@ScoobyDoobie, and @Roguelab, CBD definitely exists as real crystals! I’m not sure where you might have heard that, but it was most certainly NOT from me!
And who in the world thinks CBD is not a “real” crystal, @Roguelab?! Can you send me a link where you read that? I call shenanigans!
Cocrystallization can be fun and profitable, for sure, but one must be certain of the health safety of any such species that would cocrystallize with cannabinoids prepared for ingestion, of course, but most especially for VAPING or SMOKING, since those can both introduce otherwise ingestibly safe chemistry that is potentially harmful or even lethal upon inhalation!!! Please, for the love of life and liberty, we do NOT need another nationally damning incident like the cutting/thickening agent debacle that is still hospitalizing and killing people!!!
That is entirely possible, @ScoobyDoobie! I’m pretty sure it is not… though do you know why that would have been a question in the first place? Thanks!
No. THCa is specifically a fairly strongly dielectric (insulating) material, so it does not conduct electricity. You can test this by just trying to put “sandy” live resin sauce into one of those cartridges where the whole atomizer (heater coil) and wick post comes out for filling. Screw it back together and the thin layer of smashed THCa between the post and the electrical contact blocks it from firing!
Also, the reason we are even able to use carts with cannabis materials in the first place is because cannabinoids, essential oils, and any carrier fluids or additives are non-conductive! I don’t recommend it, but have you ever tried firing a tank type cartridge after washing it and without letting it thoroughly dry out? Doesn’t work, does it? That’s because any vaporizer cartridge contents must NOT conduct electricity!
In University, I did a few reactions using azide click reactions and bromine activated pathways to make sugar drugs of a handful of NSAIDs. We used their hydroxyl and carboyxl functional handle in a way you’re describing. When it would not react, sometimes an amino acid bridge was required for steric reasons, like alanine, glycine and a few other alkane amino acids. I wonder if making a glucosamine-cbd or glucosamine-cbda would be a fun route (or even galactosamine). Pair sugar with activated hydroxyl or carboxyl group and wham bam you’ve got something that (hopefully) your body will metabolize differently or quicker because it would recognize part of the structure as a native molecule. Or the amide bond wouldn’t break as there isn’t an enzyme to my knowledge that would process the bond in your body.
@ScoobyDoobie, it depends on the size and functionality of the rest of the amine group. Amino acids individually are sufficiently soluble in water, but adding one to a cannabinoid is not straitfoward (it would be a covalent bond of some sort, not ionic, as you may be thinking), it is unlikely to make the cannabinoid water soluble enough (though it may increase it slightly), and an amino acid group will certainly change the cannabinoid’s activity!
An amide might be easier to add to a cannabinoid acid, and it may enhance water solubility (especially if you let the N+ stay hanging and retain the cannabinoid’s carboxylic acid, making an internal salt or zwitterion), but it will still change its activity.
You’re now getting into the territory of synthesis of new compounds rather than just doing temporary modifications for solubility or isomers… so @Krative 's question is quite valid: Is it safe? …in creepy Running Man dentist voice…
It really depends on where and how the moiety is attached to the cannabinoid. Bee careful, folks!
Thanks!
