Thoughts on D8 vs D9 safety

,

Soi found myself getting lost in the echo chamber today.

And I got confused. And then sad. And then energized to find a better answer.

Do we have evidence that D8 is potentially dangerous in it’s pure form regardless of impurities or other such adulterants?

The answer is yes we do. Specifically, we have toxicology information about the D8 isomer and its relative effect on mammals, mice, rats and rabbits. As well as, teo studies with dogs.

Amazingly enough these studies made it I to the national database on toxicity. And from that our SDS info let’s us know that D8 has a known LD50. For those who might wonder what that means, it means we know that certain doses can kill you because there is good science that says as much.

We also know that there is NOT an established LD50 for d9THC because there is alot of good toxicology work on this as well. Meaning it has never been shown to KILL YOU.

I feel like these are important distinctions to make. We have a maximum space dosage for D8 so that we dont overdose folks and kill them. Which means there is a potential for harm if we dont provide education and also limit dosing.

We also know that some D8 products make people sick (there is national poison data available, its literally public…) and that those sicknesses are related to its specific chemical properties as well as potential unknowns.

Anyway. The moral of the story is, we dont have to guess about the relative safety cause the work has been done. No need to beat ones head against the wall… a quick SDS and LD50 search quickly outlined the relative safety differences. And those studies are even specific about expected adverse events.

If you really want to know more and you dont like academic journals… you could check out the national poison control website which has specific concerns listed, amounts that are toxic, side effects, and overdose precautions.

14 Likes

Have you got links to the LD50 research or reference to the other relevant literature to its’ toxicity?

6 Likes

Could you link the dog study? Ive seen one “study” where it was all conjecture based off unknown edibles dogs had eaten and been taken to the vet. Same thing with d9 edibles in colorado loads of dogs dying and at first d9 was blamed from assumption. Yet there were other variables like chocolate and prior illnesses to the dogs.

3 Likes

I too would be interested in these links if you have them.

Can you provide sources to your post?

If you really want to know more and you dont like academic journals… you could check out the national poison control website which has specific concerns listed, amounts that are toxic, side effects, and overdose precautions.

I like academic journals, but I also like well sourced posts when we try to draw a thesis.

To be clear, I believe that D8 oil is potentially a sketchy arrangement. I just don’t like a post drawing upon sources without… you know… sourcing them.

2 Likes

The who mentions LD-50:

https://www.who.int/medicines/access/controlled-substances/IsomersTHC.pdf

The source for the WHO:

https://sci-hub.se/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0041008X73903104?via%3Dihub

from chemicalbook im inclined to believe this paper may have other toxicology data, but i cannot get the “download pdf” button to work

chemicalbook reference says “LD50 i.v. in mice: 27.5 mg/kg (Yoshimura)”

if anyone can get Yoshimura its not on scihub, and I’d LOVE to read it

4 Likes

According to WHO the LD50 for d9 is much lower then for d8 and that’s with the d8 being 10% stronger (90% d9 vs 99% d8)

This is interesting also

“The purest D9-THC was
significantly more potent in male Fischer rats than was D8-THC, but female rats were equally affected by both agents”

5 Likes

i found the adrenal congestion part interesting, only appears with d8

Especially considering its a precursor to adrenal hemorrhage Adrenal congestion | Radiology Reference Article | Radiopaedia.org

A Bilateral hemorrhage often results in an adrenal crisis, with coma and death resulting if steroid replacement therapy is not administered promptly. Despite treatment, overall there is approximately a 15% mortality, and about 50% when in the setting of sepsis.

2 Likes

if i step out deep into conjecture-land, perhaps delta 8 thc exhibits more pronounced anticoagulant effects than d9 thc.

This would explain the incidence of adrenal congestion in the mice (as well as provide a good answer to the health problems brought up by the d8 community on reddit as chest pains/difficulty breathing is a side effect of anticoagulants, if dirty synths are not the answer)

it would even explain this report of a short term d8 user coughing up blood as that can be a side effect of anticoagulants as well in extreme cases

5 Likes

Thanks. Gonna link this to that dude in the Discord server I moderate To get him to shut up for once about this.

1 Like

I think I may have smoked a D9/D8 mixture cart, gave me a headache and only made me paranoid.

The following isomers of Δ9-THC and their stereochemical variants:
 7,8,9,10-tetrahydro-6,6,9-trimethyl-3-pentyl-6H-dibenzo[b,d]pyran-1-ol (or Δ6a,10a-THC)
 (9R,10aR)-8,9,10,10a-tetrahydro-6,6,9-trimethyl-3-pentyl-6H-dibenzo[b,d]pyran-1-ol (or
Δ6a,7-THC)
 (6aR,9R,10aR)-6a,9,10,10a-tetrahydro-6,6,9-trimethyl-3-pentyl-6H-dibenzo[b,d]pyran-1-ol
(or Δ7-THC)
 (6aR,10aR)-6a,7,10,10a-tetrahydro-6,6,9-trimethyl-3-pentyl-6H-dibenzo[b,d]pyran-1-ol (or
Δ8-THC)
 6a,7,8,9-tetrahydro-6,6,9-trimethyl-3-pentyl-6H-dibenzo[b,d]pyran-1-ol (or Δ10-THC)
 (6aR,10aR)-6a,7,8,9,10,10a-hexahydro-6,6-dimethyl-9-methylene-3-pentyl-6H-
1.1.7
dibenzo[b,d]pyran-1-ol (or Δ9,11-THC)

Meaning you can isomerize these from D9?

Another meta review by the WHO suggests the LD50 of delta 8 is far lower than delta 9.

We also know that there is NOT an established LD50 for d9THC because there is alot of good toxicology work on this as well. Meaning it has never been shown to KILL YOU.

This is wrong. There have been studies that suggest an LD50 for delta 9 eg:

Rosenkrantz, H., I.A. Heyman, and M.C. Braude, Inhalation, parenteral and oral LD50 values of delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol in Fischer rats. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol, 1974. 28(1): p. 18-27.

I’m confused why such studies are not relevant?

2 Likes

D8 won’t make you paranoid

D9 does

2 Likes

How does that LD50 compare to that of distilled water?

@Cassin; Having gone and looked these up, I’m a little disappointed that you’ve left actually locating those values as an exercise for the reader (not that some couldn’t use the practice)…

@Kingofthekush420 appreciate the screen capture, a url as well to define the source would be great. The table presented is presumably mg/kg, but that is difficult to confirm with the snippet presented.

Last time I looked I could not find an LD50 for THC, certainly getting dogs to eat enough weed to kill them is non-trivial, apparently banging concentrate in ethanol/sesame oil is the way to go…

4 Likes

I was under the impression there is not a clearly established LD50 for any isomer of THC. Is this not true?

I have vague memories of a certain I.V. THC study that required a THC prodrug.

2 Likes

None posted for humans yet…

Edit: first hit (no LD50 for humans)…but includes a “guess” for dronabinol at 30mg/kg

https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/fed_regs/notices/2001/fr0418/fr0418h.htm

I’m not sure what @Cassin is trying to get across then if neither have clear human studies in regard to toxicity as there are more than a few animal studies for delta 9 THC and delta 8 THC addressing toxicity. What “national database on toxicity” is being referred? Are you both referring to the RTECS database? I’m not familiar with it. Is there a value for d8 THC there? I don’t have access. Thank you

1 Like

Thats why I said D8/D9 mixture. The D8 and D9 mixed caused it more than D9 alone. I rarely get the way I got with that mixture than I do D9. D9 helps me focus and work when I had it raw and with terps in a cart depending on terps, how much I’m ripping will make me tired if I’m not doing anything but when working helps a lot. Works better for it raw with no terps in my experience.

And it gave me headaches. Made me feel weird all together. That’s just off a mixture, not “raw D8”

Oh man guys! I’m so sorry. I sent this note last night after getting lost in the Echo Chamber for like an hour and I totally thought I linked to all the sources like I normally do! Rolling out a new inventory system at work and its got me bogged down, just came up for air and come back to all these questions!

Here’s the links to the academic studies 1, 2 - (yo, they have been doing this work for over 60 years! its not new science… its just science). Some in animals. Some in humans - the human work always seems to draw more attention…but we are not generally in the habit of forcing so much of any substance into a human until it kills him. Instead we use animals studies and wait for the Darwin effect to show us humans dying of something and then correlate with other available information. You know?

Here’s the link to the national poison control website - everyone should probably already know how to use this…so you can teach your mom. Its easy and has good info. And it has links to the big study of all poison related cases that have been submitted (it comes out every year) and was I’m referring to when I talk about harm reduction activities. Cool thing here - they actually have a fully separate category for THC that is not d9THC called THC homolog - for all those synthetics out there and other unknowns that people like to ingest. :smiley:

I see people are looking at some WHO stuff and what not in the thread. Its probably worthwhile to show the DEA’s stance on THC toxicity - it also links directly to the references…if people were so inclined to read them. In summary - they agree that its nearly impossible to kill someone with d9THC - as a person would have to physically consume more than is possible to be consumed (aka it must crush them to kill them). This work is still from the 70’s and was part of Nixon’s war on drugs… so you know, read the references in that light. They were trying to prove that it will kill you, but could not. x.X

Here’s a link to a solid outline of acute toxicity and the references to the studies - also available publicly - no paywall or anything like that. And here’s the same thing for D9 - its even got a specific case listed of someone INJECTING over 2grams into their bloodstream, and then you know…dying. Not sure why you would do that. But its a known case of intravenous overdose.

I think the references above should probably help those that are looking to find more information from themselves. Certainly I was feeling a bit strange last night (doesn’t everyone who accidentally falls into the echo chamber?) but I’ve also just come from writing a couple papers on this stuff - you know?

The bigger thing for me is the known impurities and metabolites of those impurities which Mecholeum has legit been studying since the 70’s that people are all like - we never seen this before. Nah dude - we seen it. We even tried to kill animals with it. We have liver studies about it. And people decided back then it wasn’t worth pursuing, cause its wasn’t as effective as D9 for most things, and it had metabolites that made people sick.

When I say sick I mean getting the runs and stuff - not dying. And that’s the same thing we are seeing now. We’re seeing kids get sick - probably from a combination of too much sucralose or other sweeteners and D8 in their systems.

And kids getting sick is bad news bears for the industry as a whole. Cause when kids get sick - regulators take action. And when regulators take action then the enforcers start showing up to seize your stuff and/or collect taxes.

But I digress - so sorry I didn’t include the links. I don’t usually do this stuff from my phone while watching football in the dark. :slight_smile:

Yo bro! Sorry I didn’t post the link last night. It is now linked above. One must dig for it and it is definitely available through scihub, you just have to poke it with the DOI correctly. :smiley:

I think the WHO study is really weird - since it is almost exactly the opposite of the reported information from the other sources I have linked above. However - they have been known to selectively choose only the worst outcomes/studies when trying to tell people why drugs are terrible and should continue to be illegal. Kind of like the DEA study which shows that THC is basically heroin and even though it won’t kill you will ruin your life and your mom’s life too. (no really…you gotta read the study above they go completely down the rabbit hole on this one…)

I also find this stuff interesting - there is a further study that talks about cardiovascular issues - which points to this being caused by a metabolite that only forms from D8 liver metabolism. Its by that same Yoshimura lab - he really does a lot of excellent toxicology work and really tries hard to kill as many animals as possible in unique ways.

I mean I hate it… but would we have this information if we weren’t getting livers from dead people and killing off animals? Probably not.

All studies are relevant! That was the point of my post. That the studies exist. That we just need to spend the time to read them. And that we don’t have to wonder about this stuff because the science has been completed over the last 60 years or so.

I propose that the specific study you reference may not be relevant to humans - because a similar study performed in primates and another one in humans showed that there was not an LD50.

And that the studies that I linked above about D8 are specific to how the metabolism of D8 is what leads to issues (which others have shared other links about). And its those things, plus impurities from synthesis (those are also included in the links) that can also contribute to issues with GI tract bleeding and respiratory distress.

Yes - I’m referencing this database. And if you don’t have access to it directly - you can usually get all the other important information from PubChem and links to the studies where the data came from. I included links for this above. And you can always look on SDS for this information as well. And if you don’t have any SDS you can poke the European Toxicology Index.

9 Likes