• CD Moderators: someguyontheinternet
  • Cannabis Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules

Delta-8 warning?

brokedownpalace10 said:
And (sorry for using Wiki)...
aromatase inhibitor
"In women, side effects include an increased risk for developing osteoporosis and joint disorders such as arthritis, arthrosis, and joint pain. Men do not appear to exhibit the same adverse effects on bone health.[8"
So, cannabitriol isi something already found in pot, a metabolite of THC, and isn't likely a factor at all in trace quantities. Large quantities don't seem to be a horrible poison.

And, as has been said, there is a huge ongoing sampling of these CBD/THC derivitives going on as we speak with no significant adverse effects as yet.
As you so succinctly put it...
"My inference that these pseudo-phytocannabinoids are less problematic than the cannabinoids found in spice and such blends comes from the observations above, as well as the fact that the current prevalence of these compounds isn't killing people left and right"

Manufacturing by products have been mentioned numerous times as a possible issue probably avoided by using a reputable company.
No one thinks these products wouldn't benefit from quality control. Many supplements have been found to have adulterants.
But, I guess I'm just saying there has been a little hyperbole with the comparison to Thalidomide and all.

I did highlight "different drug class" when I quoted him as well.

Skorpio, you know what you are talking about, I can keep up with you, but it is an effort.
I will be still if you would like me to be.
Click to expand...
Nothing too bad with using wiki to get ideas, but glancing at the citations is pretty key, as there's a huge range in quality between publications.

Natural products papers can especially be bad, like some paper showing tramadol and prozac in an African plant and assuming they were biosynthesized rather than accumulated from contaminated water.

Honestly, go on if you want, it's fun sparring. I came out of the gate hot because I felt condescended to, but the debate has been good and fun in all.

What kind of pharmacology research do you do (feel free to generalize if you want to keep things anonymous). I'm relatively near the end of my sentence in a closely related field working on stuff related to scaffolding proteins.
 
Skorpio said:
What kind of pharmacology research do you do (feel free to generalize if you want to keep things anonymous). I'm relatively near the end of my sentence in a closely related field working on stuff related to scaffolding proteins.
Click to expand...
:LOL: Definitely a dilettante here. I started college in pharmacology 50 years ago and dropped out first year. I know terminology and like to look things up if something interests me.
I am 68 and a bit more mentally lazy than I once was.
I also felt a bit of condescension and can usually tell when someone is using a wall of words to advance their opinion.
I knew that small changes in structure can have large qualitative differences in effect, but the large sample size made me doubt it was the case with cannabinoids.
Then reading your detailed reasoning confirming that as opposed to someguyontheinternet (username checks out) just saying, "It has happened" with a totally different class of drugs made me come out of the gate hot myself.

Buckle up for another wall of words.
 
If it has happened in multiple classes of drugs then I see no reason it may not happen with this one, which is why we need regulation and analysis of products. We don't know what the byproducts are going to bind to
 
someguyontheinternet said:
If it has happened in multiple classes of drugs then I see no reason it may not happen with this one, which is why we need regulation and analysis of products. We don't know what the byproducts are going to bind to
Click to expand...
Been explained in great detail to you by someone with more knowledge in the area than both of us. We do need regulation and analysis of products, of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top