

Banisteriopsis caapi:
Upper Purus River Peru Culina "tsipi makuni"
Leaves 0.28 0.26 - -
Stems 0.11 0.1 - 0.001
Branches 0.14 0.13 0.001 0.001
Branches (freeze-dried) 0.19 0.15 trace 0.01
Roots (freeze-dried) 0.92 0.37 0.14 0.4
Upper Purus River, Peru Culina "tsipu wetseni"
Stems 0.11 0.1 0.001 0.002
Branches/Leaves (freeze-dried) 0.35 0.24 0.01 0.04
Roots 1.95 0.8 0.33 0.72
Upper Purus River, Peru Sharanhua "shuri fisopa"
Leaves 0.45 0.41 trace 0.005
Stems 0.21 0.14 0.01 0.05
Roots 0.64 0.58 0.02 0.04
Seeds 0.91
Upper Purus River, Peru Sharanhua "shuri oshinipa"
Leaves 0.70 0.55 trace 0.001
Stems 0.20 0.17 0.002 0.02
Roots 0.71 0.55 0.04 0.11
near Iquitos, Peru Mestizos "piturijacu"
Stems 0.57 0.36 0.03 0.17
Branches 0.37 0.24 0.01 0.06
Ecuador Ecuador Pinkley #445
Stems 0.35 0.22 0.02 0.1

Banisteriopsis caapi cultivars
Tarapoto, Peru cultivated Plowman & Martin #1805
Stems 0.83 0.51 0.03 0.2
Tarapoto, Peru "cielo-ayahuasca" DMCK #110
Stems 0.74 0.53 0.11 0.095
Huallaga, Peru Pilluana-R. "pucahuasca" DMCK #124
Stems 1.25 0.59 0.32 0.33
Peru Peru Pto. Almendra DMCK #125
Stems 1.36 0.64 0.38 0.2
Iquitos, Peru "cielo-ayahuasca" DMCK #126
Stems 0.17 0.06 0.08 0.03
Tarapoto, Peru "rumi-ayahuasca" DMCK #128
Stems 0.86 0.44 0.21 0.15
Tarapoto, Peru "cielo-ayahuasca" Plowman #6041
Stems 0.28 0.10 0.05 0.13

Banisteriopsis spp:
Peru Peru Piro "kamalampi" G. Baer
Stems 0.65 0.27 0.06 0.31
Peru Peru Matsigenga G. Baer
Stems 0.65 0.44 0.05 0.14

Banisteriopsis sp (probably):
Acre Territory, Brazil G.T.Prance #7498
Stems 0.31 0.27 0.01 0.02
Upper Purus River, Peru Sharanahua "shuri oshinipa"
Stems 0.41 0.36 0.01 0.03
Upper Purus River, Peru Sharanahua "shuri fisopa"
Roots 0.61 0.45 0.04 0.12
Upper Purus River, Peru Sharanahua "shuri oshopa"
Stems 0.20 0.16 0.004 0.03
Upper Purus River, Peru Marinahua "tukondi"
Part??? 0.20 0.19 - 0.006
Ucayali River, Peru Mestizos "ayahuasca"
Leaves (freeze-dried) 1.90 1.62 trace 0.1
Stems 0.39 0.29 - 0.02
Iquitos, Peru Mestizos "cielo-ayahuasca" or "ayahuasca-blanca"
Leaves 0.25 0.245 - -
Table above drawn from Rivier & Lindgren 1972 and McKenna et al. 1984a


Which both proves and disproves my point, and also validates what you are saying. there is a huge range of variability in the banisteriopsis caapi plant. especially depending on what plant part we are speaking of.

internally i know that my cielo caapi has more than 1/2% alkaloids, that is really the point i am trying to make. not that my product is absolutely pure.

however, because i feel challenged, i am going to do an acid base extraction on a measured sample of my product. if for nothing more thanb to prove the results to myself. i will share them anyway in case anyone is interested.

 

[lightwill]

Well, I tried to purify a 5gm sample of my product using standard A/B techniques. For some reason I cannot get the alkaloids to migrate from the aqueous layer to the organic layer. This was checked using UV light. Setting that aside for now. Maybe this is due to the ammonium hydroxide I added as a base. Has anybody ever succeeded in a typical A/B extraction using Banisteriopsis caapi, I wonder?

So I began to search looking for teks because I do not want to waste my 5gm of very pure alkaloid, but it looks like that may be the case unless another solution is found.

What I did not realize is that this topic has already been discussed at length on this forum. I found the thread using google actually. This is the only thread, well, this and one other, that I have even read since my arrival to the nexus. So here is what I found:

B. Caapi Extraction - Full Sprectrum Extract & Purification [Tek-Pics] - Harmalas - Welcome to the DMT-Nexus

for the sake of continuity i post this link so we can all dance in a circle. ha ha just kidding, but what I do not understand, is how the poster of the above link is able to derive pure crystals at a 1.5% yield from Banisteriopsis caapi vine while my attempts, using the exact same process, are invalid due to lack of professional analysis. this doesn't make much sense to me.

after reviewing his post, it seems that everybody agreed with him that his product is pure, and that a pure product is attainable using said procedure..... So why I am not able to use the same procedure to attain pure product?

In any case, it is clearly obvious from my work and the work of the individual who posted the above linked thread, that Banisteriopsis caapi vine has *significantly* more alkaloidal content than .5%.

To review, the only way a 200X is even possible is that the biomass has only .5% total alkaloid content. THIS IS CLEARLY NOT THE CASE WITH BANISTERIOPSIS CAAPI VINE.

Debunked. Period.

The strongest possible extract from caapi vine is 100X and anything else is a lie.

That is my opinion based on sound research and observation. I am done discussing this matter.

 

[lightwill]

to append my previous statement, as it is not so absolutely true, there is one way to have 200X from Banisteriopsis caapi vine.

IF YOU START WITH REALLY SHITTY BIOMASS.

But other than that, it's not possible.

 

[69ron]

I’m not sure what point you’re making exactly. You keep talking about this 0.5% thing. I’m not sure why.

Several vendors sale 200X caapi extracts. One sales 200x, 100x, and 5x. I'm sure you've seen them. Those are the standard potency sales pitches.

The 200x is pure alkaloids. The 100x is 50% pure. They sale at different prices and their effects are as expected. The 200x is twice as potent as the 100x, the 50x is 5 times as potent as the 10x, etc.

Whether they are actually 200x obviously depends on the strain used. It’s more of an advertising thing than an actual potency. SWIM has purchased 200x, 100x, 30x, 10x, and 5x, and the 200x is the best of the X's you can get. SWIM has not purchased from every single vendor there is though. Only a few places carry 200x because of the high price in having pure alkaloids.

Caapi contains from 0.1%-2% alkaloids. It varies widely just like P. harmala does. It’s alkaloid mix varies more than P. harmala does though. Some strains are very high in THH, nearly pure THH, while others are nearly pure harmine, but most are a mix of the two. Some even have substantial amounts of harmaline and other alkaloids. Each variety has a different mix of alkaloids, and even among the same variety large variances exist.

As far as advertising goes, the 200x means pure alkaloids. The 100x means 50% pure. That's all it means. It's an advertising standard that's been adopted by the sellers of caapi extracts. If you start advertising your extract as 100x to mean pure alkaloids, while others are selling 200x to mean pure alkaloids, it's not going to be a good advertising move because the general public is going to think the 200x is better than your 100x.

 

[lightwill]

Here is the point I am making.

To sell pure alkaloids as 200X is a lie. The only way this could be honest is if the total alkaloid content of the caapi vine was 1/2%. 1gm "200X" alkaloids = 200gm biomass = 5gm "200X" alkaloids per KG Biomass = 1/2% total alkaloid content. That is the math.

My point is that if somebody is yielding 10-15gm of pure alkaloids per KG of caapi then this is not 200X. It is 100X or less. That means pure alkaloids is 100X.

Everything you just stated about the variability of the alkaloids in the different caapi plants is known and understood. This does not change the fact of simple math. To me, it is not about advertising when I am speaking about a product, it is about truth and proper explanation. If vendors are saying they have 200X when their caapi vine had more than 1% alkaloids, they are not being honest.

If I yield 10gm of pure alkaloids from a KG of caapi, I will sell it as 100X.

 

[69ron]

If I yield 10gm of pure alkaloids from a KG of caapi, I will sell it as 100X.

Try to look at it from a buyer’s point of view. SWIM is a buyer and that would not look good to SWIM.

People will see other vendors selling 200x and think it's more potent than your stuff because the current standard is that 200x means pure and anything less is less than pure.

You can go against the standards already in place, but I just don't think it's a good idea. Because of the current vendors’ standards, people expect 200x to be pure alkaloids for caapi, and then you’re going to try to tell them it’s not. I don’t know. That doesn’t seem logical to me. Many people will assume you are selling them weak crap and trying to make it sound more potent than it is with marketing hype, if they even bother to read the marketing text about it (and most people probably won’t).

 

[Infundibulum]

Well, I tried to purify a 5gm sample of my product using standard A/B techniques. For some reason I cannot get the alkaloids to migrate from the aqueous layer to the organic layer. This was checked using UV light. Setting that aside for now. Maybe this is due to the ammonium hydroxide I added as a base. Has anybody ever succeeded in a typical A/B extraction using Banisteriopsis caapi, I wonder?

You'll have pretty hard time finding a solvent for pulling freebase harmalas with a good solvent. They don't seem to dissolve very easily in the standard solvents used.

Whereas, say freebase spice will dissolve freely in alcohols, aromatics, aliphatics, terpenes etc, SWIM has not found a good solvent yet for freebase harmalas.

This is why people go for precipitations from basic solutions (after having cleaned the acid phase with 3-4 Manske precipitation)

 

[lightwill]

If I yield 10gm of pure alkaloids from a KG of caapi, I will sell it as 100X.

Try to look at it from a buyer’s point of view. SWIM is a buyer and that would not look good to SWIM.

People will see other vendors selling 200x and think it's more potent than your stuff because the current standard is that 200x means pure and anything less is less than pure.

You can go against the standards already in place, but I just don't think it's a good idea. Because of the current vendors’ standards, people expect 200x to be pure alkaloids for caapi, and then you’re going to try to tell them it’s not. I don’t know. That doesn’t seem logical to me. Many people will assume you are selling them weak crap and trying to make it sound more potent than it is with marketing hype, if they even bother to read the marketing text about it (and most people probably won’t).

Thanks for your input, I do appreciate it. Really though, properly representing my product is more important to me than what a buyer 'may think'. If somebody can't feel the energy resonance encoded into the site and the products we provide, well, maybe they don't need the product. I think your impression of our intentions may be a bit skewed. This is not about maximizing profits, customers, or marketability. It is about providing an impeccable service that is at least equal but generally far surpassing what most others offer.

My life's perspective is based on frequencies, harmonious and otherwise. If somebody logs onto to the site and feels internal resonance with what we are representing, they will try the product. If they try the product, they will know, first hand. So then the numbers become hardly relevant, and internally I know that I am not a liar.

As far as I am interested, the other vendors who sell "200X": if their caapi yields more than 5gm alkaloids per KG, they are liars. I am not judging them, nor do I have anything against them. I can only be responsible for myself and my own actions. To me, truth is sacred and my words are impeccable. The ability to manifest ones intended reality is completely based on the level of honesty the being has achieved, internally with ones own thoughts, and externally- all the thoughtforms one projects to the world. This philosophy, my entire existence is based upon, and there is no chance of it changing now because other vendors have created a standard of misrepresenting their products. If I need to re-define the current parameters for marketing caapi extract in order to be truthful to myself and others, then so be it.

And just to make a point of the matter, I am going to sell it for as little as possible. I am here to take care of the people, not to bolster some psuedo-market. To me it is all medicine and healing and energy exchange. Nothing more, nothing less.

I have purchased some 'dedicated' (food grade) equipment, large vacuum filtration apparatus, large soxhlet apparatus, several flasks. I am ready to go, and this ain't no joke friends. You'll see...

Well, I tried to purify a 5gm sample of my product using standard A/B techniques. For some reason I cannot get the alkaloids to migrate from the aqueous layer to the organic layer. This was checked using UV light. Setting that aside for now. Maybe this is due to the ammonium hydroxide I added as a base. Has anybody ever succeeded in a typical A/B extraction using Banisteriopsis caapi, I wonder?

You'll have pretty hard time finding a solvent for pulling freebase harmalas with a good solvent. They don't seem to dissolve very easily in the standard solvents used.

Whereas, say freebase spice will dissolve freely in alcohols, aromatics, aliphatics, terpenes etc, SWIM has not found a good solvent yet for freebase harmalas.

This is why people go for precipitations from basic solutions (after having cleaned the acid phase with 3-4 Manske precipitation)

Ah, thanks for this. I think you just saved me a bunch of time. A friend in Brazil had great success using Chloroform for above mentioned purpose, and this worked fine for him. But after reading your input I am guessing chloroform is probably one of very few that would work... I don't have any. As I am very hesitant to waste medicine, I was going to try other ways of recovery... Knowing chloroform worked and guessing it may have been the ammonia I added which prevented the heptane from working, I had intended to boil the ammonia out of the aqueous phase and try to re-extract it. But this text confirms what I had hoped was not true.... Difficult solubility of betacarbolines in most non polar solvents... Oh Well... I have already added to much NaCL and carbonate and ammonia ha ha to the aqueous phase to formulate any ideas regarding salvage... I guess that one goes down the drain, but a valuable lesson has been learned!

thanks for the help everybody... I hope nobody has the wrong impression from my 'argumentative' nature.... I suppose this is one way for me to learn from others.

Much Love & Light & Peace to All... Happy Yule.

 

[69ron]

Lightwill, it's not just about profit. You need to make the product look attractive or no one will buy it. If you advertise 100x and everyone buys the competitors' 200x, then you're point about helping people doesn't quite work because the medicine no one buys benefits no one. Think about that a little. If you want to help people, the product needs to be attractive. The more attractive it is, the more people will use it, and the more you will help people.

If you make it look like a scam, no one will buy it. I think selling a 100x and saying it's as potent as a 200x looks like a scam. Selling something that looks like a scam to the buyers is not at all good. That will scare people away.

 

[lightwill]

My friend,
I am not sure why you are making all the negative assumptions. First of all, as I stated before earlier in this thread- I have over 150 loyal customers who have sampled several of the offerings of the site and have received only the highest praises regarding these products. Each and every sale that has been been facilitated through the site has resulted in a satisfied, happy customer. When new products are introduced, these same customers are going to be the primary market. Nobody will think anything we sell is a scam, because they know for themselves the truth. When our customers see high resolution photo's of pure caapi alkaloids, nobody will question anything or assume negativity. What happens after our loyal customer base samples the product? Well, they post about it in forums. I think you know this. The numbers are not relevant. Whether they perceive something as ____X for $___ does not really matter. When the product is sampled, the truth will be known.

Of course if no medicine is sold, then it will help nobody. But this will not be an issue. The only issue will be how much of my time is required to produce the supply which will be demanded once the reality of the situation is understood.

Again many thanks for your input on this matter.. Interacting with you and others throughout this discussion has thrown quite a few logs on the fire of inspiration regarding this particular product. it has encouraged me to blaze up the fire, hotter and hotter. so mote it be.

 

[lightwill]

You know, I just had an afterthought. I hope this makes everybody happy. I won't advertise the X factor. I will simply label the product "pure alkaloids". No need to go around calling everybody liars. I am not here to set people back, to each his/her own.