Is pot getting stronger???

[Guest]

For aslong as I have been smoking weed, 6 years, it has stayed the same. I havent smoked the hash some of you have smoked but, I have smoked some of Nols personal Jack the Ripper IceOlator and it was amazing. If you ever need good cheap hash goto WW Sativa(when it reopens) and get the Tbizla, its the SHIT!

 

[swampdank]

i think the potency is the same. if you were to smoke the highland oaxaca gold in the seventies, and find some now, the high would be identical, given its grown in the same soil, altitude, region.

i still believe that the most potent pot has yet to be discovered. but pot in general has changed shape and flavor. type of high is somewhat different but the potency could have easily been found if one were to look in the right places. ask jack herer, or willie nelson, they both agree hat pots potency has not changed in 30 years.

i think we need to focus not only on the medicinal value of certain plants, but also the recreational value. this is equally important since recreational use is in its own way, medicinal.

 

[subrob]

also keep in mind, only folks who actually smoked herb in the 60's 70's 80's or 90's can give even accurate opininions on this question-even then, its still just that.
with the advent of publications, the websites etc. we all know much more about lineage, potency, effects etc. If this would have all started back in the day, the scene would be completely diff. today

 

[flubnutz]

i dont know if the weed is stronger ... but it sure as hell is better, back in the 70s we were rollin double wides just to get a buzz, schwag, seedy etc. then i think around the time of "columbian" "hydro" then "skunkweed" seemed to be better; but don't remember nice clean nugs like you get now. but the buzz was there with the decent stuff and i dont think weed now on average is that much stronger.

edit: although its doing a good job on me right now

 

[guest123]

im toking some pure sativa from the early days (20 to 30 yrs ago) around here , and its kicking my ass still .. what particularly impresses me about it is the lasting affects , i cant seem to build up much resistance to it ...
after 2 weeks toking the same bag its still kicking my ass .. honestly i cant say that about any of the newer strains on the market ....
perhaps what im toking doesnt contain as much thc as some of the modern strains , but i can guarantee it is not weaker ..
the world has changed a lot in the last 30 yrs , as have the expectations of getting stoned ...

the new age stoner seems to prefer the clean look , and taste of indoor hydroponic herb , an instant hit , a bit like riding a 2 stroke motorcycle ..
the older stoner seems to be a bit more like a 4 stroke , a bit slower to get there , but lasts all day ..
remember the hare and the tortoise ??

 

[Rosy Cheeks]

There were very potent strains avaible 20-30 years ago, no one who was there then will deny that. Don't forget that selective breeding has been going on for hundreds of years, even millennia, and that the best landraces are a result of that.

Nevertheless, and phenomenal kind of pointed it out, we shouldn't concider the evolution of drug type Cannabis as linary. Strains come and go, get crossed with eachother, multiply and evolve. The collective global genepool has grown over the years, there's good and there's bad in there, so in that sense no one can say that the whole genepool is stronger, weaker or the same today.

But.... selecting a superior potent plant from a genepool and crossing it with another superior potent plant will probably lead to a superior potent cross, more potent than the rest of the genepool. This is how it works, every botanist and breeder knows it. You grow sweeter and more nutricious fruit on the same principle.

Saying that today, there exists no genetics superior in potency to what existed 20-30 years ago, is kind of like saying that all the breeders that have been working with drug type genetics since (Sam Skunkman, Shanti, DJ Short, etc) and also growers that have selected superior elite cuts for further breeding, are total hacks that have failed to breed for greater potency.

I smoked 25 years ago and I definitely don't think pot was more potent then, but that could be because I've got access to better genetics today, or because I remember it wrong.
Equally, someone that thinks pot was stronger 30 years ago could have had access to more potent genetics then than they have today, or simply remember it wrong.

You will never get an accurate idea or truth in this based on witness accounts. Every cop knows it. If a bank gets robbed and a dozen witnesses see the robber, one third will say he wore a green jacket, another third will say the jacked was red, and another third that it was blue. Witness accounts counts for little.

The only way to approach this is to measure scientifically the levels of THC and cannabinoids present in the plant, then continue to measure them regularly, in order to establish chronological records. Now, I believe that the gas chromatography technique to evaluate THC content in Cannabis was put to use in the mid 70's, and that the first studies were published in the 80's. I started to see scare alerts in the late 90's that pot (primarily Dutch coffeeshop weed) was getting stronger, and have continued to see them ever since. I've seen no study ever claim the contrary, I've only seen pro-Cannabis articles dispute the evaluation of these tests.

Now, whether you think it's moraly correct or not to use this type of statistics to scare people is up to to each and everyone. But if you contest the scientific results of these studies, then I think you need something more to back up your claim, other than "It's all BS", "They faked it", etc.

Then, you could always ask yourself how much THC levels have to do with a quality high, which is a very complex thing since ratios and combinations of other cannabinoids than THC are important in the context.

 

[hipponormous]

The science shows us that there is higher THC content than before. It shouldn't even be a question, of course we have more potent weed today!

 

[bagseed77]

i voted the same . i cant say much more that hasnt been said, ive been smoking since 81 and there seems to be more quality weed around now but i look for quality of the high , so what if i have to take two more tokes of weaker weed if the high is better i'd rather smoke the weaker better high weed.

 

[Lucky 7]

Swampdank:

i think we need to focus not only on the medicinal value of certain plants, but also the recreational value. this is equally important since recreational use is in its own way, medicinal.

A very much ignored take on the situation my friend!

After 30 yrs of constant testing in the Lucky Labs here atop scenic Wong's Palace of Pain, the only thing that has varied is my own inability to consistently appropriate the best buds.

Before growing my own, I was, on occasion, forced to partake of skanky, low quality weed. Even today I periodically choose a weak strain being touted here on the web.

Brought up on Oaxacan, stout Columbians, & exotic Island strains, I may have been a bit spoiled at the outset . . .

 

[Pops]

The science shows us that there is higher THC content than before. It shouldn't even be a question, of course we have more potent weed today!

Unfortunately, much of that science is "voodoo" science. If you consider that the pot measured in the 70's was a mixture of seeds,stems, male and female plants, you get much lower numbers,as male plants have considerably less THC. Todays pot is mostly sensimilla and will show much higher THC levels. That doesn't mean that pot is stronger today, just that it is grown differently and you are not measuring the same things.

The pot measured in the 70's was primarily sativa brickweed from mexico. If you compared the same mexican brickweed from the 70's to sensimilla Mexican today, you would see a big difference. However, mexican brickweed from the 70's is only slightly lower in potency than mexican brickweed from today.

The amount of THC in pot is not the only determining factor in potency, or how it affects you. The amount of THCV or CBD or CBN will affect how any particular strain will affect your body.

 

[greenhead]

Couldn't it just be that there are far more people growing today, and with the wealth of information available (like on the internet) and better grow technology today , larger amounts of better weed is available ? I think there is maybe more potent strains floating around, and people are growing more selective strains, but I don't know if I believe that weed in general has gotten stronger.

Even if it has, it amounts to propaganda that will and can be used against legalization efforts.

 

[Tony Aroma]

To answer your original question, I sure hope so.

 

[guest123]

The science shows us that there is higher THC content than before. It shouldn't even be a question, of course we have more potent weed today!

it is not how much thc is in the herb that dictates the potency , it just sounds good for selling some seeds ...
im betting u never toked some of the stuff 20 -30 yrs ago ...

 

[HeadyPete]

So how does 25 years of built up tolerance fit into the "then" vs "now" discussion?

 

[flubnutz]

im talkin from that time frame, but i wasnt a heavy smoker back then, off and on. only a heavier smoker the past few years. hard to say if your memory plays tricks; my smokin habits have changed too i.e. hit the bowl now where it used to be joints.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

Wow... difficult question...
I smoked herb over 20 years ago that was very potent to me at the time..... then in '89 my friend's brother sent him a package from alaska... said the name was matanuska thunderfuck... At that point in time it was the quickest hardest hitting stone I'd ever had... Not as soaring in high as some of the import from the south, but definately more raw potency... And since I've smoked buds that walk all over the thunderfuck... but have rarely experienced anything like the soaring trippy highs of my teens...

 

[mangled]

as long as I have been smoking i have never noticed a "general, linear" trend of cannabis becoming stronger.

I can still find you some herb that sucks..and could also find you some real dank stuff........just as it was several years ago..

 

[Guest]

To me, the best of 15 years ago is as good as the best of today.

It hasn't got too much stronger imho.

 

[Tokermon]

probably no difference if you compare the strongest back then with the strongest today. theres just more variety now(or more crosses)

 

[HairyPlumz]

INDOOR IS getting stronger