- Thread starter
- #81
I see where your going with this (I think).
One issue for me is that the liver converts ∆9 into the dreaded OH-11 by most means.
ok.. aaand the liver does that as blood with ∆9 goes through it, after all, that's its purpose, to filter blood.
But, since it's so much more psychoactive than ∆9, you can theoretically can only so many ng in the bloodstream anyway you dose.
Look at the link above showing ∆9 to OH-11 conversion after smoking. I find it interesting that i don't really get more high with my oil than i do smoking (different though type of high), so the conversion level must at least be similar, in my case anyways. But if someone is getting 1gram RSO into their blood stream daily, shouldn't the liver convert ∆9 to OH-11 accordingly, which you certainly would feel??
Tacking is an awesome delivery method as far as bioavailability..
Oromucosal absorption IS great for many things, but any studies done with cannabinoids have been done using carriers.. big difference.
Can you get a therapeutic dose of cannabinoids through tacking? Some here have. It would help the "no to little" psychoactivity statement especially knowing the THC-oh-11 is not involved.
Blood ∆9 and OH-11 levels as shown in the smoking link, but for tacking/oromucosal, would put an end to this conversation!
So, of you've a 93.6% THC with oil and +/- 65% is absorbed. A therapeutic dose is easy to calculate.
So, enough small doses by oromucosal (tacking) enough times a day, add on that you're by-passing the liver so no THC-OH-11 for psychoactivy....
How are you bypassing the liver? Its getting into the blood, which is getting to the liver like it or not.. just like with smoking. Yes you're probably bypassing the fullest extent of conversion, but how can you say that no THC goes through the liver via tacking? Wouldn't that be the same as saying the same for smoking?
.. or maaaybe it actually isn't being absorbed properly without a carrier ::
What do ya think?
I dunno, what do you think?