Is Hemp-Derived CBD Inferior to Non-Hemp-Derived CBD?

[J Obadiah]

Hey folks,

I'm about to conduct research on CBD. I understand that CBD can be derived from Industrial Hemp as well as Marijuana. First, is this accurate? Second, would the qualitative nature of the CBD be adversely impacted if derived from Hemp vs Marijuana?

Thank you,

Obadiah

 

[TorturedSoul]

No.

 

[Sonman]

There is a few with some cbd, it's the same but no good to smoke. The effort to extract it its better to just get a known high cbd smokable strain. I would not trust most claims from hemp. Odds are it will not be consistant at all or very minimal the same as it may have trace ammounts of the. Getting a good pheno takes alot a work and I don't feel hemp producer does that the same. It's is totally possible that someone had a hemp strain with some cbd and had no idea it was there all along till it became popular.dont wast time with hemp. There is a ton of great cbd strains today.

 

[Dwight Monk]

CBD is CBD, if that is what you are after then Hemp will give you just that as just trace amounts of THC in order for it to be classified as Hemp. Not like it is a totally different species of plant or anything. Even high CBD Cannabis has quite a bit of THC still, and it is in varying amounts of both (even if you used the same strain seeds it can be all over the place in %'s of both).

 

[TorturedSoul]

The term "hemp" should be looked at as an adjective, lol, just like "psychoactive" is.

People grow hemp strains of cannabis for seed production. Shorter plants grown so closely together that they tend to produce their flowers on the tops of the plants (seem familiar?). They don't cull the males, because the female flowers require pollination in order to produce seeds. People also grow hemp strains of cannabis for textile production. Tall plants with skinny leaves (seem familiar?). These plants are also grown close together in order to get maximum production and discourage branching (a person who'd never seen such a thing before might almost think he/she was looking at a sea o' green of sativas ). Male plants are not culled in this case, either - but the females are.

In neither case are big, greasy, sparkling buds the objective. Nonetheless, it has been known for decades that hemp strains of cannabis contain varying amounts of CBD, even though legally in this country, to be classified as a hemp strain, it must produce ≤ .3% THC (and in the EU, I believe it's ≤ .2% THC). While the majority of hemp strain varieties produce 3% or less CBD, I've seen it mentioned in articles over the years that it's not terribly uncommon to encounter a strain that is capable of producing more. It is probably worth pointing out that a hemp strain that is capable of producing 3% CBD is, by definition, a strain that has at least a 10:1 ratio of CBD to THC. Or CBD(a) to THC(a), I suppose. It seems to me that if a person is interested in working/breeding/crossing strains in order to end up with a high CBD / low THC cultivar, that they'd be ahead to use such a strain as a starting point instead of beginning with a strain that is high in THC but not especially high in CBD. Kind of like, if I wanted to dig a hole to a depth of ten feet below sea level, I wouldn't start digging at the top of a mountain .

Hemp strains are now legal to grow in all 50 states. If a researcher - such as the OP, who stated he was soon to be researching CBD - decided to grow several each of an assortment of the hemp strains that are used for each purpose (and which, again, is now legal to do in every state), but culled all the males, gave them the best care possible and, perhaps, a bit more room... he/she just might discover a thing or two.

If you state that hemp strains of cannabis that are grown in the traditional ways that textiles and hemp strain seeds are produced, with the same growth patterns and same plant selections, that they don't produce much CBD, well, you would tend to be correct. But if you were to state that none are capable of producing useful amounts of CBD, if cultivated with that goal in mind... I don't think I'd agree with you.

 

[Dwight Monk]

In neither case are big, greasy, sparkling buds the objective. Nonetheless, it has been known for decades that hemp strains of cannabis contain varying amounts of CBD, even though legally in this country, to be classified as a hemp strain, it must produce ≤ .3% THC (and in the EU, I believe it's ≤ .2% THC). While the majority of hemp strain varieties produce 3% or less CBD, I've seen it mentioned in articles over the years that it's not terribly uncommon to encounter a strain that is capable of producing more.

My Sister works for a Hemp farm that is growing for a variety of uses from oil to seeds, as OR trying to make a law against having male Hemp growing outside as it can contaminant Cannabis crops, so if that goes thru there will be a demand for Feminized Hemp seeds. I'd have to ask her if they have specific numbers they are getting for CBD%, but they found out unintentionally that the CBD is higher if you harvest earlier than one would normally do with Cannabis (a week or two earlier she said), as they were having problems with it going over the .3% THC to be classified as Hemp. And that's how they found out the CBD was higher when harvested earlier than what it was when they harvested it later (what they were used to as "normal" harvest time), so now they are harvesting the plants for the oil earlier.

 

[TorturedSoul]

So one might postulate that the CBD acid degrades (decomposes? chemically changes? whatever the technical term is) faster, on the vine as it were, than THC acid? Or, alternately, that the process takes about the same amount of time but it happens sooner with CBD(a) because it forms earlier.

Hmm. I wonder which theory it'll turn out to be.

I had to chuckle over the drive to handicap hemp farmers in Oregon out of concerns that their plants' pollen would pollinate the psychoactive strains. Brings to mind an old saying: Turnabout is fair play .

 

[Dwight Monk]

So one might postulate that the CBD acid degrades (decomposes? chemically changes? whatever the technical term is) faster, on the vine as it were, than THC acid? Or, alternately, that the process takes about the same amount of time but it happens sooner with CBD(a) because it forms earlier.

Hmm. I wonder which theory it'll turn out to be.

I had to chuckle over the drive to handicap hemp farmers in Oregon out of concerns that their plants' pollen would pollinate the psychoactive strains. Brings to mind an old saying: Turnabout is fair play .

They think just that the CBD comes on earlier in flower (or potency peaks earlier) than the THC does (but I think they still in the "postulate" phase of that ). Well I don't know for a fact but according to the guys at the Hydro store a few Cannabis grows got pollinated by Hemp (no idea if they could prove it was that and not a renegade male(s) Cannabis plant out in the woods), but if you were growing for the money it could really mess you up......as I'm sure you know how the market value of Flowers plummet if it is heavily seeded Flowers

 

[J Obadiah]

The term "hemp" should be looked at as an adjective, lol, just like "psychoactive" is.

People grow hemp strains of cannabis for seed production. Shorter plants grown so closely together that they tend to produce their flowers on the tops of the plants (seem familiar?). They don't cull the males, because the female flowers require pollination in order to produce seeds. People also grow hemp strains of cannabis for textile production. Tall plants with skinny leaves (seem familiar?). These plants are also grown close together in order to get maximum production and discourage branching (a person who'd never seen such a thing before might almost think he/she was looking at a sea o' green of sativas ). Male plants are not culled in this case, either - but the females are.

In neither case are big, greasy, sparkling buds the objective. Nonetheless, it has been known for decades that hemp strains of cannabis contain varying amounts of CBD, even though legally in this country, to be classified as a hemp strain, it must produce ≤ .3% THC (and in the EU, I believe it's ≤ .2% THC). While the majority of hemp strain varieties produce 3% or less CBD, I've seen it mentioned in articles over the years that it's not terribly uncommon to encounter a strain that is capable of producing more. It is probably worth pointing out that a hemp strain that is capable of producing 3% CBD is, by definition, a strain that has at least a 10:1 ratio of CBD to THC. Or CBD(a) to THC(a), I suppose. It seems to me that if a person is interested in working/breeding/crossing strains in order to end up with a high CBD / low THC cultivar, that they'd be ahead to use such a strain as a starting point instead of beginning with a strain that is high in THC but not especially high in CBD. Kind of like, if I wanted to dig a hole to a depth of ten feet below sea level, I wouldn't start digging at the top of a mountain .

Hemp strains are now legal to grow in all 50 states. If a researcher - such as the OP, who stated he was soon to be researching CBD - decided to grow several each of an assortment of the hemp strains that are used for each purpose (and which, again, is now legal to do in every state), but culled all the males, gave them the best care possible and, perhaps, a bit more room... he/she just might discover a thing or two.

If you state that hemp strains of cannabis that are grown in the traditional ways that textiles and hemp strain seeds are produced, with the same growth patterns and same plant selections, that they don't produce much CBD, well, you would tend to be correct. But if you were to state that none are capable of producing useful amounts of CBD, if cultivated with that goal in mind... I don't think I'd agree with you.

Very well said, mate, thank you. On a bit of a sidenote, I spoke with a gentleman from Aurora the other day after playing hell emailing him back and forth to get him on the phone, and he made an interesting statement. He said, essentially, that he finds the classification of Hemp to be little more than arbitrary and pointless. While the biological makeup of the plant isn't up for debate here, the categorization of Hemp (and Marijuana) is arbitrary. The .3% THC content is worthless because we dont even have a good way for enforcement of those standards in the one sense in which it matters: the criminal one. The only reason for the engagement in classification through arbitration of opinion (usually of people hardly involved in the culture and industry at all) is for law enforcement purposes, which cease being effective at the ground level because, after all, there is no guidance for them. Idk...just kind of digressing out loud here...lol

 

[TorturedSoul]

just kind of digressing out loud here.

It's your thread. And you're sort of preaching to the choir anyway, lol. People had been allowed to grow hemp strains of cannabis in my area for a while, but since it was "a government program" instead of farming (which already has its share of regulations), there had to be a whiff of high security in the air, regular inspections by government officials on your coin - and even if you decided you could trust ONE government inspector, the government didn't, so you had the privilege of paying the wages/fees of two inspectors each time (because a farmer who would think nothing of bribing one person would never even consider bribing two? IDFK...), et cetera. Then the act of cultivating hemp strains became legal everywhere. Yay! Things will be so much saner now and-- what?

Not much change. Which is great, I suppose, for all those government inspectors (, secretaries, heads of department, gophers, the janitors who clean their office spaces), and job security is, after all, important.

Unless you happen to be a farmer. In which case, well... F*** you, move to town and "get a job" standing in line down at the welfare office. Maybe you'll see a few of your former neighbors. I hear a lot of them... got transferred in from farming a few years ago when they decided to complain about all the toxic chemicals the factories were dumping into the water supply.

Speaking of digressing... .

 

[CannaFish]

lot of great points in this thread. hemp and drug its all the same plant, but we know CBD lines that come from "industrial hemp" have less terpenes and the total amount of CBD resin is less compared to CBD lines derived from "drug cultivars"

 

[CannaFish]

but to answer the question, I guess if it is all being chemically extracted, CBD is CBD.