Even if they were, they’d quickly be blown out of the water, once patents on the individual disastereomers were granted to other inventors.
5 Likes
Yeah no shit, it’s not novel or even well written or explored. Super lame to patent something ez and use that baby chemistry to float the rest of your reputation.
Also good luck to anyone trying to run hydrogenations with 10% loading of 10% Pd/C…just throw economy to the wind and see how competitive your pricing is in a few months…those conditions are completely unoptimized.
Does anyone do HHC consulting?
Omg can we just not… how about we don’t?
5 Likes
I understand the risks. I am just trying to gauge if there are some alternative SOPs, like those mentioned above in this thread, that could be more manageable.
are you certain?
the tragedy linked above appears to have occurred on an HHC consult.
10 Likes
Yup, I know the risks. And thanks for sharing that link to the LA fire. Wow. I feel bad for the burn victims and families. That really sucks.
Yeah, it does.
Not something I’d wish upon anyone.
I doubt we will know exactly what went sideways ever…but anyone thinking about performing or scaling this reaction needs to understand the magnitude of the risks involved.
12 Likes
I’m good. I don’t even want to support HHC to mass consumers if the risks truly outweigh the reward.
It’s truly eye opening.
You gotta give me a big life insurance policy for that level of science.
8 Likes
Probably not. And honestly, if you need consulting you shouldn’t be doing the chemistry. If you’re qualified to do the chemistry, you don’t need a consultant.
The reason I won’t consult on it is liability, AND the fact that consulting on something that valuable requires you to under value new technology. One could make hundreds of thousands of dollars running hydrogenations, or tens of thousands consulting on it. It just doesn’t make sense to give away the technology.
Edit: that being said, I’ve got kilos of HHC if you want em (;
11 Likes
An SOP doesn’t make the chemist, that’s for sure. That said, there are plenty of people out there that has the right attitude, err on the side of caution, have nice top of the line equipment, and are simply eager to do things right.
The problem, as I see it, is that all too often an SOP is seen as a Carte Blanche, lulling operators into a false sense of security, turning off their critical thinking (if it was even there in the first place).
Add to this a slew of inexperienced business owners who just sees the SOP as a way to placate regulators and could not care less about the inherent quality of the SOP. Just download it and hope it fits the equipment without any modifications.
The SOPs that I have seen in the “hemp industry” as far as the chemistry is concerned is mostly pure garbage, but still regarded as highly coveted secrets, oftentimes lifted straight out of the patent literature without any regard whatsoever if the SOP actually infringes on someone’s IP.
The idea that someone should be prevented from doing chemistry just because they aren’t classically trained in the field is a dangerous one. It is not their lack of that training that makes them dangerous to themselves and others, that is mostly due to notions of invincibility and a cavalier attitude.
9 Likes
It’s possible I am not as naive as you think. Though I understand your view given the number of clowns here.
I am frequently pressured by my employer, as the only professionally trained chemist with advanced degrees and years of industrial experience, to make some of these cutting edge products. Most of the chemistry employed isn’t new. I did Pd on C reactions years ago in grad school… but I wont pretend to be an organic synthetic chemist (let alone at scale). It has been rather difficult explaining to non-chemists the safety and scalability issues presented with such processes. And the environmental conditions required… So, these replies have been actually helpful, frankly. As was the link to the horrible fire. It states my case well. I truly hope that people can learn from the recent incident. I say that for myself.
I literally had a conversation with a pseudo colleague out west a week ago about HHC. He said his connections make it all the time. It’s easy… blah, blah, blah. He can sell it all. Same with THC-o. I just need to make it… so he can make his commission, of course.
So, I sent him the link to the horrible accident out west.
Does that make any sense?
6 Likes
As long as you stay away from transfer hydrogenation.
1 Like
I don’t know what you’re getting at after reading that. I’m not suggesting gatekeeping chemistry from untrained chemists. But I’ll triple down on saying you shouldn’t be hydrogenating or messing with HF or organometallics if you’re not classically or highly trained, that’s a no brainer.
5 Likes
That’s where people like you and me come in, I suppose.
1 Like
I have lots of experience with HF, actually.
So, what was your point?
Facts.
1 Like
Which is why I used the word idea instead of suggesting.
And then following up with your own assertion that hydrogenation isn’t shrouded in mystery.
There’s a huge difference between classical hydrogenation and transfer hydrogenation but surprisingly, many operators don’t understand that, or are unwilling to accept that fact.
asked the all knowing one about enzymatic desaturation…
pity that 's not the correct delta 9…
(…and we need a “saturase”, not a “desaturase”. doh!!)
1 Like
Look, if you consider yourself skilled enough then go for it. Don’t find a way to take what I’m saying personally.
Again, I don’t think folks will consult on this because:
- not a lot of people currently are doing it very well
- those who are doing it would be wise to use the technology to make product rather than give away their hard work for someone else to make money with
- there’s a lot of liability handing off hazardous technology to another group with a production environment beyond their control
That is my point. Anything you interpret beyond that is not on me.
4 Likes