TheFertilizer
Well-Known Member
Okay I've got some issue with how THC testing is perceived, and maybe a little with the generalization going on about those who are interested in it.
I hear so much talk about "ceilings" and all the myriad of different effects from different flowers... And I just truly can't relate. The actual differences from one strain to the other are so subtle and inconsistent for me, and I have tried a lot of different weed , from different growers, before recreational as well. I'm not doubting others ability to sense the subtle differences and quantify them, but I guess for me personally I just don't have as refined sensibilities. I'm perfectly willing to admit that may be my shortcoming, but it's the truth. I've been smoking daily for 15 years straight, so frankly if I think I need high THC, it's not because I'm some dumb kid chasing a trend.
Meanwhile, I also question how open other growers are to the idea that they think their weed is so great because of ego. Ego is a touchy word since we tend to cast a negative connotation to it in society, but there's not necessarily anything wrong with valuing something that's a reflection of yourself over something that isn't. I just think people bind themselves from the possibility that part (a significant part) of their enjoyment comes from the fact they grew it themselves over a chemical difference. It's not arrogance; you know exactly the work that went into it, how much of yourself you poured into it, why would you not value it above anyone else's? I mean it's kind of like comparing a home-cooked meal to a fine dish served at a restaurant. It could be the classiest joint in the world, it will never have that taste of home. In the same way, no store-bought weed will ever capture the same feeling of smoking your own. I think as objective as we may try to be, that it's still a huge sub-conscious factor that greatly alters our enjoyment.
For ME, the desired usefulness from THC testing would be so that I could look at a package and know, "This will get me this high." I don't really want to rely on strain reports, or anecdotal reviews, because most of the time they don't align with my own experiences. When people tell me, "Oh well, this strain has no ceiling, if it's not strong enough you can just smoke more," I find myself at a plateau after a few bowls and can't smoke much more than that a time because it taxes my lungs. That's all fine and dandy if all we're smoking for is fun, but what if relief from a specific ailment is needed. I simply can't expect consistency in anecdotal reports of such things for the reasons already discussed above; varying phenotype, unscrupulous breeders, etc. and so on. I would at least hope I could count on a laboratory analysis.
I don't really want cannabis to ever become like alcohol, but one thing that I appreciate about alcohol is that if you look at a can or a bottle and it says that it is 5% ABV, then you can easily know how much you're consuming, and have a reasonable level of predictability in how it will effect you. When you go buy a bag of pot, and it says 25%, the actual veracity of it being 25% is just not reliable. I would really suspect a lot of the time people smoke a low testing strain and say, "That was some of the best weed I ever smoked," it actually had more THC content than what it was specified and vise versa. The inconsistency means no smoker can ever predict how a certain level of THC will effect them since they can't accurately track it.
I think it's very hard to deny that higher THC percentages equal a more intense high. Otherwise people wouldn't be so drawn to things like hash and other concentrates. However I think there's a side effect people aren't paying attention to. When those people who like concentrates spend day in and day out dabbing 60-80% BHO, it boosts their tolerance up to the point where even the best flower won't get them high at all. I know people who have been real keen on dabbing for a while who tell me they basically can't get high with flowers anymore, and these are people who grow their own. It's a real problem, because when we're talking about self-medication, it's leading to people who grow their own going from getting their relief from flowers, to in no time having to squish their shit between hair-straighteners just to get a strong enough dose, fast enough, to effect them. THC is not the single active ingredient like people once thought, but if we can't even accurately test THC, then any meaningful testing of CBD or terepenes or the like can't be done either.
25% is not an insignificant percentage, and I kind of tend to wonder how much people like us have been spoiled to high THC content weed. We spoil the heck out of our plants, and get stuff that gets us high, and chances are we have higher tolerances than the average pre-roll buying light-weight at the pot stores. So if we spend all this time and energy growing the best possible plants we can, and then go buy some half-assed bud from the store, of course there's way more chance of it not getting us as high. For one thing even if the THC content was equal, did they store it worth a damn, or are all the terpenes gased off? Then, don't forget, how much of our enjoyment of our own comes from the fact it's our own. At the end of all that, the number they print on the bag probably isn't even right, so you might buy their strongest strain expecting (hoping) it to be at least on par with your own, and it might just be bunk with a big number; then that just reinforces the notion that the THC rating is meaningless, but in reality it's just misapplied.
Anyway I'm rambling but my point is I think there's plenty of merit for THC analysis, but that's hard to see because it's being abused with the current status quo. Ultimately, I'd hope to see it useful as a dosing guideline, but that's not very reliable now because the numbers are inaccurate. The only way we can hope to make it reliable is to insist they make it more accurate, and not throw the baby out with the bathwater and advocate against analysis all together. Once the THC content on the bag matches what's actually in the bag, it will provide the consistency people need to not be guessing if it will get them high.
I hear so much talk about "ceilings" and all the myriad of different effects from different flowers... And I just truly can't relate. The actual differences from one strain to the other are so subtle and inconsistent for me, and I have tried a lot of different weed , from different growers, before recreational as well. I'm not doubting others ability to sense the subtle differences and quantify them, but I guess for me personally I just don't have as refined sensibilities. I'm perfectly willing to admit that may be my shortcoming, but it's the truth. I've been smoking daily for 15 years straight, so frankly if I think I need high THC, it's not because I'm some dumb kid chasing a trend.
Meanwhile, I also question how open other growers are to the idea that they think their weed is so great because of ego. Ego is a touchy word since we tend to cast a negative connotation to it in society, but there's not necessarily anything wrong with valuing something that's a reflection of yourself over something that isn't. I just think people bind themselves from the possibility that part (a significant part) of their enjoyment comes from the fact they grew it themselves over a chemical difference. It's not arrogance; you know exactly the work that went into it, how much of yourself you poured into it, why would you not value it above anyone else's? I mean it's kind of like comparing a home-cooked meal to a fine dish served at a restaurant. It could be the classiest joint in the world, it will never have that taste of home. In the same way, no store-bought weed will ever capture the same feeling of smoking your own. I think as objective as we may try to be, that it's still a huge sub-conscious factor that greatly alters our enjoyment.
For ME, the desired usefulness from THC testing would be so that I could look at a package and know, "This will get me this high." I don't really want to rely on strain reports, or anecdotal reviews, because most of the time they don't align with my own experiences. When people tell me, "Oh well, this strain has no ceiling, if it's not strong enough you can just smoke more," I find myself at a plateau after a few bowls and can't smoke much more than that a time because it taxes my lungs. That's all fine and dandy if all we're smoking for is fun, but what if relief from a specific ailment is needed. I simply can't expect consistency in anecdotal reports of such things for the reasons already discussed above; varying phenotype, unscrupulous breeders, etc. and so on. I would at least hope I could count on a laboratory analysis.
I don't really want cannabis to ever become like alcohol, but one thing that I appreciate about alcohol is that if you look at a can or a bottle and it says that it is 5% ABV, then you can easily know how much you're consuming, and have a reasonable level of predictability in how it will effect you. When you go buy a bag of pot, and it says 25%, the actual veracity of it being 25% is just not reliable. I would really suspect a lot of the time people smoke a low testing strain and say, "That was some of the best weed I ever smoked," it actually had more THC content than what it was specified and vise versa. The inconsistency means no smoker can ever predict how a certain level of THC will effect them since they can't accurately track it.
I think it's very hard to deny that higher THC percentages equal a more intense high. Otherwise people wouldn't be so drawn to things like hash and other concentrates. However I think there's a side effect people aren't paying attention to. When those people who like concentrates spend day in and day out dabbing 60-80% BHO, it boosts their tolerance up to the point where even the best flower won't get them high at all. I know people who have been real keen on dabbing for a while who tell me they basically can't get high with flowers anymore, and these are people who grow their own. It's a real problem, because when we're talking about self-medication, it's leading to people who grow their own going from getting their relief from flowers, to in no time having to squish their shit between hair-straighteners just to get a strong enough dose, fast enough, to effect them. THC is not the single active ingredient like people once thought, but if we can't even accurately test THC, then any meaningful testing of CBD or terepenes or the like can't be done either.
25% is not an insignificant percentage, and I kind of tend to wonder how much people like us have been spoiled to high THC content weed. We spoil the heck out of our plants, and get stuff that gets us high, and chances are we have higher tolerances than the average pre-roll buying light-weight at the pot stores. So if we spend all this time and energy growing the best possible plants we can, and then go buy some half-assed bud from the store, of course there's way more chance of it not getting us as high. For one thing even if the THC content was equal, did they store it worth a damn, or are all the terpenes gased off? Then, don't forget, how much of our enjoyment of our own comes from the fact it's our own. At the end of all that, the number they print on the bag probably isn't even right, so you might buy their strongest strain expecting (hoping) it to be at least on par with your own, and it might just be bunk with a big number; then that just reinforces the notion that the THC rating is meaningless, but in reality it's just misapplied.
Anyway I'm rambling but my point is I think there's plenty of merit for THC analysis, but that's hard to see because it's being abused with the current status quo. Ultimately, I'd hope to see it useful as a dosing guideline, but that's not very reliable now because the numbers are inaccurate. The only way we can hope to make it reliable is to insist they make it more accurate, and not throw the baby out with the bathwater and advocate against analysis all together. Once the THC content on the bag matches what's actually in the bag, it will provide the consistency people need to not be guessing if it will get them high.
