How inaccurate are genetics companies THC claims?

J

jochhe1998

Active Member
Hey guys,

Hope everyone is doing well.

I am growing a couple of Barneys Farm strains right now : Blue Gelato 41, Dos si Dos 33, Purple Punch and Wedding Cake.

Most of them Barneys claims to be about 24% THC. My question is how do genetics companies come up with these numbers?

Now I am sure that these number are inaccurate in the sense that if I grow a single seed it will most likely not be 24% THC; however, is it that if I grow a 100 plants the average of them will come out around 24% THC? What are the standard deviations on these THC percentages for properly grown plants? To what extent does growing your plants well affect the THC? Is all of this just BS?

I welcome all productive comments :D
 
T

The Mantis

Well-Known Member
jochhe1998 said:
Hey guys,

Hope everyone is doing well.

I am growing a couple of Barneys Farm strains right now : Blue Gelato 41, Dos si Dos 33, Purple Punch and Wedding Cake.

Most of them Barneys claims to be about 24% THC. My question is how do genetics companies come up with these numbers?

Now I am sure that these number are inaccurate in the sense that if I grow a single seed it will most likely not be 24% THC; however, is it that if I grow a 100 plants the average of them will come out around 24% THC? What are the standard deviations on these THC percentages for properly grown plants? To what extent does growing your plants well affect the THC? Is all of this just BS?

I welcome all productive comments :D
Click to expand...
I read a scientific study recently that said 66.8% of all statistics are made up.
 
dbz

dbz

Well-Known Member
Forget the numbers just concentrate on quality bud.
People are stuck on THC being everything but you can get more pleasant and desirable results from plants that have lower thc and higher combinations of other cannabinoids. Sure THC matters but a quality grown plant is primary concern. You may not grow them well and they may not hit those numbers. You may grow them great and exceed. Most places that actually get it tested likely just test a few samples and take the highest. Some may average it..who knows...i doubt that though.
How good a strain is, first would depend on breeding and stability, else you end up with phenos that may be vastly different from each other even in these numbers plant to plant. Then it is determined by the subjective experience of the consumer which increases in direct correlation with the skill of the grower from start to cure.
 
Last edited:
J

jochhe1998

Active Member
dbz said:
Forget the numbers just concentrate on quality bud.
People are stuck on THC being everything but you can get more pleasant and desirable results from plants that have lower thc and higher combinations of other cannabinoids. Sure THC matters but a quality grown plant is primary concern. You may not grow them well and they may not hit those numbers. You may grow them great and exceed. Most places that actually get it tested likely just test a few samples and take the highest. Some may average it..who knows...i doubt that though.
How good a strain is, first would depend on breeding and stability, else you end up with phenos that may be vastly different from each other even in these numbers plant to plant. Then it is determined by the subjective experience of the consumer which increases in direct correlation with the skill of the grower from start to cure.
Click to expand...
I could not agree more dbz.

Unfortunately, your average cannabis consumer in an underdeveloped market only cares for the number :( which is why I will unfortunately be prioritizing it in the short term until the market matures.

Your insight is duly appreciated!
 
T

The Mantis

Well-Known Member
jochhe1998 said:
I have always heard this number thrown around but I always assumed it was just something your witty cousin would say as opposed to being true.

Have you really seen this in a paper? How did they come to that conclusion?
Click to expand...
My witty cousin says it is actually 86.2% and he might be right. But yeah I read it in Scientific American or Men's Health. It's 110% accurate.
 
WintersBones

WintersBones

Well-Known Member
THC levels and the how they are tested are highly subjective and any numbers being thrown out of there, by anyone, should be taken with a large gain of salt, and that goes for any breeder or LP making claims. There's so many variables like their testing methods and sample size used (and whether they're only testing tops or including lowers in the sampling), and consider most testing doesn't even cover the whole range of cannabinoids and terpenes. And there's so much we don't know about the lesser studied cannabinoids at all. So it can be useful as a very rough guide, and to compare between strains from the same breeder, but beyond that I wouldn't put too much stock in THC %'s.
 
Star Dog

Star Dog

Well-Known Member
DonPetro said:
I didn't know Barney's had those strains. How authentic are they?
Click to expand...
How authentic are any seeds... Imho we're wide open to getting ripped off.

I could make up some quality looking advertising with cool named strains but it's still only 1 plant X another, when seed banks give away freebies it says it all really... Imho.

Edit... Auto spell/correct strikes again lol
 
Last edited:
Star Dog

Star Dog

Well-Known Member
dbz said:
Forget the numbers just concentrate on quality bud.
People are stuck on THC being everything but you can get more pleasant and desirable results from plants that have lower thc and higher combinations of other cannabinoids. Sure THC matters but a quality grown plant is primary concern. You may not grow them well and they may not hit those numbers. You may grow them great and exceed. Most places that actually get it tested likely just test a few samples and take the highest. Some may average it..who knows...i doubt that though.
How good a strain is, first would depend on breeding and stability, else you end up with phenos that may be vastly different from each other even in these numbers plant to plant. Then it is determined by the subjective experience of the consumer which increases in direct correlation with the skill of the grower from start to cure.
Click to expand...
I've tried to tell people roughly what you're saying, I've smoked weed with high bs numbers and just regular weed, on more than one occasion the alleged underdog is best, personally I don't even look at cbd/thc figures, imo it's not worth the paper it's written on!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top