If you want to purify tobacco you have to remove nicotine from it otherwise I would not call it purifying.

The one of the most dangerous drags on this planet that kills many people each day is nicotine IMHO.

I suggest to you not to smoke tobacco if possible. You will feel better and live longer

I'm sure about that, but I'm not saying that having a shitty diet and good tobacco will result in me being super healty.
I already take care of my diet, of my sleeping patterns and more stuff, this topic is just here to talk about tobacco.

I don't smoke cigarettes anyway. The way I smoke tobacco is having a single deep breath from my pipe with home-grown nicotiana rustica or additive-free nicotiana tabacum and keeping it a while. Exhale and feel what the plant wants to show me.
I have interesting feelings and sometimes I get more lucid, beside relaxing all the muscles in my body (useful after a day of hitchhiking with the backpack on the shoulders) and releasing some thoughts off my head.

And is not like I'm doing it everyday.

Also the tsaank, the water infusion already discussed in this forum, is a good way to take it without burning, but lately I don't feel like sniffing stuff, it came to hurt.



Are you sure about that? Because I find most of the harm done by tobacco is the combustion, the additives and the oily stuff. I don't see a way pure nicotine could harm my body, in a small amount and a non-continous usage (of course it can kill me in a overdose situation, but that applies to everything)

I must say I also don't want pure nicotine. I tried it but it feels less wise than the tobacco in full spectrum, especially nicotiana rustica.


I may be wrong but the tar should be in the plant to be released, is not magically coming from the touch of fire and plant.
Other leaves, such as mint, produce no tar at all even though it is burned.
Make sense to me that it is not possible to separate it from the alkaloids, I'm therefore going to try some other approaches, maybe a water soaking and resin approach.

I'm aware that many do not agree with this, but tobacco is still a sacred, enlightening and very interesting plant, even though it has been widely misused, and I feel like there should be some good way to reduce much of the harm.
You all gave me some precious opinions about it (vaporizing, where the damage comes from, and so on), I thank you for this and will try out some other ways to assume it.

Some links to help you get some ideas on getting started:


http://www.academia.edu/...her_and_Petroleum_Ether_

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jf950502+

And a couple for those still bent on the nicotine dogma


http://www.sciencedirect...le/pii/S0893133X96000188

http://onlinelibrary.wil....1002/jnr.10022/abstract

http://onlinelibrary.wil...2/ana.410420205/abstract

http://www.sciencedirect...le/pii/S0197018603000093

http://www.formindep.org...-nicotine-addiction.html

http://www.journaloftheo...ditorials/vol-1/e1-4.htm

http://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/NN/B/B/N/M/

Yes I am very sure about tobacco being very toxic for humans. You can grow and cure your own tobacco if you wish and smoke as you like but I strongly believe it is one of the worst drugs and human killer around. Look for statistics it speaks for its self.

IMO if you do not have to use it DON'T.

I was smoker once and I know how great I felt after I stopped smoking tobacco and detoxed from it(as it gets some time before you get it out of your body after you stop smoking).

sorry smokerx I'm a bit confused about what you say. First you said that nicotine kills a lot of people and tobacco without nicotine would be fine



Than you say that tobacco itself kills a lot of people and you call for statistics about it:



I could not find statistic for nicotine itself, only for smoked tobacco, and I still don't understand if you think the nicotine is what makes tobacco so harmful (this is what I was questioning) or the ROI or other parts and aspects of the plant.

Thank you, and thank you 1ce for the links!

Here is one example/study of information by which removing nicotine and other alkaloids, presents a similar compound, cotinine. Which is used as a non-toxic prescription alkaloid for its impressive benefits as a powerful medicine. As well as having nootropic and multi-positive effects. Isolated nicotine also clearly seems to have this potential, too. Again, smoking tobacco is not healthy but clearly available for those who choose to use tobacco that way. I don't encourage this use, however.



https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19366487

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotinine

You could probably just do an IPA extraction to yield a crude extract.
Nicotine is very toxic, especially when concntrated.
If you're really set on working with PURE NICOTINE, then you should research the dangers first...
Then you could probably find pure liquid Nicotine online.

My question is why Pure Nicotine?
It's a harmful addictive substance with questionable entheogenic effects alone.

In light doses you get a mild head rush, stimulation, muscle relaxation, mild euphoria...

Medium doses more relaxing/sedating, mild stoned feeling but still clear, more euphoria...

Heavy doses are extremely sedating but they will make your heart beat fast (strange), strong headrush, full body buzz (a feeling of floating or flying), numbness, usually dysphoria, nausea, cold sweats, weakness, just overall crap.

The most interesting effects I've gotten from Tobacco were when I smoked a very strong form out of a pipe.
I took 3 large hits very quickly.
Closed my eyes and laid down.
Immediately felt like I was soaring through space. Weightless.
Then I felt nauseous.

The effects from smoked Nicotine leave as quickly as they come on (except for the nausea and dyshporia)
Nicotine is a POISON to all organisms (well, atleast all of the organisms we've studied the effects on)

The only reason you get euphoria is because your CNS is stimulated because it wants to get rid of the poison you just put in it and probably releases endorphins as a by product.
(pure speculation, but it makes sense^^^)

I'm currently curious about Nicotania Rustica (sacred Aztec Tobacco) for purgative effects.

That's about all it's good for from what I've gathered (I was addicted to chewing, smoking, and snuffing many forms of tobacco for 7 years and quit cold turkey with sheer willpower)

In case you need any reminder of the dangers of tobacco, here is recent news about a man who died after a tobacco purge session in Peru.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/71864946/kiwi-matthew-dawsonclarke-dies-in-peru-after-tobacco-purge

http://www.today.com/hea...g-2-energy-drinks-506441

http://www.cbsnews.com/n...too-much-water-gatorade/

http://www.damninteresti...e-the-dangers-of-oxygen/

It seems that e-drinks, water, and oxygen are killing our kids!! Let us imediately ban such dangerous and POISONOUS things such as oxygen!

Or maybe as any good doctor once said, the poison is in the dosage. Are we done nicotine bashing yet? Caffeine is addictive, and poisonous as well and most of you reading this gluttonously enjoy its extract, right?

@OP
Why not do a full spectrum tobacco extract and dilute into vegetable glycerin to your desired strength? There are lots of how-tos online for this already. With the dangers of combustion eliminated so are many of the health risks associated with smoking. Many, but not all. I think it's a step in the right direction. Since it seems the nicotine synergizes off other compounds in the plant, a broader spectrum extract looks ticket.

1ce, can you provide a scientific document purporting any poisonous effects from caffeine? Also, are you pointing to one plant in particular such as coffee? Yerba mate? Guarana? Green tea? Or isolated caffeine? I am well aware of these plants being defensive against predators in nature, however, low-moderate caffeine consumption has very low if any toxicity. At least compared to nicotine's LD50, no?

Statistically speaking, people die every year from both caffeine and tobacco.

This journal talks about ld50 and toxicity in regards to sex/age/organs: http://onlinelibrary.wil....1967.tb00034.x/abstract

http://www.sciencedirect...le/pii/S0041008X01993342


This is actually pretty interesting
http://www.sciencedirect...le/pii/S0960982299804862

http://www.sciencedirect...cle/pii/0165111094900221

http://www.sciencedirect...cle/pii/0165111077900161


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9213197
There are alot of articles on caffeine/tobacco synergy in google scholar.

Ok, little update of my point of view.

There is no way smoked tobacco can be harmless. It would probably reduce the harm using a bong loaded with milk, as a lipophile solvent, so suck up some more stuff, but no much.
Vapping is a better idea, but still the plant has a lot of fats and oil that burn before nicotine.

As most of the harm is done from smoking it, other ROIs are the only way to use it (more or less) safely.
So far the best I've found is the insufflatable cold water short maceration, as one of the most well-known traditional use, and probably rotating the ROIs is also a good practice.

It keeps being a plant that needs respect and not prolonged and repetitive use.

Thanks for all of your inputs and links and warm replies.

Check out my tobacco disinformation thread.
https://www.dmt-nexus.me...aspx?g=posts&t=58672

Organic, additive free is the way to go. Support the farmers.
Farmers make something like 20 cents off tobacco used in a commercial cigarette pack.
Manufactures and government reap the majority of the costs.

If your going to link a paper, you shouldn't make up your own conclusions and pretend to verify them with linking the paper.

That paper says nothing about nicotine not being addictive, it only suggests that the MAOI components within the tobacco may play a role in the addictive nature of tobacco use. The paper isn't even about the addictive qualities of nicotine, so you cannot say that nicotine is not addictive in itself...

And not you single you out or anything DansMaTete, because it is seriously going on A LOT in this thread... People posting papers willy nilly without even reading the abstract and correlating it to whatever suits their needs.

"Even the devil can cite scripture"

For example.

http://www.sciencedirect...le/pii/S138357181200352X

Here is a paper observing the genotoxic effects of nicotine, it induces mutations and damages DNA. But, so does sunlight, oxygen, free redicals... etc....

even your own cells can make mistakes, damage DNA... Doesn't mean there isn't enzymes already in place to fix the damage

Fair enough, i did a shortcut after i read "It is therefore possible that the
presence of MAOIs is necessary for tobacco to be addictive"(p273) and i should have say : tobacco containing nicotine and without MAOI doesn't seem addictive in itself but associated with MAOI it is.

And of course i should linked more paper going in this way:

Like this one :
"The main finding of our study is that nicotine needs the association with an irreversible and nonselective MAOI to induce the same neurochemical modifications as those observed with compounds belonging to the main groups of drugs of abuse (i.e., amphetamine, cocaine, morphine, or alcohol)"

Or this :
"Although nicotine is generally considered as the main compound responsible for addictive properties of tobacco, some experimental data indicate that nicotine does not exhibit all the characteristics of other substances of misuse such as psychostimulants and opiates"

And this :
"The results suggest that the inhibition of MAO activity by compounds present in tobacco smoke may combine with nicotine to produce the intense reinforcing properties of cigarette smoking that lead to addiction." .



And please note i didn't said anything about toxicity or no-toxicity of nicotine. And of course, i maintain tar from tobacco use is a big cause of cancer.

Thanks for that expansion DansMaTete, very interesting stuff! I did a little more research on it myself. It makes me wonder, since there are a heeck of a lot e-cigarette users today, which are definitely habit forming to say the least. Possibly a good study to be done there. But it is interesting, because a lot of smokers who switch to the e-cig say over time all it does is make them want to smoke real tobacco, perhaps because their brains are still looking for that combination of MAOI and nicotine, and the nicotine by itself isn't doing the job.

In my own experience, thankfully I never developed an addiction to cigarettes or tobacco, (just about everything else though) but I have recently been using nicotine in other means of administration, both e-cigs and gum. And it certainly leaves me wanting more, but then again, so does caffeine. Perhaps it is more like caffeine, as in it doesn't form that powerful deadly dopamine feedback loop as with drugs of abuse, like alcohol and opiates, amphetamines.

Still though, nothing in the papers suggests nicotine ISN'T addictive in itself, only the degree to which tobacco is as synergistic mixture of drugs compared to nicotine by itself. I doubt one could say with any certainty at all ANYTHING isn't addictive. I would suspect Cannabis would fall into a similar category, not directly related to that change in the dopamine pathways, but still a drug that activates those already existing pathways. A lot of people will say this is addictive, this isn't addictive, but I don't really see the point in defining what is and what isn't, out of my own experience, and others. Cannabis addiction can be devastating on ones quality of life, just like any addiction. Hell, you could even say its worse, because it doesn't kill you fast enough, or bring you to a state of utter hopelessness and despair that something like alcohol, opiates, or methamphetamine would.

IMO, Addiction starts from the mind, even the soul, (dare I say it without linking scientific papers ) before manifesting itself in the brain and the body.

Again, my first post I was trying to make a more general statement in terms of the information being posted in the thread. Take it with a grain of salt, everyone has bias, including myself.

Addiction (about everything) is a very big subject, not simple as nobody is equal in front of it.

Here is a really good explaination of addiction mecanism theory but, sorry, it's in french and i couldn't find something equivalent in english. May be with google translate you can get something out of it.