Plant Extraction Tek: DMT Nexus vs The World?

[mikeAtHome]

When you look at the yields folks seem to be getting here for MHRB and compare them to scholarly research done by DMT Nexus and the outside world, the numbers look pretty good. That’s going strictly by weight. While it may be impossible to give an exact number on the %DMT contained in a typical extraction, I think there’s at least some evidence that it is clean. A thread here on DMT Nexus Recent EEG research on effects of smoked nn-DMT…, uses DMT extracted from MH. They found that it took 20-30mg to attain an “effective psychedelic experience”. That’s in line with what I’ve read around here. I’m making the assumption that the researchers used decent hardware and technique when performing their extraction although that data was not provided.

So we have every reason to believe that both the DMT Nexus tek and the members executing it work fine. Yet I keep coming across what to me appears as a huge disconnect. More experienced members probably know the answer to this but I sure couldn’t figure it out. Here’s what it is:

Nexus tek always (don’t shoot me if there’s an exception) basifies the plant matter.

VS​

The rest of the world uses polar solvents to extract, then basifies the extract (after having removed all plant matter) and proceeds from there using one of several methods to obtain alkaloids in FB form.

And by “the rest of the world” I mean all the references I could find concerning commercial processing of plant matter for the purpose of alkaloid extraction. What got me going was a Reddit question that a lot of pros responded to (some giving references). That “thread” might still be there:
Can anyone help me in finding any appropriate method for alkaloid extraction?. There are also a couple of more serious sites that discuss the topic like General Methods of Extraction and Isolation of Alkaloids (a science/pharma site) and Extraction (Part 1) (that's from UCLA, I could never find Part 2). There are books like: “PHARMACOPOEIAL AND RELATED DRUGS OF BIOLOGICAL ORIGIN” (Evans, 978-0-7020-2933-2) that discusses alkaloids beginning in chapter 26, their history and methods of extraction. There’s a ton of research that has been published. Some of it on extractions and a fair amount of fun reading which sometimes does provide the methodology used for extraction: “Isolation and Identification of Putative Hallucinogenic Constituents from the Roots of Mimosa ophthalmocentra” (L.M. Batista et al.) published in Pharmaceutical Biology, 1999, Vol. 37, No. 1. pp. 50-53. The PDF is out there on the web if you’re interested.
I could go on. I’m not concerned/disturbed about it and I’m certainly not saying there’s any problem with DMT Nexus tek. It’s just weird. And it's kinda nice to be a little different...

The Wikipedia entry for Alkaloids does mention that alkaloids may be extracted by processing the plant material "with alkaline solutions" etc. Strangely enough, that's the only part in the section, "Extraction" that is not footnoted.

 

[SnozzleBerry]

There are a variety of teks on the Nexus, Acid/Base, straight to base, and dryteks. There are hybrids and variations on these three categories, but that pretty much covers everything. Claiming that "the nexus tek" is a "straight to base" isn't accurate, as there is no singular nexus tek and people here don't always use STB. Many people choose STB because they think it's simpler, or it seems like less steps, or they're not familiar with/confident about extractions.

When done properly, A/B, STB, and dryteks should all give similar results for DMT extractions on the same material.

Not trying to shoot you, but this whole thread seems predicated on a fundamental lack of familiarity with the Nexus and the extraction methods offered here.

 

[soulfood]

I generally use STB because it's easier to know where to look for the stuff if my yield is lower than expected. With A/B's in the past I have thrown the plant matter out after making my teas only to find later I probably didn't make enough teas.

That's the only reason really. Pull as much as I can with naphtha, then pull as much as I can with toluene.

I'd much rather do it this way, then clean my extract afterwards than use an A/B trying to get a cleaner product from the start.

But do I realise a difference in affects between DMT extracted with A/B vs STB?

No... I don't.

 

[mikeAtHome]

Claiming that "the nexus tek" is a "straight to base" isn't accurate

No No No... sorry if you got that impression. I wasn't saying that at all! I was just saying that the tek here does seem to always raise the ph, no matter A/B or STB or FASx, in the presence of the plant material. And for some reason, the "world" sees extractions as something that happens when the plant material is combined with a polar solvent. It's only after the plant material is removed from the polar solvent that the extraction gets the base added to it.

"Experts" say a lot of weird things that don't seem to be true. Like the guy that did the write-up on the chem/pharma site said to go out of your way to avoid NaOH because over-exposure will cause the alkaloid to undergo hydrolysis. Later on he does say that in the case of some alkaloids (Indoles being in that group) you may not have a choice because they can't be coaxed into FB any other way. I don't know if any of that is true or what he thinks too much exposure might be for an alkaloid and I really don't care. Because I know, e.g., that Cyb's tek has been proven work well.

Another thing that strikes me as odd, especially when it comes to pharma, why does everyone want the molecule in FB? I mean, I know why we do but pharma does its business in salts. They tend to have a longer shelf life, are more stable within a given temperature range and more importantly, they provide a faster, more efficient delivery system (since we are made mostly of water). And for everybody else pulling alkaloids (except DMT Nexus members), why would they want the FB? The alkaloid interacts with the plant in salt form (maybe not always, but generally). I get the impression it is in salt form when the plant material is processed. So why that last step to get the FB? That's off-topic, I know, and there's probably a good reason like it makes it easier to process or study or whatever. Don't know. I won't lose any sleep over it; it's just one of that minorly nagging gaps.

 

[mikeAtHome]

I generally use STB because it's easier to know where to look for the stuff if my yield is lower than expected. With A/B's in the past I have thrown the plant matter out after making my teas only to find later I probably didn't make enough teas.

That's the only reason really. Pull as much as I can with naphtha, then pull as much as I can with toluene.

I'd much rather do it this way, then clean my extract afterwards than use an A/B trying to get a cleaner product from the start.

But do I realise a difference in affects between DMT extracted with A/B vs STB?

No... I don't.

Hey soulfood. I plan to use STB for my first extraction. I pretty much took to it right away. For some reason, I don't know why, I initially got the impression that it wasn't very popular. But if that even was the case at some time in the past it certainly doesn't seem to be so now. I'm guessing the reason there are a number of teks that people use, even within the same species, has more to do with personal preference and just feeling comfortable with what you're about than it has to do with yields. Members seem to get reasonably good yields no matter the tek as long as they are concientous about the process. Which is another reason to doubt the pharma guy on epharmacognosy.com who says, "The extraction of total alkaloids with alcohol is highly recommended because of its maximum efficiency and economical viability."

Maybe it's true sometimes and more often in his industry than not. Others say this too. It's certainly not the case here. Until today, I never actually sat down and without rushing, read through the entire Wikepedia section on alkaloids. It's not that long and I'd been there plenty of times looking for bits and pieces but had never read it through. We know so little about them that we can't even define what one is. The "True Alkaloids" group are defined as alkaloids originating from amino acids. Not only does science fail to explain what an alkaloid is but it decides to put "alkaloids" that are not derived from amino acids in this group. There's probably a good reason behind that - the primary reason being that it's such a diverse bunch of molecules we can't really create a rule that sticks better than just some of the time. (Things probably aren't really that ill defined but it can appear that way at times.)

BTW - apologies to SnozzleBerry for accusing the pharma site of saying that thing about being forced to use NaOH (or another strong base like KOH) on Indoles. It was actually some other group he referenced. So just remember, when dealing with Indoles, strong bases like NaOH and KOH "should be avoided as far as possible"... I'm kidding (but he's not).

 

[SnozzleBerry]

Claiming that "the nexus tek" is a "straight to base" isn't accurate

No No No... sorry if you got that impression. I wasn't saying that at all! I was just saying that the tek here does seem to always raise the ph, no matter A/B or STB or FASx, in the presence of the plant material.

It appears that a bit of confusion remains A true A/B, by nature, removes the plant material after acidification and prior to basification. There are plenty of teks here that present this approach. This approach is much more likely to be encountered in a "proper" (sanctioned) lab than an STB, drytek, or hybrid approach. At a bare minimum, it minimizes emulsions and allows for drastic reduction of solution, as well as potentially providing other benefits.

The dryteks and STB approaches, by their nature, require you to basify the plant material initially, and the so-called "hybrid" teks that suggest leaving the plant material in do so for "ease of approach" imo.

Again, most people who choose STB do so because they view it as simpler or easier, generally due to their lack of familiarity with extraction. In the case of soulfood's reasoning, you could save your plant material after acidification in the A/B approach, and still have the initial material for further extraction in the case of lower-than-expected yield.

As far as "why freebase"...the simple answer is versatility. The FB alks can be smoked/vaped or dropped in acidic solution for oral consumption. DMT in salt form requires conversion in order to smoke/vape, so finishing with FB maximizes potential RoA while minimizing effort.

Finally, using alcohol for extraction has its own benefits, as in drytek applications or in resin approaches. Additionally, it can allow you to drastically reduce the amount of starting material, but as that veers into large-scale extraction, it's not a topic for discussion here.

 

[SnozzleBerry]

Also, I meant to post this earlier but forgot. This should help clarify everything

 

[mikeAtHome]

Also, I meant to post this earlier but forgot. This should help clarify everything

I'll be damned, you're absolutely correct! I got part if it right, tho. Our A/B tek (all our tek) is okay with NaOH and/or HCL. To the rest of the world that "should be avoided as far as possible". But that's only because they never pursued this alkaloid. So they don't know it's not a problem. It was only a few weeks ago that I started reading our Wiki's tek docs. I got the big picture and quickly favored STB, particularly Cyb's. It has consistently respectable yields but I really like starting with a base so I can get to the titration for DMT Fumarate. I guess it's STB/FASW? I'd rather evap 50ml of water (times 3) than perform x solvent pulls, force precip in freezer & filter/evap to get the FB.

You know, the meth world was split between those 2 ways of performing the final pull (I'm using the past tense 'cause the active and intelligent forum threads about that chemistry seemed to all but vanish around 2003/2004). And just like here, it seemed more of a personal choice than an opinion about the science. Those favoring precip bubbled HCL through the solvent to make FB "snow". Everyone's end-point was a salt so you either gassed or titrated. I tried gassing and decanting/filtering the precip out of the solvent. Once. I decided titration is is less smelly. Plus, for DMT it's also a bit quicker.

As far as "why freebase"...

Okay SnozzleBerry, yet again I have been misunderstood. I am feeble, forgetful and often slow to comprehend but I could have sworn I said something like, "I know why we FB". Once I have the salt I know I'll need to FB (in doses at a time) before consuming in the preferred way. I just don't understand why pharma or any other industry would do that. Especially pharma. Shortly after joining Nexus I started a poorly planned thread on DMT being a polymorph. In doing follow-up reading I one paper expressed how pharmaceutical companies hate dealing with FB. Not just because it has a 50% chance of being an unstable polymorph but also because it's more expensive and ometimes impossible, to work out a delivery system. I guess if it's a drug that saves lives then hospitals would stock it. But can you think of any drugs being marketed to the public that require The
Machine?!?!