Hello everyone,
I recently heard about new synthetic cannabinoids such as CB9 and THCH-O. I was wondering if any of you have already tried these molecules and could share your experience.
Also, do you think other oxidized derivatives like THCB-O or THCV-O could arrive on the market soon? I read that these molecules would have slightly different effects from classic THC.
Thanks in advance for your feedback!
Whatever you are calling cb9 is NOT a novel synthetic cannabinoid and if it is
It s a full antagonist Wich is cut with 99% cuting material since full antagonist already function at 1 gram on 1 kg of cbd flower
Rumor has it that on a GC only a few tiny peaks are seen ( most likely the synthetic cannabinoid ) and that the cut that is used doesn t show in the cannabinoid spectrum of retention times
So have fun but be carefull for these
Synthetics are dangerous in concentrated form
Most likely cumyl pinaca. Without the Fluor also known as stg-24
It s been around since 2016 but rare
I was contemplating to start a tread to warn the public of it s potency
But seems like those that get the pure form realized the valeu can be multiplied by cutting it
Since 1 kg is enough to impregnate
1000 kg of flower
I’m honestly surprised no one has run a column on “CB9” to separate the components and gotten an NMR on it. It’s like an afternoon of work, and is low hanging fruit in terms of a publication.
I’m also surprised that none of the people buying/consuming it are at all curious what the molecule is. Any Japanese customer I’ve ever dealt with has demanded tons of documentation and perfect COAs, but apparently they’re cool just consuming some substance that they don’t even know the name/structure of. It’s funny they’re more concerned about the COA indicating ND THC than they are about smoking a literal mystery drug.
I’m ALSO surprised that KCA, which has a presence in Japan where this material is being sold like hot cakes, has not put out any sort of white paper or statement about the new compound that’s taking Japan by storm. There is literally no way they’ve never heard of it.
What would not surprise me is if it contains something insane like dimethy heptyl compounds or has some nitrogen groups. There’s probably a reason it’s deliberately shrouded in mystery and not sold in the US. It’s funny how when HHC was released it was accompanied by data, testing and some amount of transparency by Colorado Chromatography, but this CB9 stuff is just like…don’t-ask-wont-tell??
What is THCH-O? Like, acetylated THCH? Like how “THCO” is commonly used to refer to acetylated THC?
What do you mean by “oxidized” versions. Can you maybe find a picture of the structure you’re referring to?
deer bro - this is a product of pure greed and no suprise the main player involved in this fiasco is MC Nutraceticals and @Bret_HoneyGold
Claiming some bullshit like hey deer bros we “discovered some new cannabinoid in hemp distillate”
They are not advertising in the US becuse well its sketcy as fuck to say the least
Follow the money from the HHC days and its pretty easy to put this puzzle together and fiqure out who else is a player in this
the worst part about this is its being claimed a hemp product when this shit iis toxic and unethical mystery soup strictly for profit in a pplace like Japan
Shame on all of you who support this and are making money of this trash you really should do better for humanity and the name of actual legit hemp/cannabis molecules that help people improve there quaity of life
Hopefully if anything this sheds some light on the dark side of the industry and the people who profit from selling low quality research chemicals in prohibition countries - again this is predatory and imoral and the cominunty should make a fund to get this stuff tested and put these clowns on blast
bunch of clowns
We’ve been trying to figure out what it is. Especially since we’ve seen a third party COA floating around show a material be “97% CB9.”
I’ve been trying to get my hands on that exact material, but alas I’m told only some minuscule amount was made and exhausted before another reputable lab could check their work.
I’ve seen CB9 mentioned here tangentially in threads but not much direct about it. And you’ll see it in some hemp vendor profiles description on the open hemp listings platforms… but not much for actual listings and this explains
Reads like someone’s bored again and acting like avoiding stylometry is important for this
@oilburner1
So CB9 is some super dangerous strong synthetic cannabinoid? Anyone could make it that’s not just the ppl you listed and we’ve never seen claims by them. CB9 was made long before recent am I wrong, if caymenchems has ever made it wouldnt one put them on blast as well?
Your saying that Carmen chem has a standard ???
Some vendor named the molecule a 17 Carbon core Wich makes it even harder to be named a cannabinoid
This is the way yet if my hunch is right
That this is a highly cut product (99% cut) and 1% of a synthetic cannabinoid soup (3 at least) your in for a very long day working with RC has thought me one thing some folks are very good at disguising the API defenatly if it s super potent
Here is the COA that was sent to me by clients in Japan asking about it. Edit: This was sent to me as a link that was publicly available.
CB9-quantified-COA.pdf (311.7 KB)
nah bro this is 100% @Bret_HoneyGold and Mc Nutraceticals. They are the ones pushing this trash in Europe and Japan.
They 100% responsible for this shitshow and are nothing more then sketchy drug dealers using the bogus hemp legislation they fund and lobbying to push this trash onto consumers in prohibition countries and states.
Of course you wont see claims from them. who tf would claom this shit. I guarantee i know more about the orgin and whos behind it then you so again why are you here defending it
this is a pretty serious issue thats going to kill someone eventualy.
If you are going to be a drug dealer at least sell real drugs for fucks sake
You must understand, CB9 has in no way been structurally identified so there is no way you or I could confirm whether the compound is or isn’t naturally occuring, or whether any party has made the compound previously. First, we would need to know what CB9 compound actually is in order to ascertain whether it’s been made before. What I can tell you is that there is not a cannabinoid out there that has ever been called CB9 previously, that name is new/made up.
You would be mistaken to believe Cayman has made a cannabinoid that goes by the name CB9. If they have made whatever molecule CB9 is, they’ve called it by its actual chemical name - and whoever called the product CB9 has done so to deliberately obfuscate the identity of the compound(s).
I think talk of “sketchy” and “greed” come from the fact that a novel drug product is being sold in order to skirt prohibition laws, and the identity of the drug(s) of action is intentionally being withheld. How would a buyer know what they’re consuming, or if its safe?
Agreed, it would certainly be difficult to partition something that’s only present in trace quantities. It could take multiple columns, and perhaps sensitive/well maintained analytical tools. But if it’s in there…with enough work, someone can definitely isolate a couple milligrams - of this am I certain.
This coa is shown on several site that sell cb9
Wonder if that lab treuly wrote cb9 on that coa and if so what was used as standard
Interesting times
This is 100% MC Nutraceticals and @Bret_HoneyGold @Tre_HoneyGold
whats CBG9 and HHCD? @kcalabs you tested the CBG9 so can you tell us what the hell this stuff is??
Apologies about my assumptions there I’m ok with being wrong y’all are stating what you are saying to look out for others. Everyones feedback here is helping make sense of it.
its all good deer bro thanks
all these guys care about is stuffing there pockets and using hemp legislation to push research chemicals
Looks like you have our official documentation saying what we know is not in the material. We’re a targeted analysis laboratory and, even though we test for 70+ cannabinoids, we’re not able to test for everything, especially novel substances.
We’re happy to engage in development work for identification, but we’re not currently allocating internal R&D resources to these substances.
