"It only takes ONE bad chemical"
- Thread starter Moonbogg
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
@zoiDman
Got this:
QH made from hydrochloric acid. QS made from sulfuric acid.
The main objective of a salt-selection study is to identify the salt form most suitable for development. The following four parameters are often considered primary or essential criteria for the selection of a particular form:
Got this:
QH made from hydrochloric acid. QS made from sulfuric acid.
The main objective of a salt-selection study is to identify the salt form most suitable for development. The following four parameters are often considered primary or essential criteria for the selection of a particular form:
- Aqueous solubility measured at various pH values, depending upon the intended pharmaceutical profile
- High degree of crystallinity [hardness - and hence how it is absorbed - quickly/time released/etc.]
- Low hygroscopicity (i.e., water absorption versus relative humidity), which gives consistent performance
- Optimal chemical and solid-state stability under accelerated conditions (i.e., minimal chemical degradation or solid-state changes when stored at 40 °C and 75% relative humidity).
But the real question is are the resulting molecules the same.
Because if so, there is no real difference.
I Googled it up briefly, but didn't immediately come across any molecular diagrams of either.
So I opted not to post a reply because I am not bored enough to search further.
Where is Kurt when you need him?
But the real question is are the resulting molecules the same.
Because if so, there is no real difference.
I Googled it up briefly, but didn't immediately come across any molecular diagrams of either.
So I opted not to post a reply because I am not bored enough to search further.
Where is Kurt when you need him?
Thought of Kurt as well :- )
The molecules are going to be different - but both the salts "carry" the quinine - there's a difference in how much each carry - 111 vs. 169, but that difference can be made up in dosage of one vs. the other.
Well, that (consensus or in the case of case studies) is another factor - the side effects, where sulphates (or hydrochlorides) may be incompatible with other things going on in the body and the patients reports of effectiveness on symptoms.
There are also restrictions on taking quinine for other factors. The G6PD deficiency is one, I happen to have it - as a result, malaria tablets make me more susceptible to malaria - I've had two types and several relapses of both, although no longer. So I can't take quinine or any equivalent that would cause hemolysis - rupture of red blood cells.
So does Quinine Hydrochloride and Quinine Sulfate have the Exact same effect on the Body when taken Orally?
No idea what the G6PD deficiency is. I've found that quinine gives me a terribly dry mouth and throat, like the atropine they give you for surgery.
Andria
Which part didn't you understand?
the side effects, where sulphates (or hydrochlorides) may be incompatible with other things going on in the body and the patients reports of effectiveness on symptoms.
IOW some people may not be able (for some reason or other) to take something in the sulphate form or the hydrochloride form - depending on allergies, other meds, other conditions, etc..... It's why there are different salt forms for almost all drugs. Another form is citrate (made by citric acid) or something else other than sulfur or chloride. Again, the MAIN difference here, is one is liquid and the other solid - mainly - as a drug QH is injected and QS is taken orally by tablet - both are water soluble though - so for an additive to eliquid the liquid form would be easier than crushing up a tablet and dissolving it :- )
The part about "Do they Both have the Exact Same Effect(s) on the Body when taken Orally"?
It's kinda a Yes/No question.
Not really because of 'effects on the body' - which body? Someone who may have an allergy to sulfides or chlorides?? Someone who may be taking other meds that aren't compatible??
I wasn't trying to be 'cheeky' but those are the things you'd have to ask to answer your question completely. And I found a way to stop the questions - probably a plus. lol.
For people without any drawbacks, I would think just by the form - liquid vs. solid - that hydrochloride would have a faster effect - iow, better bioavailability - which is one of the factors listed above.
For people without any drawbacks, I would think just by the form - liquid vs. solid - that hydrochloride would have a faster effect - iow, better bioavailability - which is one of the factors listed above.
Thankyou. The bad chemicals often discussed in this forum are neither confirmed nor denied. Now that I'm doing DIY I'm responsible for what's in the mix so why not settle on a flavor I like that's least likely to have problems or may be I'll learn to vape unflavored. The cuppucco flavor does have a 'buttery' taste. Should I be suspicious of that? If the questionable chemicals that worry people iin this forum are so risky why aren't the Antz folks bringing them up? Mostly they throw slow pitches.
Both Flavor Apprentice and FlavourArt have pretty good details and safety sheets on all their flavors. I mentioned elsewhere that FlavourArt's Custard Cream (both flavors under suspect) have no Diacetyl or acetyl proprionyl. Even their butterscotch is 'Not detectable' on both.
http://flavourartnaflavourreports.com/assets/0715-502-58.pdf
Check out any flavor here:
http://flavourartnaflavourreports.com/
They do and they have. They just don't focus all of their attention on it because they are more concerned about banning vaping completely. They actually don't give a damn about your lungs. They have other goals, such as convincing you that your child is hooked on that E-cig like a crack addict.
Even if diketones or any other potentially harmful chemicals were never found in e-cigs, the e-cig haters would still grab a large cotton sock, write on the sock "danger will robinson", put rocks in it and bash you over the head with it until you never touched an e-cig again.
Last edited:
In the first couple of days surfing news stories it was obvious what is happening and nothing has come up since to change my view. Follow the money. I've posted hundreds of counter points on news stories which has helped my thinking on the the topic. The most powerful argument I've got right now, that it really is about the money, is the cost difference between cigarettes and cost efficient vaping,--upwards of -98% with DIY. If you rebuild and mix DIY vaping is free for practical purposes. Governments have smokers on public assistance. Cigarettes are so expensive that switching them to ecigs could literally lift some families above the poverty line. Combine that with likely lower medicaid costs and we're talking about some serious money. It might even be that the money saved in public assistance more than offsets a decline in cigarette taxes. If there is a strong case for that then what we are up against is ruthless drug dealers pretending to be government officials.
Do they say you should avoid tonic (as in "gin and tonic") as well?
They're really just there as preservatives. They prevent things like oxidation and decomposition. They're commonly used that way in medicines, too. They're not the main event or even intended to play any role, other than preserving the important stuff. If you read the bottles of tonic, usually the more expensive name brands have the sulfate.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
