What's new
  • Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

Highly Potent Weed Has Swept The Market, Raising Concerns About Health Risks

Sam_Skunkman

Sam_Skunkman

"RESIN BREEDER"
Moderator
Veteran
The higher the THC and terpene content the less leaves you smoke, it is the leaves and plant materials combustion that cause health problems not the Cannabinoids and terpenes.
I refuse to smoke Marijuana because it is only 20-25% THC that means 75% of what you are smoking is not getting you high just making smoke that may be bad for you.
If you smoke high potency Cannabis products just smoke less if you really worry about to much THC, As for the more THC the less terpenes and other Cannabinoids, that is just not true you can have very high THC only and very high terpene content in a single variety, and for recreational use you do not really want the other Cannabinoids they do not get you high.

-SamS

Douglas.Curtis said:
The more THC, the fewer terpenes and other cannabinoids. The less entourage you have, the less enjoyable it becomes.
Click to expand...
 
Slim Pickens

Slim Pickens

Well-known member
Veteran
The sky is falling!The sky is falling!

High potency cannabis will lead to our ruination!

Remember all the states that want to limit grows to a paltry few plants,and then cry about the threat of high potency cannabis.

I get tired of hearing their whining.

Ok.I think someone needs a nap.:biggrin:
 
White Beard

White Beard

Active member
Sam_Skunkman said:
The higher the THC and terpene content the less leaves you smoke, it is the leaves and plant materials combustion that cause health problems not the Cannabinoids and terpenes.
I refuse to smoke Marijuana because it is only 20-25% THC that means 75% of what you are smoking is not getting you high just making smoke that may be bad for you.
If you smoke high potency Cannabis products just smoke less if you really worry about to much THC, As for the more THC the less terpenes and other Cannabinoids, that is just not true you can have very high THC only and very high terpene content in a single variety, and for recreational use you do not really want the other Cannabinoids they do not get you high.

-SamS
Click to expand...

I would LOVE to see this tested and verified today...or even a detailed breakdown of the Israeli experiments and their *precise* goal.
 
P

prune

Active member
Veteran
mowood3479 said:
How were people vaping 50 years ago.
(Honestly curious)
Click to expand...

Spoons.

Heat two spoons over a burner, deposit your material on one spoon then nest the second spoon over the first and squeeze. Horribly wasteful, but quite the buzz at the time...
 
MintyMick

MintyMick

Member
This article looks like an uninformed person making observations based purely off of paper results put together by people who also have no fucking clue what they are talking about. “THC increased from 4% THC in 1994 to 12% in 2014...”

Based off of that statement alone I’d say the whole article is a scare piece put together by uninformed idiots. Typical.
 
Oregonism

Oregonism

Active member
Still hold onto a catpiss skunk [most likely an inbred nl5/haze]

It was tested at 13%. Thats practically hemp to this current crop of budtender ignorati...lol.
 
M

moose eater

The authors apparently forgot (or were unaware of) the fact that in the early 1970's NIDA had tested both Nepalese and Afghani black hash that tested at 70% + THC; pics of the testing doc can be found in numerous older cannabis books.

When Nixon sent investigators to SE Asia, specifically to (predominantly) study Air Force members after hearing that drug use in SE Asia was rampant, and mental health issues were pervasive, the investigators found all of TWO (maybe 3) Air Force members who had acknowledged regular cannabis and hashish use, and who also had demonstrated mental health histories.

In all of those cases, I strongly suspect the AF members in question likely had some degree of mental health vulnerabilities preceding getting high. And war, in general, leads many toward one sort of self-medicating or another. Seriously.

Last, both Doctor Lester Grinspoon & Dr. John Morgan (deceased) advocated smoking more potent, not less potent weed, primarily for the same reasons Sam Skunkman referenced; smoking less weed as a result of increased potency, means smoking fewer random contaminants.

Anyone remember the days of passing joint, after joint, after joint of even decent Mexican around a circle back in the brick-weed days? Probably made some oncologists wealthy, we did.

On a completely unrelated topic, I just had an image of a classmate named Skipper pop into my mind, from back in undergrad days, repeatedly bastardizing Patrick Henry's speech, where Skipper would state, often in an affected frame of mind, "As to what other men may choose, I know not, but as for me, give me Librium, or give me meth."

A smiling memory of ol' Skipper...
 
T

TheScorpion

Member
Corporate funding... and underwriting.

NPR and CNN have shown us that they are not above the temptation to forgo actual news-you-can-use to sell airtime with sensationalized hype.

Was 2016 not enough to show how desperate they have become after people have all but stopped consuming their products?

Shills.


The angle is, "Hey baby boomers, mostly left leaning... this legal cannabis isn't what you were smoking in the 1960s and 70s!!! These kids today!!!"

They are playing to their audience, as always.
 
G

Gauss

Because you know they'll never do a story with the headline "Highly Divisive and Imbalanced Journalism Has Swept the Market, Raising Concerns About Free Thought".

That said, weed is still something newcomers should approach with caution gradually. Just because your nephew Chad can do three dabs in a row and thinks blowing all his money on high test is a good way to pace himself doesn't mean that you should too. Nowadays it's grown better, it's cured better, it's marketed better, but it is not at all any more or less dangerous than it ever has been. That's like saying racing is more dangerous now than it ever has been because the cars are more powerful, when we know such is not the case. Proper education and practices in the absence of anti-drug outright lies have undoubtedly made cannabis safer for everyone across the board.
 
rolandomota

rolandomota

Well-known member
Veteran
CosmicGiggle said:
Well that's the only explanation for today's high potency/nothing effect weed that I've ever seen offered up, but it makes sense.

I've been smoking the documented 20%THC stuff from dispensaries that just takes the edge off for 1/2 hr and not much more but vividly remember that 4% no-name Mexican weed that sent you to the moon and back for 2 1/2 hrs. or longer.:tiphat:
Click to expand...

Yes someone who gets it! That's what I'm saying the only problem is tolerance build up I know because that's what smoke here next door to Mexico the bricks are alive and well I have thousands of seeds I have collected but the funny thing is most people even seed companies don't see the value in them ....well their fucking stupid.....you know who you are
 
Gry

Gry

Well-known member
Was fortunate to have grown up with WGTB in it's most active period.
When it was shut down, I went with NPR.
Once the underwriting started, it very quickly became
apparent they were targeting a entirely different audience.
Leaving NPR for Pacifica was the easiest thing I
have ever done. Was almost like going home again.
Could not help but chuckle at someone attempting
to describe NPR as left of center. What an absolute
hoot. It is and has been National Petroleum Radio
since the Koch Foundation started financing them.
Which was a quite a few years back.
Listened to NPR about an hour this weekend.
They become even more shameless in fawning over all things
corporate.
 
M

moose eater

Gry said:
Was fortunate to have grown up with WGTB in it's most active period.
When it was shut down, I went with NPR.
Once the underwriting started, it very quickly became
apparent they were targeting a entirely different audience.
Leaving NPR for Pacifica was the easiest thing I
have ever done. Was almost like going home again.
Could not help but chuckle at someone attempting
to describe NPR as left of center. What an absolute
hoot. It is and has been National Petroleum Radio
since the Koch Foundation started financing them.
Which was a quite a few years back.
Listened to NPR about an hour this weekend.
They become even more shameless in fawning over all things
corporate.
Click to expand...

With the administrative re-structuring and changes to programming, not too distant from the timing with which corporate sponsorship at NPR became a thing, we saw 'Democracy Now' cancelled, the Wall St. Hipster, Kai Rizdol/Risdahl/??, or what ever (cheer-leader for nearly all things Wall St., but with a hip tempo, up-beat 'take' on outlook, etc.), more or less added in it's place, & (drum roll) Conoco Philips taken on as sponsor, like.... nearly every other ad moment....

In a State where the Major producers have been shown in court numerous times over to be stealing from the State, and way more.

Conoco now runs a PR spot, at significant cost on paid/regular t.v., etc., saying, in conclusion, "Conoco Phillips; Unlocking Alaska's Resources."

I chuckle at the end of every ad; way better humor than most ads these days, and comparable in my mind to past Super Bowl Greats like the Budweiser frogs.. Reason being, I see a guy in blacked out clothes, hat & gloves, at the back door of a home, in the middle of the night, with one of those master lock-smith pick sets that looks like a small gun with pins coming out of the barrel.

I laugh every time I see it. "Unlocking Alaska's Resources," alright.. Yeah....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top