• Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).

Tryptomics - CO based psychedelic analytical lab

Sakkadelic said:
It's interesting in the data that one of the only 2 samples with a significant amount on NMT is called "Batch #2 Leftover", it's only 1 data point but it may indicate that leaving the extraction sit creates more NMT (and tryptamine).
Click to expand...
I assumed that might be a synth sample, I think they start with tryptamine.
 
Sakkadelic said:
It's interesting in the data that one of the only 2 samples with a significant amount on NMT is called "Batch #2 Leftover", it's only 1 data point but it may indicate that leaving the extraction sit creates more NMT (and tryptamine).
Click to expand...
It could just be the result of crystallization into multiple fractions. The most abundant substance (weighted by solubility) crystallizes first, and that's DMT here. This means the mother liquor is depleted in DMT, and thus relatively enriched in its other constituents. If crystallization is continued (by further evaporation, cooling, waiting, etc.) then the second fraction of crystals will be likewise enriched.

Icon said:
I assumed that might be a synth sample, I think they start with tryptamine.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but that would push their legal risk a lot higher. As I read it, Colorado's Proposition 122 explicitly decriminalizes plants and fungi containing the listed substances, and implicitly their extracts; but synthetic sources of the exact same substances are explicitly not decriminalized. DMT is not yet on the list, but could be added "on or after June 1, 2026".

Looking at the bill, while extraction with alcohols (including without limitation ethanol) seems to be permitted, an unlicensed person who extracts with ethyl acetate or naphtha (an "inherently hazardous substance" since the flash point is below 38 C) seems to be committing a new felony. I'm not sure they exactly intended that, since the language seems to be copied from rules on cannabis, presumably intended to address the carnage resulting from butane extractions. DCM seems like it's probably lawful, despite the much greater toxic hazard. Butanol, higher esters, or higher alkanes could also be used.
 
aizoaceous said:
while extraction with alcohols (including without limitation ethanol) seems to be permitted, an unlicensed person who extracts with ethyl acetate or naphtha (an "inherently hazardous substance" since the flash point is below 38 C) seems to be committing a new felony
Click to expand...
Do these legal asses fail to see the contradiction here, that ethanol's flash point of 8°C also makes it an "inherently hazardous substance"? Why is it OK to blow oneself up with ethanol (or, presumably, methanol for that matter) but not with, say, ethyl acetate?

I guess I'd best check the exact wording of the bill, but I can't imagine it's going to be terribly well thought out. Is the 38°C figure based on the likely average maximum shade temperature in the state, or something? It bears little relation to hazardous goods regulation, either for storage or transport. I'd have to check what there is on actual handling and general workplace H&S. It would be very surprising if they'd thought to harmonise this seemingly piecemeal legislation with pre-existing chemical safety laws…
 
Transform said:
Is the 38°C figure based on the likely average maximum shade temperature in the state, or something?
Click to expand...
That seems to be the threshold from OSHA's Laboratory Standard, which does have some logic since that's around the highest usual room temperature. The different treatment for alcohols has no particular logic, though anyone in Colorado is lucky to have it. I don't think n-butanol is popular, but that Brazilian MHRB paper tried it with good results. It's also possible that a safer halogenated solvent could be identified, I guess considering flammability, toxicity, and ozone depleting potential. Limonene is also permitted.

Here's the exact language:
"INHERENTLY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE" MEANS ANY LIQUID CHEMICAL, COMPRESSED GAS, OR COMMERCIAL PRODUCT THAT HAS A FLASH POINT AT OR LOWER THAN THIRTY-EIGHT DEGREES CELSIUS OR ONE HUNDRED DEGREES FAHRENHEIT, INCLUDING BUTANE, PROPANE, AND DIETHYL ETHER, AND EXCLUDING ALL FORMS OF ALCOHOL AND ETHANOL.
Click to expand...

The same language appears in 18-18-406.6 C.R.S. So I think it just got carried over from cannabis, where esters and higher alkanes aren't frequently used so nobody cared. A wider range of permitted solvents plus some quantity limits (as drafted there are none) would make more sense, but the current language still seems workable to me.
 
Back
Top Bottom