There's really two issues: extracting the kavalactones and how much is bio-available to you.
What's the point in extracting "more" kavalactones if they will just pass through your body anyway?
I suspect there are limits to how much kavalactone content our bodies can absorb from whatever grog we drink, regardless of how much we have extracted. If I drink grog and feel as good as I would want to feel, why should I be concerned about feeling "better" ? I mean, there is no "better."
As for press cake is trash, that's nonense. There's always great stuff ina second wash and good stuff in a third wash. I always do at least a third wash, always. And sometimes fourth and even fifth washes have goodness in them and are worthwhile.
I think the key word here is "optimizing" - what does that really mean?
I'm not sure if I've seen any data on the limits of kavalactone bioavailability, but I don't think there's any reason to believe we would be anywhere near it at the doses we're drinking. Drink a triple strength batch tonight and you will very much feel the effect of having more kavalactones available to you.
There are more reasons than just 'feeling better', which itself is a valid reason, for wanting optimal kavalactone extraction. If we are truly in the range of 15% KL extraction from our whole kava, then it's simply wasteful to not strive for more efficiency. Kava is expensive, if we had more kavalactones make their way into our prepared beverage, then you don't necessarily need to use them to reach a higher 'high', you could also use them to just extend the number low or average strength sessions you get out of the bag. Also, the kava crop is a slow grower, in limited supply and is susceptible to destruction by cyclone. The more usage we could squeeze out of each plant the better. It would save money & cut waste. I mean, modern solar panels could currently supply us with
enough power, but at 20% efficiency, should we just call the technology finished, good enough? I don't think so, we should shoot for 50% and then for 75%...
Don't take this as a knock on you, but whenever these topics come up, you are always speaking from a lightweights perspective, who gets good results from lightweight doses, for whatever reasons you personally drink kava --- but then you try to pitch that as the standard all drinkers should be living by. There is a wide range of reasons people drink, doses different bodies require, doses people simply prefer, funds available to buy kava etc. I'm personally a natural born hard-head from day one, I drink kava both recreationally and to treat mental & physical conditions and have limited funds...more kavalactones will always be better for me. Try going to Vanuatu with bags of dry kava and telling the locals they should all be happy with 4 Tbsp of kava dust.
![Wink ;) ;)]()
Being a kava lightweight is a blessing, we hard-head's are jealous. You guys save money and are more consistently satisfied with your grog.
'Optimizing' in that Bitbender study just means trying to get the best possible kavalactone extraction, doesn't it? Or are we going down an esoteric philosophical jag on the true meaning of optimize? If not, perhaps you mean there could be a specific number that turns out to be the most optimal, like 25% might be more optimal than 35% ? Not sure, but I reject both of these directions.
![HappyShell ::happyshell:: ::happyshell::](/forum/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/happyshell.png)