RECENT interesting findings - Page 15 - Cannabis Botany and Advanced Growing Science - International Cannagraphic Magazine Forums

**Sam_Skunkman** · 06-09-2016, 05:32 AM

Yes we used the correct UVB lights and we had a good UV meter.
Glass in a greenhouse stops 95% of the UVB.
What issue with harding off? If I stick a plant started in the greenhouse outdoors where there is UVB I do not see any negative effects, except if it is colder outdoors. Even with the work it was only the ones that were to close and maybe got to much UVB that were harmed, but none got any benefit at any UVB level.
-SamS

Quote:

Originally Posted by neverforget4/20

very informative. Im wondering if you used any meter to measure the UVB you were getting at those distances. Is it possible that the plants were already receiving UVB through the greenhouse ?

Also could there have been an issue with hardening off the plants to uv exposure?

**Sam_Skunkman** · 06-11-2016, 02:41 PM

A powerful article that reveals the propyl cannabinoids inheritance. Many of the parental plants used in this study were selected by me for this purpose, more then a decade ago some closer to two decades or more. At: sci-hub.cc
Enjoy....
-SamS

The inheritance of chemical phenotype in Cannabis sativa L. (V): regulation of the propyl-/pentyl cannabinoid ratio, completion of a genetic model
E. P. M. de Meijer . K. M. Hammond
Euphytica
DOI 10.1007/s10681-016-1721-3

Phaeton · 06-11-2016, 04:27 PM

I did indoor studies for a year using varying UVB levels correlated to elevation.

Control plants with zero UVB to plants receiving the equivalent of 20,000'. Plants in simulated conditions matching the top of Denali died in less than three days.

I limited exposure to levels stunting growth up to 20%. Subjectively the "creeper" effect of the smoke increased with UVB exposure. Extracting and weighing showed no change in the percentages of THC.

UVB has been used at all stages of growth since the testing in 2006-2007. The subjective tests have been consistent in informal testing done on visitors to the garden.
Something is happening, it is not THC, but the positive effects are noted by almost every user questioned on how their high is.

This falls under anecdotes, but I thought I would add it in anyhow.

oldchuck · 06-12-2016, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phaeton

This falls under anecdotes, but I thought I would add it in anyhow.

Not really, Phaeton. I think your work does contribute some science. I don't know exactly what but you have done some interesting experiments. Not being sure just what you have demonstrated suggests you have reached a good place. Science is rarely completely sure about anything and a good scientist pushes on to find out more. Your science seems to me at least as good as most sociology.

**Sam_Skunkman** · 06-13-2016, 01:15 PM

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27285147

Current Status and Prospects for Cannabidiol Preparations as New Therapeutic Agents
Fasinu PS, Phillips S, ElSohly MA, Walker LA
Pharmacotherapy · June 10, 2016
DOI: 10.1002/phar.1780

Abstract
There is growing pressure for states and the federal government to legalize the use of cannabis products for medical purposes in the United States. Sixteen states have legalized (or decriminalized possession of) products high in cannabidiol (CBD) and with restricted Δ9 -tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9 -THC) content. In most of these states, the intent is for use in refractory epileptic seizures in children, but in a few states, the indications are broader. The objectives of this review are to provide an overview of the pharmacology and toxicology of CBD; to summarize some of the regulatory, safety, and cultural issues relevant to the further exploitation of its antiepileptic or other pharmacologic activities; and to assess the current status and prospects for clinical development of CBD and CBD-rich preparations for medical use in the United States. Unlike Δ9 -THC, CBD elicits its pharmacologic effects without exerting any significant intrinsic activity on the cannabinoid receptors (CB1 and CB2 ), whose activation results in the psychotropic effects characteristic of Δ9 -THC, and CBD possesses several pharmacologic activities that give it a high potential for therapeutic use. CBD exhibits neuroprotective, antiepileptic, anxiolytic, antipsychotic, and antiinflammatory properties. In combination with Δ9 -THC, CBD has received regulatory approvals in several European countries and is currently under study in U.S. Food and Drug Administration-registered trials in the United States. A number of states have passed legislation to allow for the use of CBD-rich, limited Δ9 -THC-content preparations of cannabis for certain pathologic conditions. CBD is currently being studied in several clinical trials and is at different stages of clinical development for various medical indications. Judging from clinical findings reported so far, CBD and CBD-enriched preparations have great potential utility, but uncertainties regarding sourcing, long-term safety, abuse potential, and regulatory dilemmas remain.

Betterhaff · 06-13-2016, 05:13 PM

^^Baby steps I guess but why do they continue dwelling on the long term effects crap.

Curious back to when Cannabis was part of the Pharmacopeia. A lot of the medicines were tinctures made with Cannabis Indica, I suppose with an ethanol base. I wonder what the concentrations of THC and/or CBD were...although those compounds had yet to be discovered.

oldchuck · 06-13-2016, 05:24 PM

Sam, how do you rate the science in the "Current Status" paper above? I have no access to nih studies beyond the abstract. Have you read it? I am particularly interested in the statement: "Unlike Δ9 -THC, CBD elicits its pharmacologic effects without exerting any significant intrinsic activity on the cannabinoid receptors (CB1 and CB2 )" I had never heard this. Is it true?

oldchuck · 06-13-2016, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Betterhaff

Curious back to when Cannabis was part of the Pharmacopeia. A lot of the medicines were tinctures made with Cannabis Indica, I suppose with an ethanol base. I wonder what the concentrations of THC and/or CBD were...although those compounds had yet to be discovered.

What they were then calling Cannabis Indica is what you would most likely call a "Sativa." There is no way of telling what they actually used. I suspect they produced a very erratic product.

Betterhaff · 06-13-2016, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldchuck

What they were then calling Cannabis Indica is what you would most likely call a "Sativa." There is no way of telling what they actually used. I suspect they produced a very erratic product.

Probably but it was part of the Pharmacopeia for some 80 years.

**Sam_Skunkman** · 06-13-2016, 06:29 PM

Yes true, this has been known for at least 5-6 years that CBD does not bind to the CB1 & CB2 but it does modulate them. Look at my post #79. The paper will be on sci-hub.cc in a few days I bet.

-SamS

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldchuck

Sam, how do you rate the science in the "Current Status" paper above? I have no access to nih studies beyond the abstract. Have you read it? I am particularly interested in the statement: "Unlike Δ9 -THC, CBD elicits its pharmacologic effects without exerting any significant intrinsic activity on the cannabinoid receptors (CB1 and CB2 )" I had never heard this. Is it true?

06-11-2016, 02:41 PM	#142
Sam_Skunkman "RESIN BREEDER" Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 4,657	A powerful article that reveals the propyl cannabinoids inheritance. Many of the parental plants used in this study were selected by me for this purpose, more then a decade ago some closer to two decades or more. At: sci-hub.cc Enjoy.... -SamS The inheritance of chemical phenotype in Cannabis sativa L. (V): regulation of the propyl-/pentyl cannabinoid ratio, completion of a genetic model E. P. M. de Meijer . K. M. Hammond Euphytica DOI 10.1007/s10681-016-1721-3 Last edited by Sam_Skunkman; 06-11-2016 at 03:22 PM..
	Quote 3 members found this post helpful.

06-11-2016, 04:27 PM	#143
Phaeton Speed of Dark Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Interior Alaska Posts: 1,554	I did indoor studies for a year using varying UVB levels correlated to elevation. Control plants with zero UVB to plants receiving the equivalent of 20,000'. Plants in simulated conditions matching the top of Denali died in less than three days. I limited exposure to levels stunting growth up to 20%. Subjectively the "creeper" effect of the smoke increased with UVB exposure. Extracting and weighing showed no change in the percentages of THC. UVB has been used at all stages of growth since the testing in 2006-2007. The subjective tests have been consistent in informal testing done on visitors to the garden. Something is happening, it is not THC, but the positive effects are noted by almost every user questioned on how their high is. This falls under anecdotes, but I thought I would add it in anyhow.
	Quote 1 members found this post helpful.

06-13-2016, 01:15 PM	#145
Sam_Skunkman "RESIN BREEDER" Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 4,657	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27285147 Current Status and Prospects for Cannabidiol Preparations as New Therapeutic Agents Fasinu PS, Phillips S, ElSohly MA, Walker LA Pharmacotherapy · June 10, 2016 DOI: 10.1002/phar.1780 Abstract There is growing pressure for states and the federal government to legalize the use of cannabis products for medical purposes in the United States. Sixteen states have legalized (or decriminalized possession of) products high in cannabidiol (CBD) and with restricted Δ9 -tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9 -THC) content. In most of these states, the intent is for use in refractory epileptic seizures in children, but in a few states, the indications are broader. The objectives of this review are to provide an overview of the pharmacology and toxicology of CBD; to summarize some of the regulatory, safety, and cultural issues relevant to the further exploitation of its antiepileptic or other pharmacologic activities; and to assess the current status and prospects for clinical development of CBD and CBD-rich preparations for medical use in the United States. Unlike Δ9 -THC, CBD elicits its pharmacologic effects without exerting any significant intrinsic activity on the cannabinoid receptors (CB1 and CB2 ), whose activation results in the psychotropic effects characteristic of Δ9 -THC, and CBD possesses several pharmacologic activities that give it a high potential for therapeutic use. CBD exhibits neuroprotective, antiepileptic, anxiolytic, antipsychotic, and antiinflammatory properties. In combination with Δ9 -THC, CBD has received regulatory approvals in several European countries and is currently under study in U.S. Food and Drug Administration-registered trials in the United States. A number of states have passed legislation to allow for the use of CBD-rich, limited Δ9 -THC-content preparations of cannabis for certain pathologic conditions. CBD is currently being studied in several clinical trials and is at different stages of clinical development for various medical indications. Judging from clinical findings reported so far, CBD and CBD-enriched preparations have great potential utility, but uncertainties regarding sourcing, long-term safety, abuse potential, and regulatory dilemmas remain.
	Quote

06-13-2016, 05:13 PM	#146
Betterhaff Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 2,568	^^Baby steps I guess but why do they continue dwelling on the long term effects crap. Curious back to when Cannabis was part of the Pharmacopeia. A lot of the medicines were tinctures made with Cannabis Indica, I suppose with an ethanol base. I wonder what the concentrations of THC and/or CBD were...although those compounds had yet to be discovered.
	Quote

06-13-2016, 05:24 PM	#147
oldchuck Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 1,111	Sam, how do you rate the science in the "Current Status" paper above? I have no access to nih studies beyond the abstract. Have you read it? I am particularly interested in the statement: "Unlike Δ9 -THC, CBD elicits its pharmacologic effects without exerting any significant intrinsic activity on the cannabinoid receptors (CB1 and CB2 )" I had never heard this. Is it true?
	Quote