http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...extract-full-strong-buzz-moderate-flavor.html
This thread started off well enough. A guy used a cold ethanol extraction to make a cleaner NET. Now he's claiming to have made a new form of WTA and is badmouthing Dvap.
His extract almost certainly has both tar and resin byproducts in it, among other things. I just don't know how to respond to this guy anymore.
I simply started an experiment and publicly noted my discovery/process. You came in fired up on attacking that it was not WTA before any conclusive evidence was in either way. The resulting 'alkaloidal syrups' are never claimed nor expected to be 100% pure. They are expected to have tobacco alkaloids to a certain unknown concentration.
FOR SAFETY It was assumed that the resulting oil was 100% pure, this is to avoid overdose in assuming 50% purity when its actually 80%.. (for example.)
I am simply calling out the audacity to the claim that WTA (whole tobacco alkaloid) is something that only DVap can produce. Further more I am making the statement that if you are extracting the terpenes (flavors) from tobacco you are most likely getting some of the alkaloids. These alkaloids are in salt form and can not be verified by DVaps method of acidic titration. If you are referring to WTA as some loosely defined trademarked product, then no I am not producing it.
If WTA is, as the acronym implies, Whole Tobacco Alkaloids then all NETs are an impure form of WTA. The reason your precious titration kit says there is no nicotine, is because it is testing for freebased alkaloids. In nature nicotine exists in the form of polar soluble neutral/acidic salts... Whether or not my 'crude tobacco concentrate' is what you would define as a "WTA", it does indeed contain the full and natural alkaloid spectrum of tobacco. It does indeed taste delicious, provide me a morning nicotine rush like I remember from cigarette days, and most importantly allow me to exist combustion free without cravings.
I have not been intentionally badmouthing anyone. I have simply been defending a well intended scientific experiment among the community. You will notice quite a few people in that thread see my side of things as legitimate.
How's this for an analogy? It's the equivalent of adding sugar and yeast to grape juice (and waiting a few weeks) to make alcohol and hoping it turns into a single malt Scotch whiskey.
It might get you drunk, but it ain't whiskey.
No it would be wine. It becomes whiskey with a specified process of distillation and aging in a wooden cask. That does not stop one from brewing fine single barrel malt whiskey at home. Similar to home extractions/tinctures it is easy to produce garbage. But with good technique/practice it is possible to achieve a very quality result. I've been known to brew a pretty delicious hard cider on occasion.
But were not talking about something as specific as 'Scotch Whiskey'... We are talking about a substance that has a more vague description like YPA (Yeast Produced Alcohol). If someone told me there scotch whiskey was YPA, but my homebrew beer wasn't... I would assuredly call the BS Flag. If they wanted to say there whiskey was 50% pure YPA and my homebrew beer was merely 13% pure at best, my lips would be puckered shut.'
Edit: It is pretty safe to assume the majority of the everclear is gone based on smell and consistency. Not to mention with a ethanol/water all the ethanol would be gone before the water. Even if the resulting tobacco concentrate was 100% ethanol at 24mg/ml one would have to consume a lot more than the few drops consumed from 3-5 pulls on an ecig to get any effect.
Edit2: Sorry to bring this discussion directly into this vendor thread, it feels inappropriate. Yet it feels more inappropriate to not defend myself. If anyone would like to discuss the details further I encourage a friendly open discussion on the matter in my thread.
