The Haze discussion thread

[hard rain]

I found an old Marijuana Growers Guide from 1978; Ed Rosenthal and Mel Frank which has various tables with THC and CBD levels of different varieties of plants and hash. Makes interesting reading and supports what I and others have said about CBD levels.

Hempy, you are wrong. Varieties that are not Ruderalis can have significant CBD levels. Note that these are from pre seed bank days. I think we can all agree that 1978 predates that.
The first table has lower CBD, but the ratio of THC to CBD is significantly higher than post seedbank cannabis.
Note the higher CBD in Nepalese hash on the second table.
The third table shows how high the CBD to THC ratios are in hash from 4 different countries.

 

[Hammerhead]

Everyone started selecting plants with all THC. That's why what we have today has very little CBD.

 

[Dr. Purpur]

The Thai in the 70s didn't have any CBD. That's why they dipped the sticks in the water by product of the heroin process. To give it some legs

 

[@hempy]

I found an old Marijuana Growers Guide from 1978; Ed Rosenthal and Mel Frank which has various tables with THC and CBD levels of different varieties of plants and hash. Makes interesting reading and supports what I and others have said about CBD levels.

Hempy, you are wrong. Varieties that are not Ruderalis can have significant CBD levels. Note that these are from pre seed bank days. I think we can all agree that 1978 predates that.
The first table has lower CBD, but the ratio of THC to CBD is significantly higher than post seedbank cannabis.
Note the higher CBD in Nepalese hash on the second table.
The third table shows how high the CBD to THC ratios are in hash from 4 different countries.
View Image View Image View Image

I will try and find sample analysis conducted by the UN drug agency over a set period on both cannabis and hash later shows very different results to that.

I am okay if i am proven wrong i gain something from the experience come away from it knowing more.

But the part your missing here is high CBD will not get you high so how would hash with a high CBD % be of any value to a person wanting to get high.

 

[@hempy]

Everyone started selecting plants with all THC. That's why what we have today has very little CBD.

Prove it

 

[hard rain]

Everyone started selecting plants with all THC. That's why what we have today has very little CBD.

That was my understanding as well.
One final table that I missed earlier, Note the higher CBD to THC from both Pakistan and Lebannon.
Nearly 1:1 ratio of the Burmese.
Again from Mel Frank and Ed Rosenthal 1978 version of Marijuana Growers Guide.

 

[hard rain]

I will try and find sample analysis conducted by the UN drug agency over a set period on both cannabis and hash later shows very different results to that.

I am okay if i am proven wrong i gain something from the experience come away from it knowing more.

But the part your missing here is high CBD will not get you high so how would hash with a high CBD % be of any value to a person wanting to get high.

If there is THC as well as CBD, then yes it will get you high, but you will also have the CBD as well. You will still get high.
Are you saying that Lebanese hash with 32% THC and 62% CBD will not get you high? See table above.

Edit: heres a link to analysis of cannabinoids from India, Morocco and Lebanon telling a similar CBD story. One of the Indian samples 13% CBD to 4% THC for example.
https://lumirlab.com/publication/th...-samples-seized-in-israel-and-czech-republic/

 

[Hammerhead]

Prove it

Your the guy who cant be taught frogs where born tadpoles.

 

[Dr. Purpur]

Your the guy who cant be taught frogs where born tadpoles.

They were born as eggs, which became tadpoles, then fully formed frogs. What, you never seen frog eggs in the sloughs?

 

[hard rain]

Sam and Rob started Hortafarm they with Dr Rosso were the first to create a 1.1 mix they achieved it by creating 2 plants one was high THC other plant was high CBD When equal amounts of each plant is combined and extracted you end up with a 1.1.

That was in the 90s then years later others started to follow because they saw an opportunity to cash in as prohibition governments found a cannabis product that did not get you high appealing.

This is how high CBD and 1.1 islets started.

Article from 1998

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/cannabis-a-year-that-changed-minds-1200871.html

All they had to do do was find some Burmese hash which has nearly a 1:1 ratio, 15.7 THC to 16.3 CBD. (see table above)

A lot earlier than 1998

 

[Dkeppel]

Kia Ora,


The ever changing haze discussion, of course people breed for high CBD long long long ago, people have breed cannabis for hundreds of not thousands of years.


I doubt there goal was to breed high CBD more liekly for the high it produces but nothing is absolute.


Heampy I love the buckets and that you challenge people's ideas and start these discussions but you seem to believe everything you say is absolute, try open your mind.

 

[Hammerhead]

They were born as eggs, which became tadpoles, then fully formed frogs. What, you never seen frog eggs in the sloughs?

Really, As far as I know frogs lay eggs. They are not born. If you want to be specific tadpoles Transform into frogs. Come on man is this really what we are talking about.

 

[star crash]

Your the guy who cant be taught frogs where born tadpoles.

They were born as eggs, which became tadpoles, then fully formed frogs. What, you never seen frog eggs in the sloughs?

I’ve noticed a disturbing trend of the last few years In my area...there is less and less Amphibians Out in the wild ...frogs and salamanders specifically..

 

[Donald Mallard]

The Thai in the 70s didn't have any CBD. That's why they dipped the sticks in the water by product of the heroin process. To give it some legs

while i cant say this never happened ,, it quite likely did and has ,
however the place most of the sticks came from is not the same place the opium came from as far as im aware ,
so its likely most were just strong weed with nothing else added because it wasnt required ...

 

[Dr. Purpur]

while i cant say this never happened ,, it quite likely did and has ,
however the place most of the sticks came from is not the same place the opium came from as far as im aware ,
so its likely most were just strong weed with nothing else added because it wasnt required ...

They specified if they were opiated or not. I think the opiated may have cost a bit more sometimes. Most people liked the opiated the best. I think there is a video how they did that back then. They didn't waste the water from making heroin, and someone came up with the idea to dry the buds, put them on the stick, and soak them, then dry them again. I think it was a documentary

I dont remember any of the big Buddha sticks ever being opiated though

 

[Hammerhead]

I agree, We went through many sticks. I never experience any dipped in opium or anything other than hash oil that we added. If it had showed up I wasn't into that so I would have passed on it.

 

[Donald Mallard]

They specified if they were opiated or not. I think the opiated may have cost a bit more sometimes. Most people liked the opiated the best. I think there is a video how they did that back then. They didn't waste the water from making heroin, and someone came up with the idea to dry the buds, put them on the stick, and soak them, then dry them again. I think it was a documentary

I dont remember any of the big Buddha sticks ever being opiated though

if you find the video please share it ,
as im convinced most thai stick was just potent weed and never went near any heroin wash ,
the place they had the opium was a long way from where the sticks were grown as i mentioned and unlikely one group would cooperate with the other , either the sticks would have to be transported or the heroin water .. seems unlikely to me ,

no offence dr , but i dont believe too many thai sticks ever underwent this process despite the western idea it did ...



if it can be proved id have to think again of course , but as far as im aware its just stories due to folks spinning out on strong cannabis they had not encountered before ...



id need to see evidence because i dont believe the stories ...

 

[@hempy]

They specified if they were opiated or not. I think the opiated may have cost a bit more sometimes. Most people liked the opiated the best. I think there is a video how they did that back then. They didn't waste the water from making heroin, and someone came up with the idea to dry the buds, put them on the stick, and soak them, then dry them again. I think it was a documentary

I dont remember any of the big Buddha sticks ever being opiated though

I saw them only a few times around the late 70s early 80s not after that.

Around that time you could also get opium to smoke also and i even saw opiumemated hash.

 

[acespicoli]

yeah the thai stick was like the choc thai atleast the ones I had

also got some green thai and grew it out
buds were super fluffy airy and light a 1/4 looked like a oz in a baggie.
leaves were narrow fingers like bamboo grew like a vine under low light



And right on time @hempy the opium hash had a strange heady feeling to the hash
didnt care for smoking that at the time
the thai high was a special electric buzz laughy and fun very enjoyable

the green thai weed smelled like straight up grass lol

 

[Donald Mallard]

that would have to be opiumated hempy ,
hash has no opinion at all , hehehe ..



rumor has it there was no opiumated hash either ,
it was moldy hash that folks convinced folks it was containing something else ,
but im just repeating what i hear/read ,
we had some that i was told was opiumated ,
just seemed to be strong hash to me ,

i would have expected something else if it had opium in it ,


but thats just my story , others have other experiences of course ...