Harper Government's Marijuana Ad Is Being Disliked To Hell

[Jhhnn]

I'd have to say that average potency is much improved today, but none of it I've had the pleasure of sampling is any better than the best of 40-45 years ago.

Around here, weed quality & availability had diminished by the early 80's & the cocaine curse was upon us. Lots of crank, as well. The Norcal scene was in its infancy & indoor growing rare. The Reaganites believed all drugs were poison & made it so that what we could get *was* poison. Self fulfilling prophesy.

 

[LEF]

well the panama red, Acapulco gold and Columbian gold you we're smoking we're sativas and sativas from what I understand usually have lower thc then indicas even though they have soaring highs sometimes without a ceiling

 

[Mikell]

I was recently looking thru some old documentation dating back to at least the 80's that describe marijuana as having only 4-5% THC and so therefore anything with 5% THC was great stuff. In the early 2000's I remember looking up information on the popular strain "Blueberry" and finding out it had 15-17% THC. So if the assumption from the 80's is correct then one could argue that marijuana has increased 300 to 400% since 15% is 300% of 5%. Here's the thing though, back in the early to mid 70's I was regularly smoking Columbian Gold and Red Bud as well as Panama Red and Acapulco Gold that were as good if not more potent then Blueberry.

So I think the problem here is speaking in generalities such as all marijuana is such and such percent THC or the all marijuana has increased by 300 to 400%. Yes you could prove the assertion that marijuana has increased in potency by 300 to 400% if you compared some average Mexican brick weed to Blueberry but then you would be comparing apples to oranges.

The only change that has happened is that because of the popularity of home growing and the market of breeders to support it we have refined the genetic pool and so people are able to get and grow much better quality weed then the street schwag of the past. There is still however that same shitty street schwag floating around out there that's still maxing out around 5% THC it's just that most people know better then to settle for that.

I thought about that angle. I believe the old standard for testing THC started off on a fail. Any head from back then would remove stems and seeds, and any other detritus while rolling, but did they when testing? Especially from grow seizures, where the entire plant is milled. Results from this would give the low numbers they're probably using as one side of the comparison.

I initially thought they were perhaps comparing brick weed from the 60's and 70's with purged BHO. But that would require HC to have a handle on what's contemporary...

 

[Jhhnn]

I thought about that angle. I believe the old standard for testing THC started off on a fail. Any head from back then would remove stems and seeds, and any other detritus while rolling, but did they when testing? Especially from grow seizures, where the entire plant is milled. Results from this would give the low numbers they're probably using as one side of the comparison.

I initially thought they were perhaps comparing brick weed from the 60's and 70's with purged BHO. But that would require HC to have a handle on what's contemporary...

I've never quite understood what "% of THC" really means. % of what, exactly? % of total mass of material tested, % of resin, % of what?

Obviously, % of total mass will be different from % of resin. Different methods will yield different results & may not be comparable at all.

Anybody really know?

 

[SeedsOfFreedom]

Vote Harper out if you don't like his ads! Harper and the Cons are the only political party in Canada that supports the current system.

Like them or not, vote for Trudeau and the Liberals in 2015, and help end marijuana prohibition in Canada! The Liberals are our best hope, they are taking this issue seriously.

 

[BigJohnny]

"Did you know that on average, Marijuana is 300 - 400% stronger than it was 30 years ago"

......

Yes..... it's fkn bomb, isn't that awesome?!

 

[stoned-trout]

I don't know if the potency has gone up much but we now have access to better weed....I bet the potency of them plants grown for hash hasn't changed much over where its made...we now just have access to them strains...our weed isn't all picked early and stored in less then optimal conditions...

 

[Mikell]

Jhhnn, nope, I was clearly running on conjecture. If HC responds some time this year, at least we could figure out how they're determining numbers.

Vote Harper out if you don't like his ads! Harper and the Cons are the only political party in Canada that supports the current system.

Like them or not, vote for Trudeau and the Liberals in 2015, and help end marijuana prohibition in Canada! The Liberals are our best hope, they are taking this issue seriously.

Hehe, after baiting the Russian bear, we follow up by electing a milksop? That is going to end well...

I would rather the Conservatives replaced Harper, than to take a trial run of Trudeau 2.0. Although, it would be hilarious to watch the faces of liberals as Trudeau drops his idealist policies in the face of reality.


This is the closest thing I can find. It at least points in the right direction.

From there,

Potency Trends of D9-THC and Other Cannabinoids in Confiscated Cannabis Preparations from 1993 to 2008

Outlines methods. It does appear, in this case, that the percentage is based on total mass, but I may be incorrect. I've misread studies before and will surely do it again.

Their loose definition of marijuana

Marijuana (known as herbal cannabis in Europe): usually found in four forms: (i) loose material - loose cannabis plant material with leaves, stems, and seeds; (ii) leaves - cannabis plant material consisting primarily of leav
es; (iii) kilo bricks - compressed cannabis with leaves, stems, and seeds (typical Mexican packaging); and (iv) buds - flowering tops of female plants with seeds.

including what we refer to as trim/compost material, appears to give the very low percentages. The seeds and stems were sifted out, but really, what are you testing but fan leaves at that point. Might as well have left the other bunk in.

 

[St. Phatty]

300 to 400 percent stronger means 4 or 5 times the previous strength. I have no idea what weed was like 30 years ago, but I don't see today's strains being stronger than the best strains in 2000 (when I started growing). Maybe you could make the case that the overall average is stronger when more people are growing a quality product.

I hate these ads that try to change the subject when it comes to legalization. The legalization bills I've heard of apply to adults 21 and over, not teenagers. Alcohol can be harmful to teenagers, but I'm an adult so I'm allowed to buy it.

the ad is crafty in its deception.

when someone uniformed hears the ad, they may not remember the facts - or do the arithmetic involving percentages.

But maybe that would backfire on some viewers, who get turned off by the BS hypey exaggeration sound.

Certainly what I have access to is 4 to 5 times stronger that what we had access to in high school. But that just means I was raised on 'mersh' (and liked it !).

 

[Hen]

New cannabis is 300-400% stronger than old cannabis. Ban cannabis?
Vodka is 700-800% stronger than beer. Ban vodka and other spirits?

Interesting logic.

 

[SeedsOfFreedom]

So just today I was chilling smoking a a joint of purple kush hash, listening to some reggae tunes on youtube, enjoying life. Then I click a new song in related songs, and surprise, surprise, I get to watch the Health Canada ad about marijuana first!

Targeted advertising I would say! Fuck Harper and his ads. Skip that ad , on with reggae tunes, and back to enjoying life!

 

[cannabacca]

I enjoyed reading the comments on that article ! people just lined up to dis that ass hole It was great.
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/1...ign_n_6027276.html?utm_hp_ref=canada-business
I wonder why the government didn't talk about the 30 year study that showed people that smoked pot did better in life than those that didn't ?