Today’s column: Is marijuana stronger than it used to be? - The Straight Dope
The lead-in question was from the SDMB from 2007, original thread found here: Is pot stronger these days? - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board I’ve closed that thread (since it was from 2007 with a 2012 revival) and directed comments here.
But does stronger equate to it being better? I think not since there are other factors that contribute to the enjoyment other than THC concentration; too many folks tend to key on that. Some of the new stuff can make you down right jittery and nervous; something I never found enjoyable. Weed should make you mellow and relaxed, not hyper or paranoid, which is what I find with some (but not all) of the new super strains.
I wouldn’t think of judging a drink by it’s alcohol content. I’d much rather drink and enjoy a 20 year old Scotch than than doing a shot of 151; I’d much rather have properly poured and chilled Guinness than some artificially hyped up Wee beer; and I’d much more enjoy a mellow bowel of hash than a one hit of “killer” ganja. But that’s just me. 
Peace.
Good column for 4/20. 
Take a look at thevariety of strains that have been developed by the medical marijuana guys. That’s 14 pages of strains, all categorized in various ways. For example, Si Amigo could browse the list for a strain that ranks high for mellowness and low on anxiety. And it is all legal!
I’m not a patient though, not even on 4/20. I’m going to work. Really.
ps- The line I hear on the superweed is that it is supposed to be healthier for you. Instead of smoking a joint you just take one puff and you’re done. Less smoking = less health downside. I’m sure there is a real expert on this board though…
Pssst. You directed comments to the closed thread. :smack:
Not a big deal. You used to smoke a joint or two, now you do one or two hits off one joint.
The fact of the matter is: You can only get so high from smoking pot. I imagine Cecil didn’t address this because there’s no way to quantify it scientifically, but it is true. Stronger pot just means you get high faster and longer. Even if it was significantly stronger, it is nothing to be concerned about.
Cecil says the following:
This suggests that Cecil is going to regale us with some tale of woe involving a kilo of pot, a blowtorch, and one mega-high gone south, or some sort of incident that ended in a fatality. But all he ends up saying on the topic is
Really? Really? REALLY? That’s all you got? Nothing about THC LD50 dose, nothing about any known cases ending terminally. Just idle speculation that 40% THC level might not be healthy?
Cecil, I expect better. (If you’re going to “although see below”, then there damn well better be something below that addresses the point.)
I noticed that, too. I can only assume, this being 4/20 and the subject matter and all, he just sorta lost his train of thought.
I’m not sure this is true, or at least, true for everyone. Anecdotal evidence suggests that high-potency pot is more likely to trigger anxiety and paranoia in some smokers, rather than a relaxing mellow buzz.
The issue may be that there are differences in the exact chemical composition of the product that affect the quality of the high - thus, at least for some, higher potency overall may include higher potency of those compounds that trigger anxiety states. But I really don’t know.
All I know is that lots and lots of people who enjoy pot smoking complain of a similar problem - high potenty weed is more likely to cause anxiety, to the point where smoking it is no longer pleasurable.
My kid just walked in and said it smells like pot outside. He surmised that 4/20 was some kind of pot holiday.
How did it get to be known as 420 anyway?
My guess is that people smoking low-potency stuff dont get as high as when they smoke high-potency stuff. I think if they did hit after hit of the weak stuff, eventually they pass that threshold the anxiety kicks in. From my experience, a high is a high (certain strains produce different types of highs, its true, but the my potency feelings are still the same), its just a function of how many tokes it takes to achieve.
Perhaps - I dunno. Some smokers never get the anxiety/paranoia thing happening at all no matter what they smoke, and some do.
It seems almost impossible to get the “straight dope” (heh) on this topic, any attempt at searching is overwhelmed by masses of unreliable sources.
Wiki has the answer:
Cecil and I were hoping someone would notice.
Please send Cecil a follow-up question. There are only so many words per column and only so many subjects to dive into each column. But I will say as Cecil’s research assistant I did spend some time looking into the issues of very high-potency pot on health. There is anecdotal evidence of some people binging on the high-potency stuff. There are other studies however which say the high-potency pot is better in Europe, since pot is often mixed with tobacco there, and thus they inhale less tobacco byproducts with higher-potency pot. But even the recent studies I looked at discussing these effects say there is little evidence of significant effects - the net result doesn’t tend to be people getting more high, but getting high faster on fewer cigarettes or puffs. A compounding problem is that the very high-potency pot is a) not widespread, and b) has not been in use in a large population for very long.
In general I’d agree it’s stronger today. (I’m speaking from an English perspective here.) That isn’t to say there wasn’t some very potent stuff about in the 60s, the equal of anything today, but the high-grade varieties were not readily available to the average doper.
In the early to mid-sixties the main product we bought was in hashish form, either Moroccan black or Lebanese Gold. Both were usually of average to middling strength. Grass was readily available, usually home-grown, but all of us preferred hash. Later hashish started appearing from Kabul, a good strong dope, especially one variety that had an admixture of opium. Thailand was another source, namely Thai Sticks, a favourite of mine.
To recap then, I’ve smoked stuff in the 60s that was as strong as any of the skunk varieties today but in general I’d agree the average dope was probably less potent than the average dope of today.
What was its THC content?
How do you know this? Subjective guesses as to how strong marijuana is are likely to have an enormous error. What was the THC content of what you smoked in the 1960’s?
I reject your reality, and substitute my own!
I’m not trying to slag on anyone, but thinking seriously, scientifically, especially in the case of something which by definition gives an altered state of reality…I’ll trust lab tests over first-hand reports of how “strong” marijuana is.