Preping single doses for long-term storag

Discussion in 'Research Chemicals' started by transit, Nov 1, 2005.

  1. transit

    transit Newbie

    Reputation Points:
    85
    Messages:
    258
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    61 y/o
    I have been trying to figure out a method for preparing
    individual doses of research chemicals which can be stored for the long
    term. One possible method is the blotter approach.

    Another method that I am considering is the use of
    capsules. One problem with capsules is
    that even the smallest size is much larger than is needed for doses such as 10
    mg. As a result, along with the research
    chemical, the capsule will contain air with oxygen and a degree of humidity
    (given the practicalities of the environment in which this will take place). Since both oxygen and humidity contribute to
    the decay of research chemicals this is a potential problem for long-term
    storage.

    One possible solution to this problem would be to replace
    the air in the capsule with a solid. In
    other words, after placing the desired amount of the research chemical in the
    capsule, the capsule would be topped off with another solid/powder. It would be important that the solid be
    nonreactive with the research chemical and not be toxic/harmful/disruptive to
    the human body.

    I would appreciate suggestions as to the ideal solid/powder
    for this purpose (or other suggestions to deal with preparing individual doses
    for long-term storage).

    The intent is for the capsules to be stored in sealed glass
    containers with desiccant and oxygen absorbers, and placed in a freezer.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 14, 2009
  2. dogcow

    dogcow Silver Member

    Reputation Points:
    11
    Messages:
    98
    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2005
    from earth
    SWIMhasleft RC's dosed in caps for a few months (6mo now), doesnt seem like anythig has degraded to any significant noticeable degree , keep emin a dark place. The capsules used where from cranberry extract supliments, so if you want you can just pour out a little bit of the extract and leave the rest in there.


    The problem with the blotter, in the long run, seems to me that you have to glue the paper together and eventually the glue is gonna dry up and it will fall apart.





    -dc


    ps - good sig, i like bill hicks alot as wellEdited by: dogcow
     
  3. transit

    transit Newbie

    Reputation Points:
    85
    Messages:
    258
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    61 y/o



    I was especially concerned about that happening given his plans to store
    them along with a desiccant.







    Given the trends towards greater control of research chemicals, I was
    thinking in terms of a much longer “long term.”
    What's available now, may not be available in a few years (or for that
    matter, in a few months) -- thus the plans for storage.
    </span>What has minimal effect over 6 months, would potentially have a substantial
    effect over several years. Also he is interested in some particulary fragile chemicals.






    I am trying to come up with a “filler” that would be very
    nonreactive. </span>He is concerned that things
    like cranberry extract might be rather acidic and might contribute to decay of
    the chemicals. </span>Thanks for your input.
     
  4. joachimist

    joachimist Newbie

    Reputation Points:
    15
    Messages:
    111
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2005
    here in france we have a new sort of blotters (often said to be lsd be i
    don't think it is really)
    they are called "geltabs" "gelatines" "gelats" ...
    they look like small plastic squares, size is aprox 0,5cm X 0,5cm, maybe
    little smaller.
    they are made from porc gelatine.
    they exist in different colors (orange, red, violet) for differents types and
    power of trip (said to be different lsd, like lsd25 lsd8 lsd50 etc...)
    there is the letter U on each square
    they do conserve their efficacity much better than classic blotters, and
    they can be handled easier,
    you can let them in your mouth, they "disapear" (became liquid, i dont
    know the english word) slowly, without any noticeable acidity, just a little
    taste not bad.
    so the effect is coming up really fast.

    i think it is not hard to make your owns
    I am really thinking about it
     
  5. Nagognog2

    Nagognog2 Iridium Member

    Reputation Points:
    1,936
    Messages:
    7,017
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    Tiny squares, sometimes flat, sometimes domed, are what is called Windowpane here in the USA. Was common back in the early 1970's on. Usually indicated clean and powerful LSD25. Most people sought these out over either tablet or blotter forms.


    The word you were trolling for regards "disapear"(disappear) is dissolve. End of English lesson.
     
  6. Toltec

    Toltec Gold Member

    Reputation Points:
    124
    Messages:
    223
    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    from U.S.A.
    I'm curious, how do you make window pain? \


    Thanks


    Edited by: Toltec
     
  7. joachimist

    joachimist Newbie

    Reputation Points:
    15
    Messages:
    111
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2005
    hum windowpan is a strange name...
    but i really believe it is not difficult to make it from easily available
    alimentary gelatine.
    try first without active substance to be sure of what your are doing

    a good idea to know how is dispersed (? repartited? sorry for bad english)
    the active on your bloters or windowpane is to first add an alimentary
    colorant to the concentrated solution, then you'll notice any eventual
    problem by seeing the different intensity of color.
     
  8. nanobrain

    nanobrain Platinum Member

    Reputation Points:
    824
    Messages:
    1,132
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    from Australia
    ^being Kosher, Hallal, vegan, vegetarian and on an Aurvedic detox diet, one may wish to consider agar-agar instead of horns 'n hooves (gelatin) as the binder / carrier.


    P.S. how do you make a hormone? dont pay her...Edited by: nanobrain
     
  9. Pinkavvy

    Pinkavvy Platinum Member & Advisor

    Reputation Points:
    1,698
    Messages:
    2,260
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    from U.S.A.
    About the adhesive/glue coming apart... I have never had a problem with this. The adhesive used is a soy resin based non-toxic adhesive that contains NO WATER. the reason you elmers glue dries up and comes apart is because the water in the glue dissolved making it crumble apart. If you use an soy oil/resin based glue, the problem of it coming apart is not a fear at all.

    Making windowpane is very simple. Swim's friend found a light fixture that is the perfect mold and uses an agar based geletin. There are two ways to dose it, the first being the safest and easiest laymen way. you lay your first layer of gelitan, lay the pre-weighed doses, and lay a second layer of gelitan. A bulk way to go about it is much trickier as it requires a perfectly level working surface, and very accurate dilution. Add pre-measured ammount of chemical to the mixture of agar and liquid. Then pour the solution into the perfectly level mold of say 100 hits of whatever ammount you are making. This danger of this method is that if you don't have a perfectly level surface you will have stronger doses on one side and weaker doses on the other.
     
  10. transit

    transit Newbie

    Reputation Points:
    85
    Messages:
    258
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    61 y/o
    This thread was started to explore ways to prep individual
    doses in a manner that would allow them to be stored for the long term. </span>


    I wonder whether the use of gelatin would expose the research
    chemical to moisture which would contribute to breakdown – especially with
    relatively “fragile” substances such as 4-aco-dipt. </span>The window pane approach sounds like an
    excellent method for prepping doses that will be used within a relatively short
    period of time; however, I am dubious about its appropriateness for doses
    being prepared for long-term storage (years, not just months). </span>He would very much like to hear others
    experiences/opinions on this.


    As well, to recall the original question at the top of this
    thread, when individual doses are put into capsules, what “cutting agent” would
    be best for filling the rest of the capsule so as to remove the air? – the “cutting
    agent” would need to be very non reactive with the research chemical and non
    toxic/harmful/disruptive to the human body.


    Obvious possible substances such as lactose, powdered milk,
    soy baby formula powder, powdered vitamin B 12, and Ovaltine would meet the
    concerns about being non toxic to the body; however, I am concerned that
    such substances might react over the long term with the research chemical and
    as such would be no better than leaving the air in the capsule. </span>Any opinions?
    </span>


    The inert/noble gases would be the best choice in terms of
    reactivity, but I would prefer a solid.
    </span>The best idea that he has come up with so far is calcium – any opinions
    of how that would be? – no problem for the body, but what about reactivity with
    the research chemical? And what would be better?


    Maybe Swim will need to give further thought to the blotter
    approach; but for now he would like to find a filler that is nonreactive with research
    chemicals, that could be used to make the use of capsules work.
     
  11. Solidly-here

    Solidly-here Gold Member

    Reputation Points:
    389
    Messages:
    733
    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    If you want to store many Grams of RCs, why break them into 1,000 parts first?


    If I wanted to "Deep" store 20 Grams of Research Chemical (4-HO-DiPT for instance), I would keep it all in one container. If I thought I would use a couple Grams sooner, I would "Deep" store 17 Grams, and keep the rest available for use: Gulp ... Mmm.


    You are suggesting that you want to have 1,000 containers, and then make sure that they all will survive the wiles of life for years. Hmm.


    First, I would not want to cap-up a bunch of 10 MG Hits, because a couple years later I may want to take 14 MG. This would mean that I would have to re-open EVERY Hit, and then re-measure every Hit to my new preference.


    Second,the place of storage does not have unlimited space (especially in a Fridge). I would not want to waste a lot of space, and then have to see it every time I microwave a pizza. I would rather have all of my Research Chemical hermetically sealed in one small package, and toss the package in the back (or tape it inside the door).


    So, Transit, why would you want to pre-packagea thousand Hits? Inquiring minds want to know.
     
  12. transit

    transit Newbie

    Reputation Points:
    85
    Messages:
    258
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    61 y/o
    Thanks for your comments Solidly-here.


    I have heard that Swim primarily makes use of such
    substances on an individual basis. </span>As
    well, he generally only makes use of these materials once or twice a
    month. </span>With more than a dozen substances
    of current interest, while one may receive repeated attention, it is also the
    case that any one may not be revisited for a year or more. Consequently, he is
    working with quantities and numbers of doses substantially less than those you
    used in your example. </span>So no interest
    whatsoever in storing anything near a thousand containers, especially not for
    any one chemical.


    While there are obviously advantages to a single small
    package, I do not like the idea of having to unthaw everything and open
    the package (exposing it to humidity and oxygen) merely to measure out possibly
    as little as 10 mg of one substance.
    </span>Your idea of splitting one’s stock into two with the larger one
    remaining in relatively long-term deep storage with only the smaller quantity
    being accessed on a more frequent basis makes sense.


    To detail Swim’s plan a bit further with one example, he
    plans to separate his material into 10 glass vials sized such that the
    substance comes to the top of the vial leaving virtually no room for air. </span>These vials would be stored in another
    container along with desiccant and oxygen absorber and placed in a freezer. </span>When accessed, only one vial would be thawed
    and opened and at that time individual doses would be measured out and re-stored
    except for those wanted for immediate use.
    </span>So yes, I do want to attempt to ensure that “they all will survive the
    wiles of life for years” some in individual dose form and the rest in
    relatively bulk form. </span>His initial
    question above focused only on that part that he was wanting assistance with.


    I agree that minimizing the space involved in storage is
    desirable for a variety of reasons. </span>However,
    I have access to a friend’s top opening chest freezer which is at least 10
    degrees colder than his fridge freezer.
    </span>I have read that a decrease of 10 degrees is accompanied by an
    approximate halving in the rate of chemical breakdown. </span>Whether this figure is correct, it is clear
    that colder temperatures reduce chemical activity. </span>The chest freezer also has the advantage of
    burying the materials discretely under piles of containers of food. </span>As well it is bigger and imposes fewer
    restrictions on the amount that can be stored.
    </span>Remember that the amount that he is working with is far less than that
    in your example so the space expected to be involved is not really that big of
    a deal.


    Your point about the potential change in desired doses is
    clearly the biggest problem with the approach that I am exploring of
    prepping individual doses well in advance of their use; however, this problem
    will be minimized by prepping only a portion of the material into individual
    doses at one time.


    There are obvious advantages to prepping individual doses in
    advance (along with some disadvantages).
    </span>Whether one uses the blotter approach, window panes, capsules, or some
    other approach that I have not yet thought of, it is clearly preferable to
    proceed in a way that minimizes the decay of the research chemical and that
    does not have negative effects on the body.
    </span>While the decay issue is less of a concern with many (if not all) of the
    phenethylamines, it is much more of a concern with many of the tryptamines,
    especially it appears with those of the “aco” variety. </span>Thus, especially for these chemicals, if one
    is prepping individual doses even a short period in advance of their intended
    use, it seems reasonable to minimize moisture and oxygen. </span>Thus Swim’s thought to remove the air in the
    capsules by replacing it with a solid – and thus his question as to what solid
    is least likely to react with the research chemical. </span>Whether the storage is for 10 years or only a
    few weeks, finding the best substance for this purpose seems desirable if one
    is using capsules. </span>
     
  13. transit

    transit Newbie

    Reputation Points:
    85
    Messages:
    258
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    61 y/o


    I had rejected the window pane option in part based on
    the standard source of gelatin. </span>Thanks
    for pointing out the alternative.
     
  14. Solidly-here

    Solidly-here Gold Member

    Reputation Points:
    389
    Messages:
    733
    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    Vacuum-pack SWIM's Research Chemicals . . . one way to get the air out.


    If your main concern is about air infiltration, just buy one of those $100 Vacuum sealers. Then, when you get your individual doses prepared, pop them into a vacuum jar, and suck-out all of the air. Then toss that jar into the Deep Freeze.


    This will save you the trouble of trying to fill containers to the brim, and save you from finding chemicals which are non-reactive to the RCs.
     
  15. Nagognog2

    Nagognog2 Iridium Member

    Reputation Points:
    1,936
    Messages:
    7,017
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    "Nature hates a vacuum" is a very true addage. Vacuums tend to leak. Removing the air from said container with a hand-pump vacuum or water-line filter pump, and then filling the container with argon - welding supply shops - works. Argon is ideal as it's not only inert, but it's much heavier than air. So it will gladly settle down into a container, especially one that has had it's air mostly sucked out.
     
  16. transit

    transit Newbie

    Reputation Points:
    85
    Messages:
    258
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    61 y/o



    Thanks for the suggestion for where to get argon. </span>


    I have looked at using inert/noble gases before. </span>Helium is easy to purchase due to its use in
    filling balloons, however, the fact that it is lighter than air creates some
    serious challenges to getting it into the container and keeping it there. </span>Argon is used for wine preserving, however,
    most of the wine preserver products that I has explored have also contained
    nitrogen and CO2. </span>He has heard that CO2
    is implicated in the breakdown of some chemicals so has avoided such.
     
  17. emineo

    emineo Newbie

    Reputation Points:
    199
    Messages:
    97
    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2005
    Just had a thought about method #1 with regards to method #2 and getting inconsistent doses.

    Method #1 uses an agar layer, gelled to room temp, so that the next application has a level substrate, correct? Third layer added on top of the second just to encapsulate the additive suspended in the second layer?

    I guess the key is to gel the first layer so there is a level foundation for the second layer.

    Sounds like it would work pretty well, and if you used a mold of a known volume you could make some really funky shapes without even worrying about planarity!

    What happens at the interface between layers when laid flat? Is there a lot of diffraction/refraction causing a noticable difference between layers?
     
  18. Toltec

    Toltec Gold Member

    Reputation Points:
    124
    Messages:
    223
    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    from U.S.A.
     
  19. nanobrain

    nanobrain Platinum Member

    Reputation Points:
    824
    Messages:
    1,132
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    from Australia
    hey good to hear the Bear is still aclawin'

    Sands was quoted different but if the Bear isnt crikeyty, this puts a whole new sTpin on things...

    in the 80's on one summer Dead tour, i had Black Pyramid Gels(tm) 400 mikes per, the black, shiny opaque gel sheet was pressed crinkled both ways so each hit formed a perfect tiny pyramid, black and goldflaked, from the Family, and lasted long time stored proper (5 on tongue, 18 hours :eek: ) j/k they did last, stored proper.

    as most paper is acidic, i assume pH of binder should be neutral or a tad alkaline??? what exactly in the binder would prove destructive to LSD i wonder?
     
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2005
  20. Toltec

    Toltec Gold Member

    Reputation Points:
    124
    Messages:
    223
    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    from U.S.A.
    I believe all he is saying is based from what he knew at the time. He did "only" press pills when he was making LSD in the mid to late 60's.

    Although I believe LSD in Pill form with the proper fillers and or antioxidants or UV protectives suggested a few days back, Is a great idea. LSD should be placed in the most protective environment as possible. Surly there is a way!

    I hear you bout those Black gels with the gold on them. They where quality, two of them lasted, and gave me many peeks with the help of da bud!
    cheers