Olive oil extract update

[PsyCro]

I see where your going with this (I think).

One issue for me is that the liver converts ∆9 into the dreaded OH-11 by most means.

ok.. aaand the liver does that as blood with ∆9 goes through it, after all, that's its purpose, to filter blood.

But, since it's so much more psychoactive than ∆9, you can theoretically can only so many ng in the bloodstream anyway you dose.

Look at the link above showing ∆9 to OH-11 conversion after smoking. I find it interesting that i don't really get more high with my oil than i do smoking (different though type of high), so the conversion level must at least be similar, in my case anyways. But if someone is getting 1gram RSO into their blood stream daily, shouldn't the liver convert ∆9 to OH-11 accordingly, which you certainly would feel??

Tacking is an awesome delivery method as far as bioavailability..

Oromucosal absorption IS great for many things, but any studies done with cannabinoids have been done using carriers.. big difference.

Can you get a therapeutic dose of cannabinoids through tacking? Some here have. It would help the "no to little" psychoactivity statement especially knowing the THC-oh-11 is not involved.

Blood ∆9 and OH-11 levels as shown in the smoking link, but for tacking/oromucosal, would put an end to this conversation!

So, of you've a 93.6% THC with oil and +/- 65% is absorbed. A therapeutic dose is easy to calculate.
So, enough small doses by oromucosal (tacking) enough times a day, add on that you're by-passing the liver so no THC-OH-11 for psychoactivy....

How are you bypassing the liver? Its getting into the blood, which is getting to the liver like it or not.. just like with smoking. Yes you're probably bypassing the fullest extent of conversion, but how can you say that no THC goes through the liver via tacking? Wouldn't that be the same as saying the same for smoking?

.. or maaaybe it actually isn't being absorbed properly without a carrier ::

What do ya think?

I dunno, what do you think?

 

[SweetSue]

"Blood ∆9 and OH-11 levels as shown in the smoking link, but for tacking/oromucosal, would put an end to this conversation!"

I couldn't agree more. In researching, the gums have a reduced absorption rate and, as PsyCro keeps pointing out, the studies done have included carriers. If there's a good study out there that could clear all this up, I'd be thrilled to be pointed in the right direction.

PsyCro, this is my rudimentary understanding of what's happening here. Yes, the cannabinoids hit the bloodstream and will eventually make their way to the liver and have to fight past the enzymes. However, unlike oral delivery, which must first survive stomach acids before heading straight to the liver, through tacking it hits the systemic circulation before it hits the liver increasing your chances of reaching therapeutic blood serum levels. Higher blood levels translates into greater potential for cannabinoids to find and latch onto tumor cells.

If you're incorporating Competitive Inhibition into your protocol, when those cannabinoids still in the bloodstream hit the liver they'll stand a better chance of clearing the organ unmolested, ready for another pass, and another chance at healing.

I'm also curious, although I should ask this on one of the main oil threads, why no carrier added to the oil used to tack? Wouldn't the addition of lecithin and flaxseed oil, as used in the Bio Bomb increase the rate of absorption here as well?

 

[SweetSue]

Just a quick note: yes indeed, according to Cajun, the Bio Bomb adaptation is appropriate for tacking. That adds a carrier to the tack which should change the dynamic of this discussion somewhat, no?

 

[Radogast]

I heard there was a failure to communicate over here, so I read the thread.
OK skimmed the last two pages because folks were repeating themselves.



But WHERE were they repeating themselves?

one of the key sticking points was First Pass Metabolism and the liver's role .


So let me repost a link SweetSue provided other places.

I agree with Sue that this video does a great job of explaining a complicated subject... and watching it gets MORE complicated because the one of CajonCelts key arguments (as I understand it) is that passing through the liver limits massive whole plant cannabinoid delivery because the liver metabolism of delta9-THC gets people high as the bejeesus = BAD... And the majority of pharmaceutical applictions seek metabolism via the liver as a GOOD ...

There is more of course, but for a first pass look at First Pass Metabolism - that is enough.

.....


Anyway, I think watching and understanding this concept is a good basis for being able to communicate about the essential difference between IV/mucosal(tacking)/intramuscular/transdermal dosages and oral dosages.


And nice thread here

 

[PsyCro]

Thanks for that great link.. much needed in this thread! Unfortunately, it mixes things up even more

She's comparing (similarly) IV, oromucosal, and smoking for example, stating that only 10% of given drug goes to the liver, explaining my smoking link where some ∆9 converts to OH-11.. but if the same 'should' be happening with tacking given her 10%.. ?? argh! Almost makes the point i'm trying to make, but alas, lets go deeper, just in case.

Next, i'm gonna measure up my personal oil and smoke quantities, by zero.point.whatever-grams raw material taken in either form. I want to know now wether or not i am 'feeling' it more either way. That should round things off a bit at both ends of the spectrum conversation wise...

 

[Mariamlu]

Yes, the cannabinoids hit the bloodstream and will eventually make their way to the liver and have to fight past the enzymes. However, unlike oral delivery, which must first survive stomach acids before heading straight to the liver, through tacking it hits the systemic circulation before it hits the liver increasing your chances of reaching therapeutic blood serum levels. Higher blood levels translates into greater potential for cannabinoids to find and latch onto tumor cells.

I'm also curious, although I should ask this on one of the main oil threads, why no carrier added to the oil used to tack? Wouldn't the addition of lecithin and flaxseed oil, as used in the Bio Bomb increase the rate of absorption here as well?

I reply to the second part of this, but the first part is so good, it sure makes sense to me, until somebody like PsyCro proves otherwise.

If you add anything to cannabis concentrated oil, you can not tack this anymore, it will not stick to the gums the same way any more.
It will not stick, it will flush down the stomach. It will be same as oral dose.
When I did not winterize, but soaked the buds longer, I got so much plant stuff in my oil, that it was greasy and did not tack properly. I had a hell of two weeks on that oil. Was stoned every day.

 

[PsyCro]

Liposomal formulations for enhanced lymphatic drug delivery

some more pro-oral info .. showing that lymphatic absorption is indeed possible, bypassing the liver. Olive oil being a long-chain-fatty-acid, along with taking after some food, goes into this category.

If you add anything to cannabis concentrated oil, you can not tack this anymore, it will not stick to the gums the same way any more.
It will not stick, it will flush down the stomach. It will be same as oral dose.

Exactly, its not actually tacking anymore. But, if you could try small doses a couple times an hour with the carrier, every time keeping it in your mouth without swallowing for a few minutes, what would happen.. hmmm?

I'll be back soon with mentioned measurements from my last post, and some more imperical-on myself-testing..!

 

[Radogast]

Thanks for that great link.. much needed in this thread! Unfortunately, it mixes things up even more

She's comparing (similarly) IV, oromucosal, and smoking for example, stating that only 10% of given drug goes to the liver, explaining my smoking link where some ∆9 converts to OH-11.. but if the same 'should' be happening with tacking given her 10%.. ?? argh! Almost makes the point i'm trying to make, but alas, lets go deeper, just in case.

Next, i'm gonna measure up my personal oil and smoke quantities, by zero.point.whatever-grams raw material taken in either form. I want to know now wether or not i am 'feeling' it more either way. That should round things off a bit at both ends of the spectrum conversation wise...

As the video explained, and I have no reason to doubt, once 'anything' hits the bloodstream, roughly 10% of the blood goes through the liver each pass through the heart, and 90% of the blood goes other places each pass through the heart. The thing that is special about oral delivery is that 100% of elements absorbed by the stomach and intestines go to the liver in the first pass before they pass through the heart. Oral delivery thus has a much higher 'first pass' metabolism.

Note that anything absorbable in an anal suppository counts the same as oral delivery if it goes finger deep, flows into the liver before joining the bloodstream.

A suppository one knuckle deep will be absorbed via the mucous membrane into the bloodstream and skip the liver on the first pass - the same as other, non-oral, delivery methods.

Tacking is wierd in that, done right, MOST of the delivery is non-oral, but if saliva gets to 'the tack' it tends to go down the throat and become oral delivery.

On the face of it, almost any other place than the gums or anal sphincter would seem to be better for non-oral delivery. There are variables about the bioavailability of transdermal, oral mucosal, trans-dermal delivery, etc that I haven't learned that come into play.

 

[PsyCro]

The thing that is special about oral delivery is that 100% of elements absorbed by the stomach and intestines go to the liver in the first pass before they pass through the heart. Oral delivery thus has a much higher 'first pass' metabolism.

That's the basic idea of it, and certainly explains what 'first pass' is. But, look at my link in post #87.. it shows that it is possible to bypass first pass through lymphatic absorption.


"Abstract

The lymphatic system that extends throughout the whole body is one of useful targets for efficient drug delivery. The intestinal lymphatic drug delivery has been actively studied to date because administered drugs can avoid the first-pass metabolism in the liver, resulting in improvement of oral bioavailability. Drugs must be hydrophobic in order to be transported into the intestinal lymphatics because the lipid absorption mechanism in the intestine is involved in the lymphatic delivery. Therefore, various lipid-based drug carrier systems have been recently utilized to increase the transport of drug into the intestinal lymphatics. Lipidic molecules of the lipid-based drug delivery systems stimulate production of chylomicrons in the enterocytes, resulting in an increase in drug transport into lymphatic in the enterocytes. This review summarizes recently reported information on development of liposomal carriers for the intestinal lymphatic delivery and covers important determinants for successful lymphatic delivery."

As the video explained, and I have no reason to doubt, once 'anything' hits the bloodstream, roughly 10% of the blood goes through the liver...

...Tacking is wierd in that, done right, MOST of the delivery is non-oral, but if saliva gets to 'the tack' it tends to go down the throat and become oral delivery.

Exactly, and by that logic 10% of what goes in via tacking should cause a OH-11 type of high, but its being stated here that tacking does not cause a high, which is why i'm still questioning it, and CCO in general as far as proper absorption is concerned..

 

[Radogast]

That's the basic idea of it, and certainly explains what 'first pass' is. But, look at my link in post #87.. it shows that it is possible to bypass first pass through lymphatic absorption.

I haven't been able to follwo that link - earlier today and just now.

"Abstract

The lymphatic system that extends throughout the whole body is one of useful targets for efficient drug delivery. The intestinal lymphatic drug delivery has been actively studied to date because administered drugs can avoid the first-pass metabolism in the liver, resulting in improvement of oral bioavailability. Drugs must be hydrophobic in order to be transported into the intestinal lymphatics because the lipid absorption mechanism in the intestine is involved in the lymphatic delivery. Therefore, various lipid-based drug carrier systems have been recently utilized to increase the transport of drug into the intestinal lymphatics. Lipidic molecules of the lipid-based drug delivery systems stimulate production of chylomicrons in the enterocytes, resulting in an increase in drug transport into lymphatic in the enterocytes. This review summarizes recently reported information on development of liposomal carriers for the intestinal lymphatic delivery and covers important determinants for successful lymphatic delivery."

Exactly, and by that logic 10% of what goes in via tacking should cause a OH-11 type of high, but its being stated here that tacking does not cause a high, which is why i'm still questioning it, and CCO in general as far as proper absorption is concerned..

A good point.

Observationally, suppository delivery system seems to benefit more from mangos and other forms of competitive inibition in the liver that tacking as a delivery system. I wonder if the lymphatic system is involved.

 

[SweetSue]

You want to incorporate competitive inhibition regardless of the delivery system, in my opinion. It's a numbers game and we're not willing to give up any, so we'll do whatever we can to shift the odds in our favor. Competitive inhibition gives us more free cannabanoids with each pass.

Competitive Inhibition is more important with liver cancer because you're planting the suppository deeper so it gets straight to the liver and you want the cannabinoids to work for you right there. You need a big crowd already there tying up the enzymes.

 

[94xjjohn]

Here's another thought I wonder about:

Smoking and tacking both expose cannabinoids to the blood system independent of the liver, so only 10% first passes through the liver metabolizing to psychoactive Delta11 THC.

So why, if done properly, does smoking get me high and tacking doesn't AS MUCH?

I know! I KNOW!!! maybe.

Cannabis is an expectorant. While I smoke, I continually cough up and swallow (ugh!!!) small amounts of THC laden mucus.....WHICH THEN GOES TO THE LIVER AND IS MADE MORE PSYCHO !!!

Solved:
When smoking herb, part of the THC goes to the blood and part goes to the stomach and liver.

BOOMAn OG revelation.


JohnnyOGOilseed

 

[Radogast]

Here's another thought I wonder about:

Smoking and tacking both expose cannabinoids to the blood system independent of the liver, so only 10% first passes through the liver metabolizing to psychoactive Delta11 THC.

So why, if done properly, does smoking get me high and tacking doesn't AS MUCH?

I know! I KNOW!!! maybe.

Cannabis is an expectorant. While I smoke, I continually cough up and swallow (ugh!!!) small amounts of THC laden mucus.....WHICH THEN GOES TO THE LIVER AND IS MADE MORE PSYCHO !!!

Solved:
When smoking herb, part of the THC goes to the blood and part goes to the stomach and liver.

BOOMAn OG revelation.


JohnnyOGOilseed

I love your mind dearly, but that sounds like stoner talk !

Only 10% (and yeah that is a very rough number) per pass through the heart - but the heart keeps beating and beating so the second pass happens in about a minute.... If THC went ONLY to the liver that would be minute 1-10%, minute 2-9%, oh he took another toke, minute 3-18%, minute 4-16%, minute 5- 14.5% ... After 5 minutes, 2/3 of the amount of the THC in the first hit (with a lot of help from the second hit) has passed through the liver. No wonder it takes a few minutes to get high --- But of course THC, CBD, terpene x do their own thing in the brain, the fingertips, .... And edibles take longer to get high. The stomach and intestines take things at a slower pace than the driving beat of a heart.

One of the reasons to get so excited about cannabis in the lymphatic system is that it is taken out of circulation (circulating blood.) Lymph nodes are active battlegrounds in the fight against cancer and disease. Once in the system, things flow slowly towards the drains. The cannabinoids can be in the system for a loooooong time. My wife has a lymph mass in her ankle after her break that has taken weeks to halve in size. Even with massage there is not a large flow.

It's hard to get facts about the lymph system because it has long been poorly understood, leaving an opportunity for Rolfers, massage therapists and huksters to invent scenarios and theories unmediated by science. And in some cases they appear to have been right. I may have had an ivory knife blade scraped down my inner thigh to where my bone felt scraped - done per ancient chinese literature on 'bone washing' of the lymph system, but that doesn't mean I literally believe their theories of stagnant chi that guided the treatment.

Science seems to have taken a recent interest in the importance of the lymphatic system, but I haven't read the papers and abstracts on the hard science pay sites. Some afternnon when I am avoiding work, I'll dig around a bit.

 

[SweetSue]

Rad, have you tried a cannabis salve for that ankle lymph mass? Come at it from the skin down?

 

[94xjjohn]

I love your mind dearly, but that sounds like stoner talk !

Yep.

 

[Radogast]

Rad, have you tried a cannabis salve for that ankle lymph mass? Come at it from the skin down?

Still waiting for that spare half oz... She's trying to stretch a 2.5 week supply for 3 weeks until next harvest. We'll make it, but not if we make salve. I predict some oven dry next month.

Not sure of the final recipe, but coconut oil and bud are going to be in our virgin run of the Magical Butter Machine

 

[SlowToke]

Evening folks! Rumor has it there's some interesting conversation going on over here, so thought I would come check it out. Looks like I heard right! I'm interested since I'll be taking cannabis oil once I harvest my current grow, and am trying to learn everything I can about the best ways to dose the oil. I'm looking to subscribe to a few threads that will help me with my understanding, and this looks like a good one.

One of the reasons to get so excited about cannabis in the lymphatic system is that it is taken out of circulation (circulating blood.) Lymph nodes are active battlegrounds in the fight against cancer and disease. Once in the system, things flow slowly towards the drains. The cannabinoids can be in the system for a loooooong time. My wife has a lymph mass in her ankle after her break that has taken weeks to halve in size. Even with massage there is not a large flow.

It's hard to get facts about the lymph system because it has long been poorly understood, leaving an opportunity for Rolfers, massage therapists and huksters to invent scenarios and theories unmediated by science. And in some cases they appear to have been right. I may have had an ivory knife blade scraped down my inner thigh to where my bone felt scraped - done per ancient chinese literature on 'bone washing' of the lymph system, but that doesn't mean I literally believe their theories of stagnant chi that guided the treatment.

Science seems to have taken a recent interest in the importance of the lymphatic system, but I haven't read the papers and abstracts on the hard science pay sites. Some afternnon when I am avoiding work, I'll dig around a bit.

Rad, I agree! The lymphatic system would be an important gateway. But I wonder if the cannabinoids don't end up there somehow anyway. We know that THC and other cannabinoids bind to the CB receptors of the endocannabinoid system, which enhances the immune system response to tumor growth. But doesn't THC also attacks cancer cells directly causing apoptosis death of the cells? And is also known cancerous cells do use the lymphatic system as the cancer spread from initial tumor sites. So if THC is able to attack all cancer cells, which it likely does based on reduction in metastatic cancers that have been reported by cannabis oil users, than perhaps there already is a way for cannabinoids to access the lymphatic system. Just thinking out loud about this possibility right now. I definitely need to continue studying the interaction of the endocannabinoid system, CB receptors and the cancer fighting response to the binding of THC to the receptors. Fascinating stuff!

 

[PsyCro]

Ok, so.. still nobody is tackling the 'no euphoria' effect with tacking.

Lets look at a few things:

1. oromucosal (tacking) should be, in most cases, right next to intravenous absorption-wise.
2. as shown above, approx. 10% of what is absorbed via parenteral routes (IV, oromucosal, smoking) will go to the liver.
3. as shown above with smoking, conversion from ∆9 into OH-11 happens.
4. with IV and oromucosal, even more is absorbed than with smoking, and this we know from way back when, when talking about bioavailability and absorption.. sooo, even more (proportionally) will convert from ∆9 into OH-11.

And now, here's the kicker .. if even more is being absorbed via tacking, why are you not feeling it?? Look at the small list right above, the logic is right there, unless somebody can show otherwise.


Next, i propose a small experiment for those who are willing. I cannot be a part of it, only because i don't make CCO. The experiment is more for those who are tacking, but anyone with CCO can do it.

- One day, in the afternoon for example after lunch, take your normal tacking dose orally.. just swallow it. Write down the results.
- A few days later, or the next day, after lunch, take that same dose, melt it into a tablespoon of olive oil, and swallow that. Write down the results.
- Let us know, possibly even after a few stabs at it, how it all went.

The purpose of said experiment, will be explained by the participants .. and after that we can discuss some more .. have fun

 

[CajunCelt]

If you tack a small enough dose, you don't experience euphoria.
By slowly building up the dose, your also building tolerance.
If you tack too much or swallow too much....euphoria.

Your item #4 above. You are ingesting the oil lymphatically by oromucosal, avoiding a huge part of the 1st pass.
If you take certain supplements, you can further prolong the avoidance of the 1st pass.

By adding a LCFA like olive oil, you're helping bioavailability for sure, but your still just ingesting orally & wasting huge amounts of oil.

 

[SweetSue]

So we have an explaination now for the "no euphoria" - small doses and increased tolerance. A better description would be "controlled euphoria". (We should consider that.) This is fact PsyCro, not conjecture. So, where do you want this discussion to go from here? These cannabinoids we introduce into the body, the expectation is that they're going to attach themselves to receptors on cells and go to work. So yes, a certain percentage will be converted every time they pass through the liver, although you can decrease those numbers as well with competitive inhibition, but the numbers reaching the liver should have already been depleted by those busy at work.

Or am I missing something here?