THC % Does Not Measure The High

Wilksey

Well-Known Member
Just going by tested THC levels pot today is 3-5x stronger than even the best of the 70s.
Nah, that's propaganda dude.

Testing standards and sampling standards have been all over the place, if not outright absent. Even today you'll get 3 different results from 3 different labs using the same sample.
 

Z3r0Z3r0

Well-Known Member
Nah, that's propaganda dude.

Testing standards and sampling standards have been all over the place, if not outright absent. Even today you'll get 3 different results from 3 different labs using the same sample.
Yes but your also exagerating, dont get me wrong Id luv some maui wouwi or thai stick, but they do indeed all have lower THC levels all the original 70s strains. Theese new frankewhore hybrids are stronger in THC terms, now does this necesarily mean they are better? Of course not, cannabis has a synergistic effect of hundreds of cannabinoids and no plant or hybrid will give same high.

As far as lab tests of course they are not consistent due to batches. Why most strains list avg max THC percentage,anything lower and it wasnt grown right

But as stated now full spectrum analisis matters and THC is not the only ingredient labeled in percentage, I look at CBD, CBN, CBG, CBDV. All of them together give you what you like, not THC alone and not CBD alone, cause truth is you take THC ALONE with NO other cannabinoides, you might lose your intrest in smoking pot....
 

Wilksey

Well-Known Member
They do indeed all have lower THC levels all the original 70s strains.
Show me the sample collection methods, the test standards, and multiple results demonstrating the superiority of modern seedless flower compared to old school seedless flower and I'll agree. Until then, it's all government propaganda and stoner lore.

Hell, if anything, I bet the THC totals have DROPPED over the years compared to the original land race strains due to all the shitty pollen-chucking "breeding" programs that have popped up over the past 3 decades. Talk to any legit breeder of anything, and they'll tell you it takes great genetics to produce great genetics, and I guarantee 90% of all hybrids today were created using a combination of great, mediocre, and even marginal genetics at best, and that's not going to help spike THC levels across the board, but drop them instead.
 

Z3r0Z3r0

Well-Known Member
Show me the sample collection methods, the test standards, and multiple results demonstrating the superiority of modern seedless flower compared to old school seedless flower and I'll agree. Until then, it's all government propaganda and stoner lore.

Hell, if anything, I bet the THC totals have DROPPED over the years compared to the original land race strains due to all the shitty pollen-chucking "breeding" programs that have popped up over the past 3 decades. Talk to any legit breeder of anything, and they'll tell you it takes great genetics to produce great genetics, and I guarantee 90% of all hybrids today were created using a combination of great, mediocre, and even marginal genetics at best, and that's not going to help spike THC levels across the board, but drop them instead.
Show me the sample collection methods, the test standards, and multiple results demonstrating the superiority of modern seedless flower compared to old school seedless flower and I'll agree. Until then, it's all government propaganda and stoner lore.

Hell, if anything, I bet the THC totals have DROPPED over the years compared to the original land race strains due to all the shitty pollen-chucking "breeding" programs that have popped up over the past 3 decades. Talk to any legit breeder of anything, and they'll tell you it takes great genetics to produce great genetics, and I guarantee 90% of all hybrids today were created using a combination of great, mediocre, and even marginal genetics at best, and that's not going to help spike THC levels across the board, but drop them instead.

You are correct to an extent, you need to look at strain to see what the parents were
 

OldMedUser

Well-Known Member
Show me the sample collection methods, the test standards, and multiple results demonstrating the superiority of modern seedless flower compared to old school seedless flower and I'll agree. Until then, it's all government propaganda and stoner lore.

Hell, if anything, I bet the THC totals have DROPPED over the years compared to the original land race strains due to all the shitty pollen-chucking "breeding" programs that have popped up over the past 3 decades. Talk to any legit breeder of anything, and they'll tell you it takes great genetics to produce great genetics, and I guarantee 90% of all hybrids today were created using a combination of great, mediocre, and even marginal genetics at best, and that's not going to help spike THC levels across the board, but drop them instead.
Testing methods have been accurate for decades and using selective breeding THC levels are a lot higher than back in the day.

A lot of exaggeration by the authorities has gone on in recent years blowing the numbers way up to scare people but it's well documented that with all the focus on breeding higher and higher THC levels they are way higher.

Now the focus is gradually moving into blends of cannabinoids that work better not just for the high but for medicinal use. 100 years of repression has prevented proper study of cannabis but that is changing fast.

Any decent lab can accurately measure the amounts of everything in a sample of pot and if the same samples are distributed between different labs the results should all be the same or very close if the same methodology is used in each.
 

Wilksey

Well-Known Member
Testing methods have been accurate for decades and using selective breeding THC levels are a lot higher than back in the day.
No, they haven't, and they still aren't today. Why? Because there's no agreed upon standard for sample collection OR testing. Period. If you don't have uniform collection and testing standards, then your testing won't be repeatable, reliable, and your results won't have any validity.

Check out this High Times vid:

They tried to use a scientific approach, but failed miserably because the lab tests show different results for the same samples, which means their "testing" was pretty much worthless for anything conclusive, and only represented trends, at best.

A lot of exaggeration by the authorities has gone on in recent years blowing the numbers way up to scare people
Agree. Ignorance has a lot to do with it as well. That and marketing on behalf of unscrupulous growers trying to sell their shit as some kind of "special" fire weed.


but it's well documented that with all the focus on breeding higher and higher THC levels they are way higher.
First, I don't agree that cannabis breeding has been properly "documented" at all, let alone "well documented". I would argue that the overwhelming majority of indoor cannabis strains were selected and "bred" [Read: pollen chucked] for characteristics other than thc content. Things like growth rate, flowering time, structure of the plant, structure of the flowers, size and weight of flowers, total yield, aroma and flavor profiles, and over all ease of growing are all higher priorities than thc content alone.

We still don't even really know what the hell "high thc" actually means, or does, because we're still not sure how thc interacts with the other cannabinoids to produce the psychoactive effects we feel when we ingest them. It might be that we should be looking for higher cbd ratios, rather than thc, because maybe they interact with thc to produce a better and more balanced high....we just don't know, though, thanks to criminalization.
 

OldMedUser

Well-Known Member
The actual testing done at the lab should be consistent if the sampling method is also consistent.

As a breeder it would be my best interest if I only sampled the very best colas and sent that for a sample. They are going to have the highest levels of cannabinoids and show that on the lab analysis sheet that I can wave around to show the great results.

In the case of all the buds and sugar leaves being used to make edibles it should all be blended together to make a homogeneous blend and the sample taken from a few random spots, remixed then a portion of that submitted for sampling.

I spent 3 years in tech school in my 30s getting a diploma in chemistry and worked in a couple labs after that before saying to hell with little more than minimum wage and switching to driving truck in the oil patch. :)

:peace:
 

hawse

Well-Known Member
Hey just my two cents (and first few post here actually), but I was just talking to my buddy about this the other day. There is one strain I have, and just from looking at it under the loupe I can see a decent amount of trichomes. It has a lemon/citrus skunk flavor an extremely strong mind and body affect. Then I have some OG Kush, it's covered in trichomes, way more than the other, has a frosty look to it with the naked eye. But, only a nice euphoria and head high, decent body buzz. But the first stuff, the unknown lemony stuff, it knocks my socks off. Way better for pain, less bad side effects, and generally a feeling of this stuff kicking your ass lol. So, does just having more thrichomes mean it's stronger? Is that the only visual way to tell. Or is it that this less strong looking stuff is actually stronger? I'd love to have it tested some day. OR also it could be that one is more indica/sativa dominant, OR it could be terpenes? lol I suppose the affects and "strength" of cannabis are very subjective...
 
Brick Top, Thank you for the charts and info. There is so much more we need to know about the Cannabinoids, terpenoids and flavonoids. as humans we are built with cannabinoid receptors, Im learning. Im curious, as a diagnosed by biopsy, sarcoidosis and RA patient who refused pharmaceuticals @ diagnosis 24 years ago. Im supposed to be in a wheelchair, if not dead! But, I believe cannabis is saving me. Im active, i have flares, and I use different forms of CBD tinctures, raw cannabis, and salves. Along with RSO , vaping oils and I smoke cannabis, as well. Of course all against my rhuematologist and pulmonalogist. Whole foods, and cannabis. Im in a medical state in Arizona, and I'm frightened of recreational undermining all we need to know. I'm very ignorant, but i want to soak it up like a sponge. Your graphs and illustrations are helpful. Thank you, I agree with Bob Harris, wingman status!!
 
I Just read this thread out of curiosity as its still going after 8 years and i'm really glad I did as it was a fantastic post, That information is the basis of the research done that allowed the government to very cleverly make there definition between CBD and THC and cash in on it, I don't think a lot of us would have believed that CBD would thankfully despite it being influenced by money not compassion be available as a valid lawful medicine!

It does genuinely work but there is obviously a large corporate or high street degree of this stuff available now as it was designed to by the government! I need to ask Admin if can plug ;)or i need to pm a CBD site that's perfectly legal its definitely just CBD i'm sorry:) that was recommended to me as a group of dedicated individuals not a massive corporation, and there products have helped hugely with my back issue having had a kite surfing accident a few years ago, And I need to ask them as well!

Anyways top marks to Brick Top for this initial reply
 

reynescabruner

Well-Known Member
Yes, because each of us have different tolerance and either way has different ways to relax. There are also strains that's relaxing for you but not for mine. So I go for product reviews first before trying a new one and then try myself if it does really has same effect.
 

outerstar

Active Member
I'v grown G19 (G13) before and marveled at the cellular development of the trunk. And it really was a trunk. But what I realized is that through breeding growers sought to improve desirable qualities in their cannabis, like THC, plant growth etc.

Evolution however creates unique and different types of plants that have there own type of high. Im no expert (and I dont keep pigs) but I think there is a homogenous element to creating high thc strain cannabis. There is "intensity" and "direction" of the high, modern growing seems to be focused on the "intensity" and not the "direction", to some point.
 

mordynyc

Well-Known Member
1. Everyone has different tastes and reactions to the different chemicals in cigarettes AND Cannabis even though both have 1 target drug that gets you.
2. I'd rather squeeze a bit more grinded weed in my dynavap from a good yummy 20% strain than pay more or the same for a 25% I wont like as much at all for whatever reason to either buy as flower or waste the effort growing it if there is a consensus for example that it's just a strong couch locked high with nothing else offered.
Change my mind.
 

mordynyc

Well-Known Member
Yes, because each of us have different tolerance and either way has different ways to relax. There are also strains that's relaxing for you but not for mine. So I go for product reviews first before trying a new one and then try myself if it does really has same effect.
Can't you just smoke less of the strong stuff? It comes out even cheaper since you can micro dose.
Low% thc or cbd weed is a waste of time IMO.
 

CTGrown203

Well-Known Member
Strongest strain I think I ever smoked was a 14% thc trainwreck grown by advanced grow labs,
Only half the thc of all these strains
 

Weedmama

Member
this is great info, I was trying to like your post BrickTop but didn't know how.
so much good info for when trying to find a strain, I also find it very dependent how it was grown - organic vs nonorganic and the terpenes present in the strain can make a big difference in the effects felt.
 
Hello All ,

New user here . Not so new grower . No old timer either .

I recently have taken to testing my strains for THC % with a local lab . I am noticing the grows that get great user reviews do not necessarily have the highest THC % . In fact , the local favorite is coming in at 9% , which is half of my other strains !

I do not think the lab is at fault . I think there is a lot more to the quality of the high than THC % . In addition , I am starting to question the reasoning behind the commonly held notion that Sativas are always energetic and Indicas are sleepers .

There is a BBC documentary that really seems to confirm this . See YouTube
.

Does anybody have similar observations ?

I am trying to understand why some strains make people giggle and chat and others make people sleep . THC % is not the deciding factor . CBD ? CBN ? Other Magic Stuff ?

Thank You ,
Matt Thematic
Its the terpene profile. Terps have effects. Thc% isnt everything. Each terpene has effects example anything high in linalool will put you to sleep
 

bigunyun

Well-Known Member
I just brought some samples I grew from some of my seeds into the lab and had them tested and it was interesting. This lab MCR in MA publishes a lot of their results on THC and terps. THC % isn't everything of course cuz you could just smoke more, theoretically to get the same THC dose as long as you like the smoke. Terps are probably important, but even weed with low terps can get you really buzzed.
I used a nugsmasher to make some rosin from the Doctors Orders cuz i wanted to see how much the smasher extracted. I smashed 4.5 g of flower and got exactly 1.00 g rosin. The flower tested at 21.64% and the rosin at 89.13%, which means the nugsmasher effectively extracted over 91% of the THC, which i thought was impressive.
The other thing I tried was some trash hash i made from old leaves and flower from the bottom of plants i wasn't going to process or smoke so I made some dry ice hash and tested it. That bubble hash tested out at 35% and that works well in the press, too. So I'm glad I tested this stuff, I learned a lot.
S21-31329 Doctor Orders.jpgS21-31329 Doctor Orders 2.jpgS21-31331 Diesel Rosin 1.jpgS21-31331 Diesel Rosin 2.jpgS21-31330 Afgan Tush.jpgS21-31330 Afgan Tush 2.jpgS21-31332 WG Bubble Hash 1.jpgS21-31332 WG Bubble Hash 2.jpg
 
>
Top