Little to no thc present in flowers?

I stumbled across an article that has me wondering... it makes claims that thc is barely present in the actual flowers, appearing in trichomes and bud leaves much more so. For some reason, im doubting their research, but then again it could just be my pothead bias.

http://m.phys.org/news/2013-04-ingredient-cannabis.html

Could someone who knows what theyre talking about shed some light on this? Im not just asking other stoners (as i have a rather heavy understanding myself), but perhaps someone in a field of science that has experience working with cannabis..

 

That is right. The THC is on the flower but is a separate part to the flower. This is why hash works, you are smoking many of these trichomes scarped away from the plant.

 

Something tells me that high quality marijuana wasnt used then, as ive personally smoked hashed out weed and gotten ripped. It tasted like absolute shit, but worked. I dont doubt that the majority of chemicals seem to be in the trichomes, but a lot of dank seems to have more thc than this study showed.
I'd like to see some further studies, though.

 

Great question, The flower is the home of most thc on the plant, but instead of the flower itself being psycho-active it's actually the tiny crystals and glands produced by the plant that just happens to concentrate on the flowers. Simply put, pot PRODUCES the chemical that gets you high, the plant itself is not the cause of euphoria.

 

always thought was a little thc in the plants as leafs can get ya high if smoke enough or maybe it's the lack of oxygen from inhaling all that leaf smoke.