Sponsored by

PuffItUp Dynavap VGoodiez 420EDC
  • Welcome to VaporAsylum! Please take a moment to read our RULES and introduce yourself here.
  • Need help navigating the forum? Find out how to use our features here.
  • Did you know we have lots of smilies for you to use?

Misc. Nebulizers for Cannabis Consumption

momofthegoons

Vapor Accessory Addict
Staff member
There are a whole lot of claims in this article that are unsubstantiated.... for one they claim that smoking cannabis can cause cancer. I would have loved for them to link to their source for this info....

Use of Cannabis Nebulizers vs. Smoking and Vaporizing

Nebulizers are not new. They have long been used to deliver prescription medicine to treat asthma, COPD, and the symptoms of respiratory diseases and allergies. However, nebulizers have found a new use as the safest and cleanest way to deliver the benefits of cannabis. Let’s look at the differences between smoking, vaporizing, and nebulizing cannabis.

Most people inhale cannabis through smoking or vaporizing (vaping), neither of which are without risks. The Surgeon General has been warning us for decades about the risks of smoking and the fact that smoking has been proven to cause cancer, emphysema, and other life-threatening diseases. That’s because smoking requires combustion, and this hot smoke contains carcinogens and other materials that are damaging to the windpipe and lungs. It’s neither a clean nor a cost-effective way to deliver cannabis.

For the health conscious, vaporizing presented a healthier option. Claims that it is cleaner, safer, and less dangerous than smoking gave many the reassurance that it was a safer alternative to direct inhalation. Vaporizers do eliminate smoke and some of its damaging effects. However, recent studies have shown that vaporizing is not as safe as once believed. In fact, vaping has been found to suppress more immune genes than smoking, resulting in greater suppression of the body’s respiratory mucosal immune system. That’s because vaporizers use hot vapors, which chemically alter medicine and cause damaging side effects. Let’s not overlook another factor—because a vaporizer emits a mist into the air, the body does not receive the full effect of the dosage.

Enter jet nebulizers—a new and groundbreaking way to inhale cannabis, without risks or damage to the body’s immune and respiratory systems. Designed for the purpose of delivering prescription medicines, nebulizers dissolve cannabis and turn it into a light mist that is transported directly into the body via a mouthpiece.

The compressor in a jet nebulizer send compressed air through cannabis oil at a high velocity, turning the medicine into an aerosol which flows through tubing and is inhaled by the patient through a mouthpiece. They are portable, affordable, and approved for use by medical professionals and hospitals worldwide. Among their greatest benefits is the fact that, unlike smoking or vaporizing, there are no side effects, damage to the bronchial or respiratory system, or loss of product via smoke or vapor. And, because the medicine flows directly from the nebulizer into the patient’s mouth, the user receives greater benefit without the lingering odor or residue left behind after smoking and vaporizing.
CannaNeb is the world’s first and only cannabis nebulizer. A jet nebulizer, it is the safest, cleanest, and most affordable way to administer cannabis. Designed and engineered specifically for CBD and thicker oil-based medications, it produces cold vapor, which is better for the body than the smoke or hot vapor produced by other inhalation methods. With the CannaNeb nebulizer, users can safely receive the full benefits of a medicine that is free from chemical alterations, because the process doesn’t produce heat or carcinogens that damage the lungs, bronchial tubes, or respiratory system.

Nebulizing is the cleanest and safest way to inhale medicine, and it can now be used to administer the medical benefits of cannabis. Experience the benefits of CannaNeb, the world’s only cannabis nebulizer—it’s a medical breakthrough and the purest way to inhale and receive the greatest benefits of cannabis.



Nebulizer's Lungs vs. Smoker's Lungs
 

Baron23

Well-Known Member
There are a whole lot of claims in this article that are unsubstantiated.... for one they claim that smoking cannabis can cause cancer. I would have loved for them to link to their source for this info....

Use of Cannabis Nebulizers vs. Smoking and Vaporizing

Nebulizers are not new. They have long been used to deliver prescription medicine to treat asthma, COPD, and the symptoms of respiratory diseases and allergies. However, nebulizers have found a new use as the safest and cleanest way to deliver the benefits of cannabis. Let’s look at the differences between smoking, vaporizing, and nebulizing cannabis.

Most people inhale cannabis through smoking or vaporizing (vaping), neither of which are without risks. The Surgeon General has been warning us for decades about the risks of smoking and the fact that smoking has been proven to cause cancer, emphysema, and other life-threatening diseases. That’s because smoking requires combustion, and this hot smoke contains carcinogens and other materials that are damaging to the windpipe and lungs. It’s neither a clean nor a cost-effective way to deliver cannabis.

For the health conscious, vaporizing presented a healthier option. Claims that it is cleaner, safer, and less dangerous than smoking gave many the reassurance that it was a safer alternative to direct inhalation. Vaporizers do eliminate smoke and some of its damaging effects. However, recent studies have shown that vaporizing is not as safe as once believed. In fact, vaping has been found to suppress more immune genes than smoking, resulting in greater suppression of the body’s respiratory mucosal immune system. That’s because vaporizers use hot vapors, which chemically alter medicine and cause damaging side effects. Let’s not overlook another factor—because a vaporizer emits a mist into the air, the body does not receive the full effect of the dosage.

Enter jet nebulizers—a new and groundbreaking way to inhale cannabis, without risks or damage to the body’s immune and respiratory systems. Designed for the purpose of delivering prescription medicines, nebulizers dissolve cannabis and turn it into a light mist that is transported directly into the body via a mouthpiece.

The compressor in a jet nebulizer send compressed air through cannabis oil at a high velocity, turning the medicine into an aerosol which flows through tubing and is inhaled by the patient through a mouthpiece. They are portable, affordable, and approved for use by medical professionals and hospitals worldwide. Among their greatest benefits is the fact that, unlike smoking or vaporizing, there are no side effects, damage to the bronchial or respiratory system, or loss of product via smoke or vapor. And, because the medicine flows directly from the nebulizer into the patient’s mouth, the user receives greater benefit without the lingering odor or residue left behind after smoking and vaporizing.
CannaNeb is the world’s first and only cannabis nebulizer. A jet nebulizer, it is the safest, cleanest, and most affordable way to administer cannabis. Designed and engineered specifically for CBD and thicker oil-based medications, it produces cold vapor, which is better for the body than the smoke or hot vapor produced by other inhalation methods. With the CannaNeb nebulizer, users can safely receive the full benefits of a medicine that is free from chemical alterations, because the process doesn’t produce heat or carcinogens that damage the lungs, bronchial tubes, or respiratory system.

Nebulizing is the cleanest and safest way to inhale medicine, and it can now be used to administer the medical benefits of cannabis. Experience the benefits of CannaNeb, the world’s only cannabis nebulizer—it’s a medical breakthrough and the purest way to inhale and receive the greatest benefits of cannabis.



Nebulizer's Lungs vs. Smoker's Lungs
Oh yeah? And exactly what liquid are the cannabinoids supposed to be suspended in and be absorbed by direct contact with your lungs??? Hmmmm?
 

BD9

Leaf Dawg
Vaporizers do eliminate smoke and some of its damaging effects.However, recent studies have shown that vaporizing is not as safe as once believed. In fact, vaping has been found to suppress more immune genes than smoking,resulting in greater suppression of the body’s respiratory mucosal immune system.


This seems like complete BS. Do they have a source for that claim???
 

momofthegoons

Vapor Accessory Addict
Staff member
A nebulizer does seem like a somewhat viable option for those with compromised lungs.
Yes... but it would depend on what the carrier liquid was as @Baron23 stated. IF they could assure that the contents were pure, tested cannabis (and that is a big IF) I would think it might be a viable option. Another might be a bag vape system where the user can sip the vapor in a case with COPD.

This seems like complete BS. Do they have a source for that claim???
I wholeheartedly agree. They also say that using a nebulizer is " safest, cleanest, and most affordable way to administer cannabis" with no substantiation as well. :watchout: I'd like to see a little bit of data to substantiate that.
 

Shredder

Dogs like me
Ya, this reads like ronco spray hair. It probably isn't a bad idea, but to make good vapor you need terpenes inhaled with the cannabinoids in a mist. If anyone can cool that mist and still include the same ingredients, well cool.
 

Baron23

Well-Known Member
@Shredder @momofthegoons @BD9 @I'm Ron Burgundy?

It says "jet nebulizer" and rather indicates its not a vaporizer with any sort of heating element. Its mist, not vapor, that a nebulizer (by most definitions) generates.

Nebulizers use oxygen, compressed air or ultrasonic power to break up solutions and suspensions into small aerosol droplets that can be directly inhaled from the mouthpiece of the device. An aerosol is a mixture of gas and solid or liquid particles.​

I've seen the ultrasonic types but not the others. But key is making an aerosol (not vapor) from a liquid so it can be inhaled.

So, what can the cannabinoids (and terps, flavanoids, etc) be suspended in to make this aerosol.

Well, it sure ain't water since cannabinoids aren't water soluble.

It ain't going to be ethyl alcohol cause you will not inhale an aerosol of that stuff...well, not more than once.

So, PG/VP/PEG? What?

This whole thing, no matter what the goodies are suspended in, sounds to me like spraying reclaim all over the interior of your lungs.....this idea is, so far, not thrilling me.
 

Killick

Well-Known Member
Nebulizing is very intriguing. I tripped over it while researching uses for DMSO which, among other things, is a 'polar aprotic solvent, whatever that means... (https://chem.libretexts.org/Core/Or...ular_Forces/Polar_Protic_and_Aprotic_Solvents)',

which works dandy with cannabis BTW. So, if one were to decarb some dry sift, drop that in a little dmso and swirl it around, then filter the wee bit of sludge out, it should be as close to clean as one is likely to get in a home chem lab. FWIW this makes a very effective use of DMSO *and* cannabis. It's basically a tincture that will work through your skin, and DMSO is used for a lot of things. A chemist buddy, from the group, got me interested in it a couple of years ago. It's worth researching if'n you have the urge.

This link shows nebulizer procedures, as well as lists a few different things that can be loaded into a neb. Note - I'm an idiot and don't know what I'm talking about, so don't take my advice on any of this, because it's not advice - it's searching the web to piece together a mild hypothesis. There are a lot of smrt people in the group, and any feedback is very appreciated, positive, negative, and even 'wtf are you smoking/dynavaping? (Cinderella 99, from a neighbors basement closet, is the answer to that Q).
Maybe someone like @herbivore21 can help out with some of the larger words and wierder ideas? Grassy Ass in advance, ole bean. You've been a great help on so many wierd adventures.

This link suggests where cannabinoids could be dissolved in DMSO diluted distilled water, and nebulized...
http://www.dmso.co.za/used-dmso-treat-bronchopneumonia/

A few other things that can be nebulized...
http://healyourselfathome.com/HOW/THERAPIES/NEBULIZING/NEBULIZING_MAIN.aspx
 
Last edited:

herbivore21

Well-Known Member
I must admit, I have not looked into nebulizers for use with cannabis as of yet. One thing that stands out to me is that this method will require a solvent (DMSO may indeed have some potential here, but we must be mindful of safe exposure limits of that compound for inhalation, it is not completely salubrious!). The question is will mixing a cannabis extract with such a solvent for nebulization be a safer or preferable method to vaporization - the answer is maybe!

I'm sure all of you have noticed, like me that vaporization can be somewhat hard on the throat and lungs. It may not be smoking, but the heat is noticeable nonetheless! I do sometimes wonder if an alternative means of producing an inhalable cannabis containing aerosol such as nebulization may come to the fore as an even less debilitating method of delivering cannabis medicine than vaporization some day. Some testing and clinical trials will certainly be required to tell us whether or not this will be the case. I do remember the boss man at D-nail mentioning that he had a plan to provide vapor without using heat at all in the process, the benefits of doing away with heat have always been apparent to me in terms of reduced discomfort for the respiratory tract.

I also wonder whether the use of a nebulized solution wherein the cannabis resin components are very well dissolved in the carrier may allow for less congestion/concentrated build-up of recondensed resins within the respiratory tract (via potentially increased absorption across the various relevant internal membranes due to the presence of a solvent that better carries the cannabis medicine across these barriers). If so, this may be a very worthwhile option to consider, especially for those with high dosage requirements.

One of these days, I might perform my own experiment with formulating such a product for self administration. However, I'll be doing a lot more relevant reading before attempting such a thing (I admittedly have not looked into nebulization in enough detail yet, and don't have time just now to do so)! I've spent a long time perfecting my skills to allow me not to use solvents anymore, and certainly will not go back to using solvents in my medicine until I'm sure that the method in question is gonna be as safe, or safer than what I'm currently doing. Damn, if that isn't another task to add to my long list of mmj ideas to experiment with.

Many thanks for the kind words @Killick by the way, my best wishes to you and yours my friend!
 

Killick

Well-Known Member
Ahh, Herbie - the very person responsible for that sober second thought. Your kind assistance with safety over the years makes you a bit of a Go To person for all things with an unknown element to them. Remember when the biggest material safety discussions were about which brand of silicone degraded faster, or which vape had the potential for plastic in the airpath? Good times, say wot? :)

I've been looking at DMSO for awhile now, since reading about it's use for topical pain relief. Due to it's rather scary transdermal properties, which are less scary and more unusual, makes DMSO a very interesting compound to research. The more one reads the more one wonders why this isn't a more commonly used compound. There are several books available (two linked below), and reading about some of the things it's used for is a bit overwhelming. Oddly enough the books aren't written by doctors, and the chapters tend to be case studies. I've read 3 different books and find the similarities a little odd. But they are backed up in a bunch of other reports, reviews, and even videos.

So here's what I kinda know:
Very effective pain relief topically
Cannabis dissolves readily in it. This is my favourite topical pain relief blend, with cannabis infused cream a close second.
Can be ingested. Teaspoon in a glass of juice, drank over an hour. This for pain, recovery, and free radical scavenging.

Gingivitis and gum disease can be treated with a mix of DMSO 25%, colloidal silver 75%, and oregano oil.
Bacteria can't live in a solution of 15% or greater DMSO.
For use as eye drops a mixture of 25% DMSO in an opthalmic solution is effective. Colliodal silver can be used as carrier.
To help with seasonal allergies and sinus infections DMSO can be applied to forehead, around nose, and on chest.
Book suggests that for facial application, or for anyone experiencing a slight 'sunburn' sensation, that DMSO be mixed with aloe vera gel to reduce the slight sting.

Side note - neighbour has a colloidal silver generator. I know little about it, but research shows it to be an effective antibacterial. We made a batch using distilled water, with one drop of sea salt added for conductivity. Given the opportunity it's quite fun to watch the silver particles being drawn into the water.

This link provides some detail around ratios: 10% DMSO concentration with colloidal silver in a total of 50ml, using 5ml twice daily. All DMSO should be treated with decarbed dry sift and filtered (I made this part up, but this is central to the 'nebulizer as a cannabis medicating device' concept)
http://www.dmso.co.za/used-dmso-treat-bronchopneumonia/

Other interesting things recalled from book off top of head include:
Injectable, either IM, IV or SubQ
Eye drops, apparently to aid with things like cataracts and macular degeneration.
DMSO freezes at 68f, and this is how it's tested for purity.
DMSO combined with water (don't know ratios. See google) lowers the freezing point to -15c, making it effective for organ transplant preservation.
Semen samples from horses and bulls are suspended in DMSO for storage and distribution, and samples remain viable for up to 20 years.
Suggested as a clot buster and stroke reducer.

https://www.amazon.com/DMSO-Natures-Morton-Walker-D-P-M/dp/0895295482

https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-dmso-handbook-for-doctors-archie-h-scott/1115967084
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BD9

Killick

Well-Known Member
But wait! There more!

Abstract
The reemergence on the debate of the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes has been the impetus for developing an acceptable delivery form of aerosolized cannabinoids. The goals of the present study were to: (1) develop and characterize the physical properties of an aerosolized form of Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (Delta(9)-THC), the major psychoactive constituent present in marijuana; and (2) assess the pharmacological effects of cannabinoid inhalation in mice. A Small Particle Aerosol Generator (SPAG) nebulizer, used to generate the aerosol, had an output of approximately 0.154 mg/l of aerosolized Delta(9)-THC with a 2.0 microm mass median aerodynamic diameter and a 2.2 geometric standard deviation (GSD). Virtually all the particles were less than 5.0 microm in diameter suggesting that they were sufficiently small to penetrate deeply into the lungs. Inhalation exposure to aerosolized Delta(9)-THC in mice elicited antinociceptive effects that were dependent on concentration and exposure time with an estimated Delta(9)-THC dose of 1.8 mg/kg. On the other hand, inhalation exposure to Delta(9)-THC failed to produce two other indices indicative of cannabinoid activity, hypothermia and decreases in spontaneous locomotor activity. The antinociceptive effects occurred within 5 min of exposure and lasted approximately 40 min in duration. The cannabinoid receptor antagonist N-(piperidin-1-yl)-5-(4-chlorophenyl)-1-(2, 4-dichlorophenyl)-4-methyl-1H-pyrazole-3-carboxamide HCl (SR 141716A), but not naloxone, blocked these antinociceptive effects (AD(50)=0.09 mg/kg) indicating a cannabinoid receptor mechanism of action. Similarly, inhalation exposure to a water soluble cannabinoid analog, 3-(5'-cyano-1', 1'dimethylheptyl)-1-(4-N-morpholinobutyrloxy)-Delta(8)-te trahydrocann abinol (O-1057), produced antinociception that was blocked by SR 141716A. These results demonstrate that the development of an aerosolized form of cannabinoids for human medicinal use is feasible.

Pharmacological evaluation of aerosolized cannabinoids in mice. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/public...valuation_of_aerosolized_cannabinoids_in_mice [accessed Jun 11 2018].


https://www.researchgate.net/public...valuation_of_aerosolized_cannabinoids_in_mice
 
  • Like
Reactions: BD9

herbivore21

Well-Known Member
But wait! There more!

Abstract
The reemergence on the debate of the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes has been the impetus for developing an acceptable delivery form of aerosolized cannabinoids. The goals of the present study were to: (1) develop and characterize the physical properties of an aerosolized form of Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (Delta(9)-THC), the major psychoactive constituent present in marijuana; and (2) assess the pharmacological effects of cannabinoid inhalation in mice. A Small Particle Aerosol Generator (SPAG) nebulizer, used to generate the aerosol, had an output of approximately 0.154 mg/l of aerosolized Delta(9)-THC with a 2.0 microm mass median aerodynamic diameter and a 2.2 geometric standard deviation (GSD). Virtually all the particles were less than 5.0 microm in diameter suggesting that they were sufficiently small to penetrate deeply into the lungs. Inhalation exposure to aerosolized Delta(9)-THC in mice elicited antinociceptive effects that were dependent on concentration and exposure time with an estimated Delta(9)-THC dose of 1.8 mg/kg. On the other hand, inhalation exposure to Delta(9)-THC failed to produce two other indices indicative of cannabinoid activity, hypothermia and decreases in spontaneous locomotor activity. The antinociceptive effects occurred within 5 min of exposure and lasted approximately 40 min in duration. The cannabinoid receptor antagonist N-(piperidin-1-yl)-5-(4-chlorophenyl)-1-(2, 4-dichlorophenyl)-4-methyl-1H-pyrazole-3-carboxamide HCl (SR 141716A), but not naloxone, blocked these antinociceptive effects (AD(50)=0.09 mg/kg) indicating a cannabinoid receptor mechanism of action. Similarly, inhalation exposure to a water soluble cannabinoid analog, 3-(5'-cyano-1', 1'dimethylheptyl)-1-(4-N-morpholinobutyrloxy)-Delta(8)-te trahydrocann abinol (O-1057), produced antinociception that was blocked by SR 141716A. These results demonstrate that the development of an aerosolized form of cannabinoids for human medicinal use is feasible.

Pharmacological evaluation of aerosolized cannabinoids in mice. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/public...valuation_of_aerosolized_cannabinoids_in_mice [accessed Jun 11 2018].


https://www.researchgate.net/public...valuation_of_aerosolized_cannabinoids_in_mice
I read over this article and there are a couple of major limitations to the findings.

This study considered two different solutions being nebulized. One was a research cannabinoid which was chosen for use because it is soluble in water (unlike the cannabinoids we are familiar with from the cannabis plant), and the other was d-9-THC which was successfully dissolved in a 1:1:18 solution of absolute ethanol, empulphor and saline. The problem here, as stated by the authors is that emulphor was not at the time of printing approved for use in human beings. I am not aware of whether that compound has ever become regarded as safe for this purpose. The search for an appropriate and safe carrier solvent for nebulization of plant cannabinoids continues! Unfortunately, this research does not provide us with a known safe method for delivering extracts of cannabis resin.

I do wonder about the loss of the ensemble effect in these nebulizer preparations too. These preparations tend to contain only isolated cannabinoids and solvent/s, rather than whole cannabis resin. Lots more reading to do still before I can really speak much more on this topic, however!
 

Killick

Well-Known Member
I'm in total agreement. The research is spotty, but there are glimpses of promise. Remember when using a hair straightener was a wierd idea, but turned into something a bit more useful? There are apparently many different ways to skin a cat. I'm not proposing we skin any cats, but the idea seems to have merit, at least enough to keep poking it with a stick.

I'm still thinking that DMSO has value as a potential solvent for carrying cannabinoids through nebulization. I'm trying to poke holes in the idea, without actually doing a human study. Margo Moo is in a shopping cart...
 

herbivore21

Well-Known Member
I'm in total agreement. The research is spotty, but there are glimpses of promise. Remember when using a hair straightener was a wierd idea, but turned into something a bit more useful? There are apparently many different ways to skin a cat. I'm not proposing we skin any cats, but the idea seems to have merit, at least enough to keep poking it with a stick.

I'm still thinking that DMSO has value as a potential solvent for carrying cannabinoids through nebulization. I'm trying to poke holes in the idea, without actually doing a human study. Margo Moo is in a shopping cart...
Greetings my friend,

I took some time today to have a look at some MSDS's to learn about permissible occupational exposure permissible limits for inhalation of DMSO in the air as well as finding a little information about the impacts of inhaled DMSO in rats.

Whilst it is not known to be potentially fatal for inhalation at levels tested (from what I've seen, all tests exposed subjects to concentrations below 2000ppm), DMSO is likely to cause upper respiratory irritation when inhaled, even in these very small quantities.

Here's a description of some of the symptoms observed in rats when exposed to inhaled DMSO in a dose of ~1668ppm:

"May cause respiratory irritation. Signs/symptoms may include cough, sneezing, nasal discharge, headache, hoarseness, and nose and throat pain. Exposure to high concentrations of Dimethyl sulfoxide could cause lowering of consciousness. Repeated exposure to DMSO vapors did not cause any irritation to the respiratory tract; however the exposure to high concentrations in the form of an aerosol induced an irritation of the upper airways after a repeated exposure."

What this suggests to me (we can only infer here, there's no research data that I've found yet for human inhalation exposure) is that in quantities of DMSO sufficient to dissolve cannabis resin into a liquid, we'd end up producing an aerosol that contains too much DMSO to be considered safe for human inhalation. Reading the symptoms above, I'd expect those side-effects to be similar, if not worse than the worst side effects of vaporization. Many of these side effects above are similar to what I (and no doubt plenty of you) have experienced from vaporization in high quantities with frequent dosing, especially at higher temps with flower. As such, it doesn't look like DMSO/cannabis resin solutions for nebulization are likely to be any more tolerable than vaporization.

There's also the caveat that very little is documented about the impacts of inhaling DMSO for people. The occupational exposure limit that I've found for DMSO in the workplace for humans is a maximum of 250ppm, but no research was cited to support this limit.

From where I'm sitting, I'd wanna know that the solvent in question has been used safely for nebulization of other products and is not known to cause irritation to the user. There are very few such solvents available that are recognized as such for human use and none of those so far to my knowledge would be adequate to sufficiently dissolve cannabis resin. The search should certainly continue though! There's potentially quite some promise in this approach to MMJ IMO.

I wonder as well if ultrasonic emulsion may yield a successful solution of cannabis in a solvent that normally does not dissolve cannabis resin. That'll be something to look into next time I get a moment for some reading lol
 

Killick

Well-Known Member
So far the only examples I've found for dosing is from this article: http://www.dmso.co.za/used-dmso-treat-bronchopneumonia/ which is a little light on technical detail.
"10% DMSO concentration with colloidal silver in a total of 50ml. In the morning, just before breakfast my wife would pour 5ml of the mixture into the nebulizer and inhale it until finished".
What I read from this is that DMSO is diluted with distilled water, so it's a small component of the mixture, and not pure cannabis DMSO that goes into the nebulizer. Colloidal silver, in excess concentrations, can cause issues when taken internally, so thats something else to be aware of for n00bs like me...

"May cause respiratory irritation. Signs/symptoms may include cough, sneezing, nasal discharge, headache, hoarseness, and nose and throat pain.
A few years ago an ENT doc got me set up with a nasal rinse system. It uses distilled water to carry a bit of salt, and that mix is rinsed through nasal passages. It does a reasonable job of clearing sinuses, and it most certainly causes sinus issues when I use it. I had UPPP surgery a bunch of years ago which may be related, or maybe not, but I tend to get all the effects your article references just using the saline mix with lukewarm water. Will DMSO make it worse? Not yet (I've tried it 3 or 4 times now). There is also colloidal silver added to the mix. Once the coughing and sputtering stops I can breathe easier, and can go longer times between rinses.

Smoking and vaping can also cause respiratory issues. I'm a little sceptical of the word 'may', especially when used in research documents. It's a kind way of saying 'I don't know'. It's like looking at mainstream cannabis research which almost always includes the phrase 'requires more research', for a plant with no toxic load. DMSO, to my mind, is a similar low toxic load compound. If it's used topically, and ingestable, as well as injectable via IV, IM and SubQ methods, why not nebulized, especially using the 'start low and go slow' mantra advice we tend to give new cannabis users?

So my cannabis infused DMSO experiments don't require much DMSO. Just enough to cover decarbed dry sift. I'd almost suggest getting your hands on some and give it a wee test. It's available at health food stores at a very expensive $30 for a 10ml dropper bottle, or $80 for a gallon on Amazon.

Here's a link to an old thread referencing DMSO nasal spray, with anecdotal evidence of several different concoctions of Colloidal Silver and DMSO used to fight nasal infections - https://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/msg134251.html

Anecdotal evidence is what got me started using cannabis as a medication, with great success. I really didn't think I'd be off all 27 medications when I started my personal cannabis journey, and yet here I am, pharma free (with the exception of the occasional pharma antacid. I'll find a natural alternative soon with a little luck).
https://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/msg134251.html

Another anecdote:
I use 10% several times a day for sinus congestion and sinus headaches. I have never had any dryness reaction, which is strange I guess since it does dry my skin, but I am using much higher concentrations. It clears my nose within minutes, makes it run and I have to blow for a few minutes, some drains down my throat. But it works and fast, for me. I either use a dropper with my head turned upside down over the bed or a metered nasal spray and I tip my head back, either way I roll from side to side to distribute. I also put it on my temples, in my ears, and all around my ears, in 30% concentration mixed with CS. I put Peppermint oil on these areas first and then the DMSO to drive it in and get some circulation going. Both of these methods work to reduce sinus headaches. If you do get dryness Emu Oil is helpful. Sinus irrigation with salt water also works. Neti Pots are good for sinus irrigation and they are cheap compared to a sinus irrigation set up for a Water Pik or sinus irrigation unit.
https://www.remedyspot.com/content/topic/2739938-dmso-for-nasal-congestion/

I wonder as well if ultrasonic emulsion may yield a successful solution of cannabis in a solvent that normally does not dissolve cannabis resin. That'll be something to look into next time I get a moment for some reading lol

It's interesting that you mention ultrasonic extraction - thats how I infused the last batch of DMSO, and had a surprising result. Normally DMSO, when applied topically, tends to result in the slight taste of garlic a couple of seconds after application. The US extracted DMSO smells strongly of garlic on opening the bottle, whereas non US DMSO doesn't smell like much of anything, suggesting that the shearing action of ultrasonics has modified something in the DMSO. I won't be using US extraction for this in future as the sift infuses quite readily on it's own, into a small amount of DMSO in a glass dish with a slight amount of manual agitation.

Here is the US unit I have (iSonic p4810). The video spends a minute explaining the differences in units. It's not Industrial Sonomechanics grade equipment, but it's handy enough for us basement tinkerers...

Here's another model review, with a helpful review for thos that might want to learn more about US extraction and how it works...
 

herbivore21

Well-Known Member
So far the only examples I've found for dosing is from this article: http://www.dmso.co.za/used-dmso-treat-bronchopneumonia/ which is a little light on technical detail.
"10% DMSO concentration with colloidal silver in a total of 50ml. In the morning, just before breakfast my wife would pour 5ml of the mixture into the nebulizer and inhale it until finished".
What I read from this is that DMSO is diluted with distilled water, so it's a small component of the mixture, and not pure cannabis DMSO that goes into the nebulizer. Colloidal silver, in excess concentrations, can cause issues when taken internally, so thats something else to be aware of for n00bs like me...


A few years ago an ENT doc got me set up with a nasal rinse system. It uses distilled water to carry a bit of salt, and that mix is rinsed through nasal passages. It does a reasonable job of clearing sinuses, and it most certainly causes sinus issues when I use it. I had UPPP surgery a bunch of years ago which may be related, or maybe not, but I tend to get all the effects your article references just using the saline mix with lukewarm water. Will DMSO make it worse? Not yet (I've tried it 3 or 4 times now). There is also colloidal silver added to the mix. Once the coughing and sputtering stops I can breathe easier, and can go longer times between rinses.

Smoking and vaping can also cause respiratory issues. I'm a little sceptical of the word 'may', especially when used in research documents. It's a kind way of saying 'I don't know'. It's like looking at mainstream cannabis research which almost always includes the phrase 'requires more research', for a plant with no toxic load. DMSO, to my mind, is a similar low toxic load compound. If it's used topically, and ingestable, as well as injectable via IV, IM and SubQ methods, why not nebulized, especially using the 'start low and go slow' mantra advice we tend to give new cannabis users?

So my cannabis infused DMSO experiments don't require much DMSO. Just enough to cover decarbed dry sift. I'd almost suggest getting your hands on some and give it a wee test. It's available at health food stores at a very expensive $30 for a 10ml dropper bottle, or $80 for a gallon on Amazon.

Here's a link to an old thread referencing DMSO nasal spray, with anecdotal evidence of several different concoctions of Colloidal Silver and DMSO used to fight nasal infections - https://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/msg134251.html

Anecdotal evidence is what got me started using cannabis as a medication, with great success. I really didn't think I'd be off all 27 medications when I started my personal cannabis journey, and yet here I am, pharma free (with the exception of the occasional pharma antacid. I'll find a natural alternative soon with a little luck).
https://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/msg134251.html

Another anecdote:
I use 10% several times a day for sinus congestion and sinus headaches. I have never had any dryness reaction, which is strange I guess since it does dry my skin, but I am using much higher concentrations. It clears my nose within minutes, makes it run and I have to blow for a few minutes, some drains down my throat. But it works and fast, for me. I either use a dropper with my head turned upside down over the bed or a metered nasal spray and I tip my head back, either way I roll from side to side to distribute. I also put it on my temples, in my ears, and all around my ears, in 30% concentration mixed with CS. I put Peppermint oil on these areas first and then the DMSO to drive it in and get some circulation going. Both of these methods work to reduce sinus headaches. If you do get dryness Emu Oil is helpful. Sinus irrigation with salt water also works. Neti Pots are good for sinus irrigation and they are cheap compared to a sinus irrigation set up for a Water Pik or sinus irrigation unit.
https://www.remedyspot.com/content/topic/2739938-dmso-for-nasal-congestion/



It's interesting that you mention ultrasonic extraction - thats how I infused the last batch of DMSO, and had a surprising result. Normally DMSO, when applied topically, tends to result in the slight taste of garlic a couple of seconds after application. The US extracted DMSO smells strongly of garlic on opening the bottle, whereas non US DMSO doesn't smell like much of anything, suggesting that the shearing action of ultrasonics has modified something in the DMSO. I won't be using US extraction for this in future as the sift infuses quite readily on it's own, into a small amount of DMSO in a glass dish with a slight amount of manual agitation.

Here is the US unit I have (iSonic p4810). The video spends a minute explaining the differences in units. It's not Industrial Sonomechanics grade equipment, but it's handy enough for us basement tinkerers...

Here's another model review, with a helpful review for thos that might want to learn more about US extraction and how it works...
I understand each of your points here man, but let me start by saying I'm only discussing DMSO in my above post as a solvent for MMJ formulations delivered via nebulizer inhalation.

As you rightly say, DMSO is recognized to be safe in a number of human applications other than inhalation of the aerosol. However, to date, I've found no scholarly evidence that speaks to the safety of inhaling DMSO aerosol. Those formulations for pulmonary delivery that have used DMSO that I've found in the scientific literature only use DMSO as a solvent during processing, and remove all residuals from the final product prior to nebulization. The only pre-clinical research that I've seen for DMSO aerosol inhalation has suggested it is a potential respiratory irritant - even in the very small concentrations outlined above in my last post.

The only information about people inhaling DMSO that you've presented is anecdotal and as such, not the kind of evidence that I as a scientist will ever rely on to justify inhaling such solvents.

Even if we set my high scientific standards aside, there were some adverse effects reported in those anecdotes you provided too. I'm especially concerned about the nasal spray report that you linked to, because DMSO aside, that author was also inhaling small amounts of Hydrogen peroxide (h2o2), a strong oxidizing agent which is known to cause not just irritation, but inflammation and worse if it is inhaled, depending on the concentration. That substance is strictly limited for even ambient trace human inhalation exposure in workplaces. Both NIOSH and OSHA guidelines allow for no more than 1ppm exposure of h2o2 for inhalation - over a maximum of 8 hours! Please don't mess with shit like that at home brother (I'm not assuming that you would necessarily, but felt it necessary to point this out for any who may read). Even as anecdotes go, given the above, that is not a source whose advice I'd be taking when it comes to what one should or should not inhale.

Of course, to return to my own pesky scientific standards: I'm only ever going to consider inhaling a nebulized solution that uses a solvent/s that is/are recognized to be safe for that purpose in humans by independent medical research literature.

I am not saying that DMSO will never be able to be used as a solvent or cosolvent (in the case of addition of another compound to dilute the concentration of DMSO whilst still retaining solubility of the active medicine). Once I know that a credible research ethics committee has allowed researchers to look at these impacts in humans, and then if/when the resultant scholarly research has identified that it is safe for humans to inhale DMSO and under what conditions, I will consider it as a solvent for my own nebulization purposes. In the meantime, I'll be holding off on any such testing personally.

IMO there is no sense in trying to reinvent the wheel with methods that are not known to be safe in humans, especially when the pre-clinical evidence suggests that it is likely to give us the same problem as we were trying to resolve in the first place with vaporization.

Your skepticism surrounding the use of the word 'may' is something I do not share in this case (although we have agreed many times in the past on taking these kinds of qualifiers with a pinch of salt). The document concerned is an MSDS which is trying to discuss the potential impacts on humans of this substance when inhaled, they must use the qualifier 'may' because the only research available referred to rats, not people. This should leave us erring on the side of caution IMHO, because if research has not yet been allowed to proceed looking into human inhalation of something viewed as reasonably safe for other methods of delivery, there's usually gonna be some good reasoning behind that. After all, it is not as if researchers have not considered using DMSO in preparing formulations for pulmonary delivery, but we should remain mindful that they are removing that DMSO completely from the final formulation prior to administering via inhalation (one example of this can be found in a scholarly book called 'Biodrug Delivery Systems', edited by Morishita et al.)...

I should say that using DMSO for other methods of delivery that are known to be safe for humans is a good idea! The above again, is only discussing DMSO for inhalation in an aerosol. None of what I say above should be construed as in any way diminishing the efficacy of other, known safe methods of delivery using DMSO. Also @Killick I respect you're well and truly somebody who can look out for yourself brother, by no means am I telling you what to do here (although I will tell you to take care, whatever you do, you're good people!).

BTW, very interesting to hear about what happened to the DMSO when you exposed it to sonication man! I am definitely open to looking at DMSO for some of these other applications that are recognized to be safe in the scholarly literature! Add that to my long list of MMJ to-do's as well! Many thanks to you for bringing up those points brother.
 

Baron23

Well-Known Member
I understand each of your points here man, but let me start by saying I'm only discussing DMSO in my above post as a solvent for MMJ formulations delivered via nebulizer inhalation.

As you rightly say, DMSO is recognized to be safe in a number of human applications other than inhalation of the aerosol. However, to date, I've found no scholarly evidence that speaks to the safety of inhaling DMSO aerosol. Those formulations for pulmonary delivery that have used DMSO that I've found in the scientific literature only use DMSO as a solvent during processing, and remove all residuals from the final product prior to nebulization. The only pre-clinical research that I've seen for DMSO aerosol inhalation has suggested it is a potential respiratory irritant - even in the very small concentrations outlined above in my last post.

The only information about people inhaling DMSO that you've presented is anecdotal and as such, not the kind of evidence that I as a scientist will ever rely on to justify inhaling such solvents.

Even if we set my high scientific standards aside, there were some adverse effects reported in those anecdotes you provided too. I'm especially concerned about the nasal spray report that you linked to, because DMSO aside, that author was also inhaling small amounts of Hydrogen peroxide (h2o2), a strong oxidizing agent which is known to cause not just irritation, but inflammation and worse if it is inhaled, depending on the concentration. That substance is strictly limited for even ambient trace human inhalation exposure in workplaces. Both NIOSH and OSHA guidelines allow for no more than 1ppm exposure of h2o2 for inhalation - over a maximum of 8 hours! Please don't mess with shit like that at home brother (I'm not assuming that you would necessarily, but felt it necessary to point this out for any who may read). Even as anecdotes go, given the above, that is not a source whose advice I'd be taking when it comes to what one should or should not inhale.

Of course, to return to my own pesky scientific standards: I'm only ever going to consider inhaling a nebulized solution that uses a solvent/s that is/are recognized to be safe for that purpose in humans by independent medical research literature.

I am not saying that DMSO will never be able to be used as a solvent or cosolvent (in the case of addition of another compound to dilute the concentration of DMSO whilst still retaining solubility of the active medicine). Once I know that a credible research ethics committee has allowed researchers to look at these impacts in humans, and then if/when the resultant scholarly research has identified that it is safe for humans to inhale DMSO and under what conditions, I will consider it as a solvent for my own nebulization purposes. In the meantime, I'll be holding off on any such testing personally.

IMO there is no sense in trying to reinvent the wheel with methods that are not known to be safe in humans, especially when the pre-clinical evidence suggests that it is likely to give us the same problem as we were trying to resolve in the first place with vaporization.

Your skepticism surrounding the use of the word 'may' is something I do not share in this case (although we have agreed many times in the past on taking these kinds of qualifiers with a pinch of salt). The document concerned is an MSDS which is trying to discuss the potential impacts on humans of this substance when inhaled, they must use the qualifier 'may' because the only research available referred to rats, not people. This should leave us erring on the side of caution IMHO, because if research has not yet been allowed to proceed looking into human inhalation of something viewed as reasonably safe for other methods of delivery, there's usually gonna be some good reasoning behind that. After all, it is not as if researchers have not considered using DMSO in preparing formulations for pulmonary delivery, but we should remain mindful that they are removing that DMSO completely from the final formulation prior to administering via inhalation (one example of this can be found in a scholarly book called 'Biodrug Delivery Systems', edited by Morishita et al.)...

I should say that using DMSO for other methods of delivery that are known to be safe for humans is a good idea! The above again, is only discussing DMSO for inhalation in an aerosol. None of what I say above should be construed as in any way diminishing the efficacy of other, known safe methods of delivery using DMSO. Also @Killick I respect you're well and truly somebody who can look out for yourself brother, by no means am I telling you what to do here (although I will tell you to take care, whatever you do, you're good people!).

BTW, very interesting to hear about what happened to the DMSO when you exposed it to sonication man! I am definitely open to looking at DMSO for some of these other applications that are recognized to be safe in the scholarly literature! Add that to my long list of MMJ to-do's as well! Many thanks to you for bringing up those points brother.
I have absolutely no interest in inhaling DMSO and what we vape is a gaseous form of the cannabinoids. Not at all sure I just want to coat the inside of my lungs with micro-droplets of cannibinoids. This is not thrilling me.
 

Killick

Well-Known Member
@herbivore21 We're on the same page regarding aerosol delivery of solvents. What got me into this train of thought was suspended colloidal silver in a nebulizer, and the realization that DMSO is is a solvent with low toxic load, which may provide a method of nebulizing cannabinoids. It's still in the realm of hypothetical, and I wish I knew more about organic chemistry and methods of testing, which is why this thread exists. At this point in time, based on my own anecdotal findings and some small experimentation, I'm of the opinion that this is an entirely plausible method of intake, pending a bit more research to identify potential issues. Everything needs more research, but there does come a point in time where the evidence may suggest it's worth a closer look. At what point does a trace element of a low toxicity chemical cause lung issues? Especially considering that a number of us have histories of working in toxic environments, including burn pits filled with human waste, medical waste and chemical waste, all incinerated through judicious application of hydrocarbon accelerants including diesel and gasoline. Speaking as someone who is already overburdened with a number of toxins and heavy metals I tend to be that teeny bit sceptical of numbers in msds sheets. There is a safe level, and then there is a toxic level, and in between those two there tends to be a rather large gap. Someone working with these compounds every day will want to watch the safe levels very closely due to risk of prolonged exposure, whereas those not in the environment day in and day out will tend to have less concern. This is true of every compound, including water. Julie Childs one famously stated that everything is acceptable in moderation, including moderation.

5 years ago I didn't know what a vaporizer was, and was on a huge amount of medications. Now I know a great many ways to ingest cannabinoids. Do I *need* to nebulize cannabis? No. But if it might have a use for people sensitive to the heat of smoking, or they can't tolerate the pull of vaping due to lung issues, nebulizing may be a helpful idea. Yes, there are bags and other options available. This is a different focus of attention.

Here is an article stating aerosol application of cannabinoids is an effective bronchiodialator, but doesn't explain the method of aerosolization. It's that 'how did they create an aerosol' piece that I'm chasing. Is it DMSO? Is it something else? Which something else? The usual methods of suspension are fats and alcohols, and also DMSO. I've not investigated nebulizing ET or MCT as yet. The facts about DMSO remain that it's effective topically, ingested, and injected. Why not trace amounts in a nebulizer remains the question.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1429361/
1 delta1-trans-tetrahydrocannabinol, (delta1-THC) produces bronchodilatation in asthmatic patients. 2 Administered in 62 microliter metered volumes containing 50--200 microgram by inhalation from an aerosol device to patients judged to be in a steady state, it increased peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1). 3 The rate of onset, magnitude, and duration of the bronchodilator effect was dose related.

U.S. Navy Toxicology Unit, National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland 20014 USA
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0041008X69901343
Sprague-Dawley rats were exposed to DMSO at concentrations of approximately 2900 mg/m3 for 24 hours, 2000 mg/m3 for 40 hours, or 1600 mg/m3 for 4 hours. Others were exposed to 200 mg/m3 7 hours a day, 5 days a week for a total of 30 exposures. No significant alterations were noted in hemoglobin concentrations, microhematocrit, total leukocyte counts, reticulocyte counts, serum glutamic-pyruvic and glutamic-oxaloacetic transaminase activities, liver alkaline phosphatase activity, or liver lactate concentrations. The concentration of serum urea nitrogen was slightly elevated in rats exposed to approximately 2900 mg/m3 for 24 hours but was within normal limits in all other animals. Histopathologic edematous changes were noted in lungs of some of the animals used in the acute exposures which were not seen in controls. Hemorrhage and pneumocyte infiltrations were seen in the lungs of both experimental and control rats.

@Baron23 - how does inhaled cannabis via smoking and/or vaping impact your lung health at present? Nebulization is merely another way to get medications into your body. What we're discussing here is the use of an organic solvent, which is already approved for use as a medication carrier. It's already low on the toxicity scale, and is currently used on humans and animals both topically and internally - nebulization is just another uptake method and has proven benefits for some conditions.
 

Killick

Well-Known Member
Ps - this article suggests ethanol as a carrier...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC470501/

Edit: And then there's this info:

Inhalation
Fishman and coworkers at the Naval Medical Center (10) performed many toxicological measurements on the exposure of rats to DMSO vapors. The following single and repeated exposures were made:

DMSO Concentration Length of Exposure
1600 milligrams per cubic meter 4 hours
2900 milligrams per cubic meter 24 hours
2000 milligrams per cubic meter 40 hours
200 milligrams per cubic meter 210 hours (7 hrs/day, 5 days/week for 30 exposures

Extensive blood and tissue samples were examined. No evidence of toxicity was demonstrated. No significant changes were noted during or following repeated exposure. We suggest, as a good hygiene practice, avoiding exposure to DMSO sprays or mists and very high doses of DMSO vapors.

https://www.gaylordchemical.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/GC-Literature-106.pdf
 
Last edited:

Sponsored by

PuffItUp Dynavap VGoodiez 420EDC Dispensr
Top