So - are we getting it or are we not - nicotine

[kinabaloo]

Like I said Kin, really a moot point unless you need it and I dont. More of a comment than anything. I really can't believe you took the time to look it up.

To All:
Today went well with the less than .5ml of Liquid Analog in my 2ml of stock vape.
Did a couple of snus and felt fine. Actually vaped less still than a normal snus day.
So....still a little life in the really highly diluted WTA , some carry over fro 50% day or both?
I dont know........just sad to see it gone. A lot learned though. At least for me and I think Dvap was satisfied with the reporting and results.
Now I can be excited to see what round 2 brings on!

Since the pure alkaloid extraction is so tough to extract, I might still be looking into a snus juice add on. Its pasturized , not fermented like american stuff. TNSA'a are way reduced. I'd be happy just to strip the possible atty gummer uppers out of it. Damn, now that sounded scientific lol

Easy man, just a bit of fun! And self-deprecating.

I'll put the paranoia down to withdrawal symptoms

The extraction for WTA is time-consuming for an individual, but would be easier than just nic for a chem company. However, without some kind of 'harm reduction umbrella' statutory-wise, suppliers might be loathe to market a 'natural extract of mixed alkaloids. But if the FDA and others wanted to show a real commitment to reducing smoking, they would embrace this, offsetting any possible harm/risks with the far greater harm of not allowing it, as is routinely calculated for drugs.

(A designation of 'tobacco product' would be better than 'drug' in this regard if the opportunity here for running with the 'harm reduction' categorisation is missed.)

Testing can confirm this, but if we take the known ingredients route and add only those alkaloids that are safe and effective to pure nicotine, then the beta-carbolines found in tobacco (or some of) are the likely candidate.

All logic and real concern for health points to the pragmatic solution to an entrenched problem. Will it happen? Maybe, but it will take some bold decision making by regulators. We can simply keep putting forward the facts and in time, with public support, it might come to pass.

Experimental results will go a long way to convince, us as a community first of all, that the 'something missing' is not (just) 'enough nic', but an important co-factor.

 

[Vaporer]

I didnt mean you as in you personally.
It was a general ref.
Didnt come out right Kin

 

[kinabaloo]

I didnt mean you as in you personally.
It was a general ref.
Didnt come out right Kin

No problem. Likewise I'm sure things I say come across in ways I didnt mean.

What might sound pompous and self-regarding is just the attempt to be precise.

Example: "Testing can confirm this, but if we take the known ingredients route and add only those alkaloids that are safe and effective to pure nicotine, then the beta-carbolines found in tobacco (or some of) are the likely candidate." The underlined phrase is not redundant, but there to emphasis that beta carbinoids are a family and some are hallucinogenic (unwanted effect); so, until we can be more precise, that phrase denotes this.

Another example, this time a mistake - I wrote about 'precursors and followed it with an example that was related but misleading, in that glutamine is not a precursor to hGh, but serves to promote hGh production whn in excess to other amino acids during sleep. Accuracy really matters in science.

For some search terms, in Google say*, these threads appear high on the first page; so assuming some key players might pass by, I think it's good to make a coherent case.

For example, speaking on a recent radio interview, Dr Siegel, a champion of the harm-reduction approach, was clearly unaware of the co-factor importance. Indded, at some point it might be a good idea to present the WTA case more 'publicly'; but some way to go yet. The testing DVap has arranged is a good start.

* Here's the first I tried just now as an example:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...a+carbolines&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

 

[Stubby]

The thought I had on harm reduction is that of the two people who have used WTA, one that doesn't need the co-factors, and the other that does, both report a 40% decrease in nicotine use. Could it be that the co-factors are effecting even those people that do okay with the purified nicotine. Perhaps there is an overcompensating with nicotine to make up for the missing alkaloids.

This would certainly be a point in favor of WTA over straight nicotine in regard to harm reduction. Less nicotine used but better results.

To early to tell at this point but something to keep an eye on.

 

[olderthandirt]

...
So....still a little life in the really highly diluted WTA , some carry over fro 50% day or both?
I dont know........just sad to see it gone. A lot learned though. At least for me and I think Dvap was satisfied with the reporting and results.
...TNSA'a are way reduced. I'd be happy just to strip the possible atty gummer uppers out of it. Damn, now that sounded scientific lol

Perhaps not "scientific" but in terms we all understand! You do realize we're not quite done with ya. At the very least your actions/reactions today, and I'm thinking tomorrow, will be informative. What you do with regards to vaping and snus as you return to your comfort level, how long before your back to the point you were prior to the "Liquid Analog".

...
The extraction for WTA is time-consuming for an individual, but would be easier than just nic for a chem company. However, without some kind of 'harm reduction umbrella' statutory-wise, suppliers might be loathe to market a 'natural extract of mixed alkaloids. But if the FDA and others wanted to show a real commitment to reducing smoking, they would embrace this, offsetting any possible harm/risks with the far greater harm of not allowing it, as is routinely calculated for drugs.
...

Not very likely kin. But as you say, find ways to keep your and DVaps efforts public, perhaps... someday...

...
What might sound pompous and self-regarding is just the attempt to be precise...

I thought I had on harm reduction is that of the two people who have used WTA, one that doesn't need the co-factors, and the other that does, both report a 40% decrease in nicotine use. Could it be that the co-factors are effecting even those people that do okay with the purified nicotine. Perhaps there is an overcompensating with nicotine to make up for the missing alkaloids.

This would certainly be a point in favor of WTA over straight nicotine in regard to harm reduction. Less nicotine used but better results.

To early to tell at this point but something to keep an eye on.

Ah, thanks Stubby. I knew a conclusion something like that was rattling 'round in my head but I couldn't quantify the thing.

I still can't shake the pessimistic nag that this is all known and documented, these efforts of DVap, Kin and all have more than likely already been done, the results moldering in some dark BT/BP archive...

aarrgghhh... not positive thoughts, sorry, excuse me while I go partake in some 48mg over-compensation

 

[DVap]

I still can't shake the pessimistic nag that this is all known and documented, these efforts of DVap, Kin and all have more than likely already been done, the results moldering in some dark BT/BP archive...

I find this likely.

On another note. The 2nd batch of WTA liquid has been mixed to 30 mg/mL alkaloids (~27 mg/mL nicotine). I used a more "robust" tobacco blend for this batch than the first, and instead of a copper brown alkaloid mix, this purified mix was deep amber. The mixed liquid is golden brown while the first batch was pale yellow. The first batch has a touch of harshness at 28 mg/mL, not bad but present. I figured that might be caused by some particularly volatile alkaloid, so I worked the final concentration to try to subdue the harshness by attempting to strip out the most volatile alkaloids. This batch turned out not harsh in the least, and really superior vapability wise. 20 good vapes, and I'm at peace with the world.

The 3 testers for this batch are a sordid lot. Horribly addicted fellows, all of them. If this stuff calms the raging beast for these guys, it'll work for anybody.

I'll leave it up to the individual testers whether they wish to remain anonymous throughout the testing. They can feel free to identify themselves at any time starting now, and post their impressions real-time, or to wait till they're done testing. Actually, it's easier on me if they just post real time, that way I don't have to juggle PM's to pass along the impressions of multiple testers!

Edit: I've been convinced that the testers should remain anonymous during the testing. A couple folks have pointed me to Google Docs as a way for each tester to record their daily impressions. This has been set up, and the testers can simply bookmark the appropriate URL to access the spreadsheets for entering observations.

I'd guess the 2nd batch should be arriving to the testers around mid-week.

 

[IANAN]

Day 1 (Cat's Claw) Results;

1. Desire to smoke-- It seems to take 6-8 hours for the herbs/ingested foodstuffs to get in the system and become effective. During the morning hours the desire to smoke was more pronounced than in the evening. By the end of evening slight cravings were present and were satiated with chocolate and vape.

2. Mental Awareness state (Mental Fog)- Until the late afternoon-evening of day 1 there was some mental fog and lack of volition. By early afternoon for about 3-4 hours had an abundance of energy.

3. Anxiety (Relaxed state) and restlessness- Around mid afternoon, 2 hours after lunch, had a feeling of excess energy. Not really nervous energy but more like I just had to do something. The period lasted about 3 hours. Oddly enough I normally suffer from insomnia and only sleep 6 hours or less. Did not suffer from it and got a good nights sleep (8.5 hours) .

4. Perceived GI (Gastro-intestinal) effects including effects on bowl movements- No pains or discomfort in the stomach and am regular, if not more frequent movements.

5. Effectiveness of and frequency of vaping sessions to reduce cravings- While drinking coffee or consuming a square of chocolate a bit before (T=less than 1 minute) it increases the effectiveness of the vape session. Vape sessions required less puffs to be effective and cravings were more like a manageable twinge that could be dealt with instead of an overwhelming need.

6. Number of traditional cigarettes consumed (If any)- 9 mostly in the morning - This is down from 15 the day before.

 

[olderthandirt]

...
I'll leave it up to the individual testers whether they wish to remain anonymous throughout the testing. They can feel free to identify themselves at any time starting now, and post their impressions real-time, or to wait till they're done testing. Actually, it's easier on me if they just post real time, that way I don't have to juggle PM's to pass along the impressions of multiple testers!

I'd guess the 2nd batch should be arriving to the testers around mid-week.

Hmm...
The efficacy of the WTA is going to be very subjective. Regardless whether the indicators logged are physical or psychological they will nonetheless be subjective. Is it possible that real time posting could conceivably influence each individual "testers" personal objectivity? That there are going to be multiple testers this time around, I wonder if one individuals input could possibly influence the other subjects thoughts? My experiences in QA testing are such that I know how easily test data can be skewed!

Might it be safer with respect to data integrity to not post any input from the test subjects until all have finished testing? Given the somewhat ad hoc nature of this type of trial, the more steps taken towards credibility the better.

Or is it my turn to be thinking too much into things?

 

[IANAN]

* Here's the first I tried just now as an example:

nicotine MAOI beta carbolines - Google Search

Just found a really good one in there

Harmane inhibits serotonergic dorsal raphe neurons in the rat
(Psychopharmacologia, 2005, vol. 182, no4, pp. 562-569)

Nicotine, harmane, and befloxatone inhibit the activity of raphe serotonergic neurons. Therefore, at least two tobacco compounds, nicotine and harmane, inhibit the activity of serotonergic neurons. The mechanism by which harmane inhibits serotonergic dorsal raphe neurons is likely unrelated to a MAO-A inhibitory effect.

Of course there were other studies that they substituted MOA-As and it did increase self dosing and another where they gave the rats both another MOA-A and Harman (Harmane is a synonym for Harman) and it increased locomotion in the rodents.

They have also known for a long time that beta-carbolines have potentiating effects on other alkolids so both need to be present to get the effect.

The exact method may not be known, but it appears that Harman and Norharman are among the key suspects in what is missing.

Anyhow Kin has an idea to add Harman to e-liquid. If he makes a batch it could be tested as well. My aproach is more homeopathic in nature, and takes foods and whole herbs (as much as possible), that have beta-carbolines in them (In particular Harman and Harmine) and consume them while vaping. All three approaches are valid.

Twisted

Quote:
Originally Posted by IANAN
In search of an alternative to WTA (Whole Tobacco Alkaloid Extract)

Basically I am deriving this as something that most likely would not/could not be under the FDA pervue to help increase the effectiveness of vaping- to give the something extra. Okay I am posting this if anyone wishes to follow along (I won't be sending samples ;-) )...


Neat. We'll watch for updates. Seems my 25mg/day Passion Flower plan might need revised .

If it is the extract then they may have striped out what we want. It is why I am going with the full spectrum passion flower. Also 25 mg, unless it is extract, is a very small dose.

 

[Vaporer]

Stubby, I agree that some will over compensate with nic to try and fill the void.
I'm ok nicwize (new word, Kin don't say anything lol) at 18-24mg but jump to 36 on occasion. Problem being it really dosent do much.
If I use Stonewall for a suppliment, and hit the 36 , it's instant hiccups. To much nic and no better feeling. If its snus better feeling and I'll stay at 18-24, I can drop as low 12 with little notice or go to 36 on a bad day just bumping it, not constant and no hiccups.
So hiccups is my symptomatic trigger of limit. Maybe a diff snus woulld be a little more MAOI heavy and a better feeing would result. Something I can try.

OTD, I can't imagine they didnt or dont know. Real chain jerker huh? If our little group here can figure it out in a few months, they couldn't do it in 50years+, with basically unlimited resources?

Ok, today is 0 WTA day all together, no remnants left in any bottle. What was left yesterday was a 10% or less mix.
Feeling ok still. No unusual craving to have to have it back. Life was more pleasant with it though. I am playing catch up vape now. No snus yet today. Time to toss a portion in.

 

[IANAN]

OTD, I can't imagine they didnt or dont know. Real chain jerker huh? If our little group here can figure it out in a few months, they couldn't do it in 50years+, with basically unlimited resources?

They didn't have the Internet... and all those other studies published on it to search very rapidly.... I think they know now... FYI Kin found some patent applications from 2005 to increase the effectiveness of NRTs by adding beta-carbolines to them.

Keep in mind we are reviewing study after study over the internet in a very rapid succession... each person sharing very quickly our literature reviews. Just to find all the publications 10-15 years ago would have required a team of researchers to dig through multiple libraries journal after journal after journal.

 

[DVap]

Hmm...
The efficacy of the WTA is going to be very subjective. Regardless whether the indicators logged are physical or psychological they will nonetheless be subjective. Is it possible that real time posting could conceivably influence each individual "testers" personal objectivity? That there are going to be multiple testers this time around, I wonder if one individuals input could possibly influence the other subjects thoughts? My experiences in QA testing are such that I know how easily test data can be skewed!

Might it be safer with respect to data integrity to not post any input from the test subjects until all have finished testing? Given the somewhat ad hoc nature of this type of trial, the more steps taken towards credibility the better.

Or is it my turn to be thinking too much into things?

Maybe you're right. I'll ask the testers to just send some very summary daily observations, perhaps several categories with a 1 - 5 score to save me posting gory details. When all are done they can post away.

 

[Vaporer]

Ianan,
I think you missed the point.
It's always been known even before the net that BT foumulated analogs for increased effects , desired outcomes and guiding thier results to intice people to want to use thier brand.
The net does allow us a wealth of info at our fingertips. If Mr. Obama has his way, his "neutral net proposal" may change that by limiting access to only certain things.
I'm really getting sick of this socialist approach in the USA.

The real point is, if they knew about the MAOI's, thier effects, addictive properties then why with all thier FDA approved NRT's did they just include nicotine? This is just the typical myoptic approach that has always been taken. Why doesnt the gum, lozenges and nasal spray include MAOI's too?

 

[Vaporer]

OTD,
I found staying on the down low was best. I figured I'd get swamped with questions, even lurkers, just putting me more out of a normal environment.
Also, A pad and pencil close by is good. You can record times when something is used or how long its been.
To me, a main point is NOT to focus on it. Reflect back every so often and think about whats happened and how you felt during that period rather than to try to keep a real time event log. I think to much immediate focus can be bad.

 

[IANAN]

Vaporer;

The earliest research I found on this were studies of scans of brains from 1996 which was published in 1997. Most of the research has been from 2003- present day. NRTs were approved for OTC in 1997 with several of them, like the inhaler, being fast tracked approved in 1997. Research in 1997 was computerized but it was not like it is now. Typically if the library had a computerized research system you would log onto a research abstract computer with a pre-loaded database. The database on some libraries was not updated every year and there were multiple databases for each branch of research. After pulling the very short abstract you would then go over to the library journal collection and dig through the journals (Sometimes on microfiche) if the library had the journal. Otherwise you would go over to the Librarian desk and request an inter-library loan for the journal and wait a few days to 2 weeks for the research article.

You would typically have to pay a usage fee (and per page copy) at many libraries for the electronic database, copies of the article from microfiche, and inter-library loans.

It's not like it is now.

 

[Vaporer]

I did a few normal posts while I was the tester just to keep things on a normal keel and appearence.
If the testers coming out and want to identify themselves one thing I will not do is answer questions concerning the test.
As you say, it's to easily influenced even though that's not the intent and may seen very innocent.
I'll be glad to answer the questions later when the test is done.
I will answer standard chat, questions and such with them , even if I know who they are.

 

[IANAN]

Maybe you're right. I'll ask the testers to just send some very summary daily observations, perhaps several categories with a 1 - 5 score to save me posting gory details. When all are done they can post away.

DVap... How large is the N on this one and are you doing blind studies with this batch??

 

[olderthandirt]

OTD,
I found staying on the down low was best. I figured I'd get swamped with questions, even lurkers, just putting me more out of a normal environment.
Also, A pad and pencil close by is good. You can record times when something is used or how long its been.
To me, a main point is NOT to focus on it. Reflect back every so often and think about whats happened and how you felt during that period rather than to try to keep a real time event log. I think to much immediate focus can be bad.

Those are good pointers for the test subjects for sure.

I may well have been over-thinking, but I just pictured the testers seeing each others replies each day could affect a subliminal influence on them. And even if that didn't actually occur, the door would be available for others to claim such.

 

[IANAN]

Those are good pointers for the test subjects for sure.

I may well have been over-thinking, but I just pictured the testers seeing each others replies each day could affect a subliminal influence on them. And even if that didn't actually occur, the door would be available for others to claim such.

A free google doc survey form could be used for the participants to log their daily results. DVap sets up the doc and then just sends it to the test group then publishes it when he is done.

Google docs can be accessed here http://docs.google.com or SurveyMonkey could be used as well.

 

[DVap]

DVap... How large is the N on this one and are you doing blind studies with this batch??

n=3, And it took me 9 solid hours of work to prepare enough for that. Care to finance a larger n?

As for blind studies, I'll ask Vaporer to answer the following question: Have you ever vaped anything even close to the throat hit/taste of the WTA?