ive just got some of the christmas harvest....




how the hell have we been fooling ourselves with that crappy sandy pethetic imitation grade.


this bud is NICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

proper 1 hit shit ;)

keep ur noses to the floor people, the end is in sight.

Dont get me wrong, I feel the Cannabis addiction as much as most people. But ya'll need to quit cluckin and STOP SMOKING THIS SHIT! The more of this crap you buy out of desperation, the longer it is gonna be around. I personally would rather go without than poison (or possilbly kill myself) on this filth. Also, I dont think a filter will do much if it cant even filter out all the poisonous chemicals in a cigarette. A filter would just stop the possibility of sand particles passing through the roach.

Seriously, its not that hard to go without for a little while or to smoke some hash if you really cant hack it. I just do not understand why so many people are continuing to smoke sand shit and then in the next breath talk about how "we need to do something about this".

Dont buy it, dont sell it and certainly dont smoke it. Help to spread the word to other stoners and eventually we'll see an end to this. Keep buying it though and it will become as widespread as the soapbar situation is now.

im sure it would it would be safe in a bong but i wouldnt reccomend
to the guy asking abiout it on previous page

hey guys just had some non-sandy shit in. its wet still but it aint sandy i think it may have a few traces of sugar but theres no sand so i dont care!! im a happy toker again!!!

im new n this is my first reply.i am in the manchester area and our skunk goes from some fine grainy shit to the ridiculous an i am very worried bout wot it will do 2 us all.after all if this is sand then im no scientist but i seem 2 remember learning at school that you make glass out of sand? oh yeah and the method of turnin sand 2 glass is heat isnt it, so when we smoke our sandy skunk wot the fuck is goin on in our lungs,this could be a killer so we have 2 stand up 2 this shit.when u buy jus open the bag or whatever your buds in, wet the end of your finger rub it on the bud then put it in your mouth,if there is any of this shit on it YOU WILL crunch it and there is no mistaking it.we have 2 b strong an throw it right back at em n tell em 2 fuck right off till they got some proper shit. im fuckin sick of it now so im finkin of growin me own. ...green is the scene if u know wot i mean...

Hi Bigbob

Well, yes, sand can make glass byheating, but that's not the problem, it's simpler than that. Basically, the risk is simply sucking small particles into your lungs. That's why you must use a filter at the very least if you really want to smoke this stuff.

Like we say, don't buy it.

Happy christmas anyway

Derek

Webteam UKCIA

THIS IS A ONE-OFF POST- PLEASE CIRCULATE. VERY IMPORTANT.

I have done a basic analysis on the contaminants of 3 batches of bud from SW, SE and London- I have also seen similar samples from many, many sources, starting at the end of february 2006.

1: Under microscope at 50x magnification, contaminants appear as very small (50-120 um) beads, with regular circular shape and small pores/ single holes present.

2: Beads do not dissolve in non polar solvents (pet ether) or polar solvents (ethanol, acetone).

3: Beads are insoluble in conc NaOH solution, conc H2SO4.

4: Melting point is above 400C, but cannot perform TG, DTG analysis at the moment so cannot specify any transition temperatures or accurate melting points.

5: The beads have a significant sodium and silicon content, suggesting that the comments previously about silicates are correct.

6: Smoking this has resulted in mouth ulcers and sore throats/ chesty coughs which never occur when smoking normally due to the good health and only occasional cannabis use of the subject.

7: Reliable sources say that this contaminant is industrial etchant spray used for glass frosting, It is a high pressure aerosol of propellant, lubricant and silicate abrasives. This accounts for the high permeation levels displayed in all 3 samples, with particulates presents inside even 'tight' buds all the way into the stems. This also may account for the non plany oils present in the bud which have been previously described as a 'glue'

8: The same sources (and other independent sources) have corroborated the same story of the origin of this contamination. The main suppliers are from 2 major cities to the north of wales and are gangs from these two cities. Most people will guess where I mean as the post 'drought' supplies are mainly concentrated around these cities.

9: Obviously a further qualitative analysis is needed and I may be able to perform MS, IR, NMR and thermal methods on the samples, in particular the oil 'glue' and the gritty particulates.

10: DO NOT SMOKE THIS, IT MAY POSE A SIGNIFICANT HEALTH HAZARD AND WE MAY SEE A DRUG TAKING COMMUNITY CRISIS ON A LARGER SCALE THAN THE MPTP CRISIS OF THE EARLY 80'S.

BUYERS: PLEASE RECONSIDER BEFORE BUYING ANY MORE OF THIS, AND CONSIDER THE DAMAGE YOU MAY BE CAUSING TO YOUR CUSTOMERS.

PLEASE RE-READ POINT 7. IT IS THE MOST RELIABLE INDICATOR OF THE MOST OBSERVED CONTAMINANTS.
OTHER CONTAMINANTS SUCH AS NATURAL SAND ARE PROBABLY THE RESULT OF SUPPLIERS COPYING THE ETCHANT METHOD WITH WHATEVER THEY HAVE TO HAND.

further to the previous post- here are some links to photos of the contaminant particulates. 100X magnification. size and structure are consistent with my previous estimate of 50-120um.

ad4m.g ....... contaminated weed = health problems.
if i were u - dont bother smoking it at all - there is no way of seperation.
do u know what silica sand is?? [www.bbc.co.uk]
read this....i did and guess what that shite is never passing these lips again.


COME ON PPL - SORT IT OUT
just dont even bother buyin it....would you by a stella or a pint of milk if it was contaminated???
thought not

There is no way of FULL seperation, however there are methods to get some of it off.
Also, the guy with all the knowledge says it burns at 400c, so it its not going to burn when your smoking it in a joint, bong or whatever. So inless you litrally inhaling this stuff straight in your lungs raw, i dont think that it posses a really large risk. However, this being said i still agree it shouldnt be smoked.

Thanks to the guy with all the infomation to, you have provided the infomation everyone wants to know.

The m.p of the contaminants is far far above 400C, i would say more like 2200C
but they are very small and very light, so WILL end up in your lungs.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/26/2006 09:25PM by bad.analytical.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/06/2007 04:05PM by bad.analytical.

Any chance of explaining what we're looking at?

Derek

Webteam UKCIA

Hi, I will say that I have 5 years of chemical education (continuing) but am not affiliated with any organisation. I just wanted to do some private research. The tests were rudimentary to the extreme but allowed for a qualitative analysis of the contaminants. As you will appreciate, cannabis bud is plant tissue and so is an extremely complex subject. The contaminants which cause the most worry (the crystals) are a very un complex subject. So I burnt away all of the material in a methane-air flame (about 1500C) until there was no appreciable plant material left (a reasonably homogenous charred mixture). The oils were extracted with a non-polar solvent- that is one which is immiscible in water, petrol and cooking oil being two examples, however I used petroleum ether which is a low boiling fraction of oil. Acetone was used as a polar solvent to strip the material of more polar oils which would still be water insoluble. The sample was then further oxidised with concentrated sulfuric acid, sulfuric acid is a very stong dehydrating agent, stripping hydrogen and oxygen from a substance in the ratio 2:1. The sample was then neutralised with household bicarb and washed with water. It was then dried to a constant mass. Using a fine mesh I was able to remove the majority of the contaminant from the charred sample and study it under a microscope. Unfortunately I was unable to make a further qualitative analysis of its oxygen, silicon, aluminium or sodium content as I do not have access to expensive analytical instruments or reagents such as HF for at least a month.
I am almost certain that it is an aluminosilicate and I think that the information about etchant could well be correct.

Pictures 1-3 are self explanatory, pictures 4-6 are the contaminants under a microscope, they are all uniform in size and structure. 100um is 0.1mm, or 100 millionths of a metre.

Quote:

bad.analytical

Pictures 1-3 are self explanatory, pictures 4-6 are the contaminants under a microscope, they are all uniform in size and structure. 100um is 0.1mm, or 100 millionths of a metre.

Many thanks for that, it's appreciated.

What does the text say in pictures 1- 3 please? The pictures are too small to see any detail or to read the text.

Derek

Webteam UKCIA



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/26/2006 10:01PM by Derek.

Sorry, they should be clickable links? Try again

The next issue is obviously what is the source of this material.

Other samples have displayed a similar level of contamination. The samples analysed originated in- plymouth, exeter, berkshire, london, manchester, liverpool, bristol. The sample under analysis above originated in north london. The nature of the contamination has been identical- roughly uniform in size, shape and composition.

1: FIBRE GLASS?
Glass fibres have been much touted as the source of contamination. Whilst an irritant, larger fibres "with diameters greater than 3µm (micrometers) and length greater than 10µm have been designated by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) as an "A4" substance meaning "Not Classifiable as a Human Carcinogen". This means that there is insufficient data to draw a conclusion either way about any cancer causing potential.) These are within the bounds of the size of contaminants observed previously.

If glass fibres have been used, the only method which they would 'ball up' to form the uniform beads is through heating. I realise that the sample was exposed to extreme temperatures, but these beads are also present at room temperature, the chemical treatment just made isolation from oils and plant matter simpler. Glass fibre would also be hard to apply with such penetration exhibited by all samples, it also adds negligable mass due to its low density and its fibrous nature would be very apparent to a user. If anyone has photos of 'fibre glass' contaminated material, then please post. For now I think it would be fine to discount this risk.

I will continue to post on further possible sources of contamination tomorrow. I will research silicate materials tonight and see whether I can find any leads. Thanks.

Quote:

bad.analytical
Sorry, they should be clickable links? Try again

They are indeed, soz.

Derek

Webteam UKCIA

You certainly know your stuff O_O, your work into this contamination is appreachieated by many im sure.

Would this substance still pose any threat if the smoke passes threw water? Im intrested to know, because ive smoked alot of this contaminated cannabis threw bongs (aswell as joints) the last few months. Not so much recently, but i have smoked a good 4oz of this...

I've had a mixture of this crap over the past few months, everything from sugar weed, to weed that I thought contained fibre-glass as well as other bits containing sand (It differs!).

I have been keeping an eye on this thread since it had started. It seems people have the right idea, spread the word, test it before you buy it, if you get it by mistake, bin it! and don't use that source until again or, at least until they get something "grit free". Slowly but surely the people contaminating it will learn to stop and you'll get a nice bit (I have now).

I wouldn't normally be happy about a "cannabis bust" but this sounds almost "nice to hear" in my opinion. It doesn't seem anyone else has spotted it yet.

[www.drugpolicycentral.com]

Quote:

"TWO Brits were being held in Spain last night after police seized a #2million haul of deadly contaminated cannabis."

All the best everyone, I wish you all a happy new year!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/27/2006 10:34AM by OutCast.