Is Weed More Potent Today?

I've heard some say that the marijuana out today is more potent than what people smoked in the 60's,70's and 80's. Is this true and if so why? What type of weed were people smoking in the 70's and 80's?

 

I would say it is because there is a lot more cross-breeding than before. At the same time, much of the weed from previous decades was tested many years after it had been confiscated in raids, etc., so there is a good chance that over time it lost much of its potency. I would still wager that, on average, today's weed is stronger just because of the methods of cultivation and the development of various hybrid strains.

 

Well, speaking from experience - smoking in the 70's and 80's (and 90's etc) - I disagree that weed is stronger now.

It might vary in different regions of the country; but, the weed available here in SC, especially in the 80's, was the best, imo. Today's weed isn't bad but then I don't live in a weed legal state. Perhaps if I had the opportunity to experience a dispensary I would change my mind.

 

I miss Colombian Gold... Seriously.

 

Yes...it is stronger and just better. We have learned how to cultivate it, be kind to it...know how to harvest. Have so many strains to choose from. Back in the day....homegrown was the worst weed...now it's the best. IMO

 

the answer to that question is yes and no.
yes in the sense that genetics and cultivation techniques have developed to the point that we get a higher yield of flowers than decades ago
But no in that using the same cultivation techniques also yielded great weed back then same as it does today.

One important factor to bear in mind is how the weed was/is tested.
Back then if you got an ounce of weed it was usually roughly manicured buds with seeds and lots of leaf.
Today it is usually nice manicured buds, no seeds and little leaf.

that is very important because the way it was/is tested is they take the sample, grind it all into a fine powder and then test.
If you grind up an ounce of bud, leaf, seeds and stems you will get an overall lower THC content for that sample than you will for an ounce of manicured buds, even if it is the exact same strain off the same plant.

What is really different today is the lack of any distinct strains anymore, they are all mutts now.
Back then if you got Thai, it was from Asia, if you got Columbian Gold it was from Columbia and they were as different as night and day.

You just don't see that anymore regardless of the fact that there are now a ridiculous number of "strains" around.
most are pretty much the same, either Indica or Sativa but beyond that not the distinct differences we enjoyed yesteryear.

 

It depends what you exactly mean with more potent. I think in general it got stronger (it seems most importantly due to a higher percentage of THC), but for a lot of people this mainly increases the potency of getting 'couchlocked' or it's use as a painkiller. This especially counts for the heavy stoner strains (they're almost all blends of indica and sativa now, at least here in the netherlands) like Haze.

There are so many different kind of weeds and ways and degrees of how intensive you can grow that it really depends on multiple factors. So there ought to be weed with a similar high as back then too. It may be a bit harder to find it.

Kinda makes sense to me. But it all depends on the strain, and the grower (and the circumstances of course, when its really done at home).

 

Weed is better than it was last year, it's come down to a fucking science. Whether literally genetically enginerring the plant, or many organic and veganic grows that are a bit newer and proven to be healthier and more yielding for the plants.
There's also people who will coat their buds with hash, and a layer of kief to make it really strong.

Also when did the dab culture start? That's definitely (stronger) than flower, but I wouldn't say better.

 

I agree with this, at first it was really fun to be able to go into a pot shop and browse it like a candy store. But I've come to find the real freedom being the home-grown market. Be careful california, a lot of people want to legalize while restricting home grown ops.

 

oil?....I was smoking killer honey oil in the mid 70s in high school....it was just as good as the honey today....better because it was also cheaper

high times magazine has been featuring the ''dab'' culture ever since it started in 74,,,,...if you can find an issue from the first few years you can see a list of available smoke across north America with the prices at that time.....oil of many kinds was there plenty

ive never seen Columbian redbud like I saw in the mid seventies either

also elephant sticks....great big fat sticks of bud wrapped in brown paper out of south America


Nepalese temple balls....haven't seen those since the 70s either....they would easily equal the best dope today


having said all that....I don't miss that 180 a pound Mexican dirtweed I sold for about a decade back then

 

Found an article on this.


http://www.hightimes.com/read/harry%E2%80%99s-world-todays-marijuana-really-stronger

 

weed is weed..

I was a teenager growing sticky dank early 80s. I dont know what all the fuss is but we humans have known to let the cannabis plant ripen for some thousands of years..

 

Nah...gotta disagree on this: "weed is weed" That's like saying beer ie beer, wine is wine...etc.

 

Right. I would love to see it legal to grow your own for personal use, just like you can make beer, wine, moonshine. The Initiative (Home Grown/Home Use) that was passed in DC...by the Voters, is being held up on the Federal level.

 

I agree 100% with that article.

 

There has always been good weed and bad weed. Sure we have improved the genetics but keep in mind if you have bad weed you are just going to take more hits to get to where you want.

 

This guy Ben Goldacre is a physician/neuroscientist that has written at least one book called "Bad Science" that I thought was pretty good. Anyway, he does a bit of an analysis on the potency increase claims that are made. This part of it in particular I thought was pretty funny:

"
To get their scare figure, The Independent have compared the worst cannabis from the past with the best cannabis of today. But you could have cooked the books in exactly the same way 30 years ago if you’d wanted: in 1975 the weakest herbal cannabis analysed was 0.2%; in 1978 the strongest herbal cannabis was 12%. Oh my god: in just 3 years herbal cannabis has become 60 times stronger.

And in fact, what’s most amazing is that this scare isn’t new. In the US, in the mid 1980s, during Reagan’s “war on drugs”, it was claimed that cannabis was 14 times stronger than in 1970, which rather sets you thinking. If it was 14 times stronger in 1986 than in 1970, and it’s 25 times stronger today than the beginning of the 1990s, does that mean it is now, in fact, 350 times stronger than 1970?

That’s not even a crystal in a plant pot. That’s impossible. That would require more THC to be present in the plant than the total volume of space taken up by the plant itself. That would require matter to be condensed. If I was a physics-minded branding manager, I would suggest Quark Gluon Plasma as the most appropriate street name for this substance: and I look forward to reading about the scare in the Independent tomorrow."

http://www.badscience.net/2007/03/reefer-badness/

 

Many strains on the street market todays (I see Haze was mentioned) have very hight THC levels (18-25%) but very low if any CBD and CBN levels.

this makes weed feel "Stronger" then weed from the 60's and 70's because without CBD present THC will rush and peak the CB1 and CB2 receptors very quickly, but this leads to high tolerance since the high usually quickly wears off (20-30 minutes on average) and the urge to redose is great. Once the CB receptors are peaked it takes several weeks for them to return to normal levels.

Weed with equal are close to equal ratios of THC to CBD, like strains from the 70s had actually have the potential to be better for several reasons.
For one, CBD slows the uptake of THC down, which means it does not hit the receptors all at once within 1-2 minutes of the hit for a huge rush, but spanned out over a 20-30 minute period with a peak around the end of 30 minutes often, (we used to call this creeper weed in the 90's tho it was rare) and the high can last from an hour to two.
Secondly CBD also slows the break down of anandamide (a naturally occuring endocannabinoid) and is suspected to prolong the effects of THC via inhibition of the cytochrome P-450-3A and 2C enzymes.. it is also stated in scientific literature that CBD increases CB1 receptor density which would also potentiate THCs effects.

So it depends on what you mean by "better" to answer the question.

Some people prefer the crackabises of weed like Haze and Cush, with high THC and very little if any CBD, they prefer to burn out their CB1 receptors on an up and down rollercoster that last for a very short time, which results in contantly being on the search for stronger and stronger product to get the same high as they initially did when they started for habitual users, but that is chasing the dragon IMHO.
While others prefer a more mello high that last longer and is generally more healthy for your system, keeps it in better balance with less peaks and valleys like strains with good amounts CBD provide.


So yes, for the burn outs and dragon chasers the weed today with high TCH and little to no measurable amount of CBD it is better, but for those whom like a longer lasting more natual feeling and healthier high those strains that emerged in the last 3 decades are not "better", tho the THC level is way higher.
You get more benefitial effects out of less THC if you know how to use it in conjunction and unison with other cannabinoids still found in some strains of MJ.

I'd give you guys a link to the cheapest highest potency CBD on the U.S. market right now, but they would ban me for that.

 

^

jeremysdemo,


Which strains of weed today are similar to those of the 70's and 80's?

 

In fact, weed may have actually been better in antiquity.

Never discount the ancients (Pieceofmyheart lol ).
They may have actually been much more sophisticated than we will ever know.

Archeologists have discovered weed from 2,700 years ago that is quite similar to whats grown today.
"The size of seeds mixed in with the leaves, along with their color and other characteristics, indicate the marijuana came from a cultivated strain."
A barrage of tests proved the shit was not only the diggety-dank, but was a unique strain.
And whats more, it was found in the grave of a red-headed white shaman dude, in the middle of whats now known as the Gobi fucking desert! Some of the lead research was done at the U of M right here in Missoula

http://jxb.oxfordjournals.org/content/59/15/4171.full

On the left is the ancient weed, perfectly preserved, though time has rendered it psychoactively inert, lol