Standards and Measurements

SeniorHippies · Post by **SeniorHippies** » Thu 17th Dec 2009 12:25 am

In view of the scientific acuity demonstrated by most of the people posting in this area of the forum I post this question here. What are the scientific obstacles to a rigorous method of quantifying the potency of marijuana? I'll leave the question in this simple form lest my ignorance cloud the issues.

TRANCE · Post by **TRANCE** » Thu 17th Dec 2009 01:22 am

None!
For me, I look at the shape of the bud, I'll have a good sniff and the sniff takes many years of knowing if it's been cured to perfection or not. I'll happily swivel on my heel if I can't find that 'HEDONISTIC' smell, which takes years to know and learn. I only smoke weed and never HASH, btw. Some could get really anal and have a jewellers loupe to see THC crystals but I tend to buy on smell alone and hope it will deliver the hit I want. I'm fairly accurate now. lol

Most weed will get you smashed in Amsterdam, at the end of the day. I have no idea about hash, as I don't touch the stuff.

enjoy

Uncle Ron · Post by **Uncle Ron** » Thu 17th Dec 2009 05:00 pm

Not quite sure as to what you specifically want to know. If you are in the field of science and/or have access to equipment, then use a gas chromatographic device to accurately measure the CBD and THC levels.

For the layperson, and to somewhat paraphrase Trance: appearance and smell are initial benchmarks in determining the potential potency.

In the case of having a jewelers loupe, the trichomes (crystals) should be clear or slightly opaque (cloudy).

As simple as possible, when sampling gear, make note of the appearance, smell, taste, and effects. Time and experience should enable you to determine (within reason) the potential potency of the gear. Also knowing the genetics of the gear would be helpful (sativa, indica; sub-strain - NYC Diesel, Amnesia Haze, etc...) because of the various observable traits each possesses.

In determining if gear is potentially potent, I follow this simple procedure:
- Knowing the sub-strain, Sativa or Indica.
- Appearance: proper color; no mold; a nicely trimmed bud (indicative of growers pride in product?).
- Feel: the gear is not dried out and crumbly but can range in slightly spongy to rock hard nuggets.
- Smell: knowing the sub-strain is helpful in determining the proper smell which usually has an earthy or citrus(y) note. Should have a fresh-cut smell.

Hope this helps.
Peace

doobydave · Post by **doobydave** » Thu 17th Dec 2009 05:13 pm

Cannabis is a multi-molecule drug, with a potential to create over 80 different cannabinoids. Therefore, discussion surrounding it's potency currently remains purely subjective.

Someone should point this out to the Home Office, to stop them repeatedly coming out with nonsense regarding it's supposed "strength".

sh@dy · Post by **sh@dy** » Thu 17th Dec 2009 06:34 pm

TRANCE wrote:None!
For me, I look at the shape of the bud, I'll have a good sniff and the sniff takes many years of knowing if it's been cured to perfection or not. I'll happily swivel on my heel if I can't find that 'HEDONISTIC' smell, which takes years to know and learn. I only smoke weed and never HASH, btw. Some could get really anal and have a jewellers loupe to see THC crystals but I tend to buy on smell alone and hope it will deliver the hit I want. I'm fairly accurate now. lol

Most weed will get you smashed in Amsterdam, at the end of the day. I have no idea about hash, as I don't touch the stuff.

enjoy

it took me 2 years of smoking to master the ultimate smell

I used to laugh about the people drinking whine as connoisseurs....now I do the same they do with the buds! I smell them, I take them into hands, have a close look, have a bite, have a close look how it works in the grinder, the first puff always is something special, even after a few joints

USbongLord · Post by **USbongLord** » Thu 17th Dec 2009 06:44 pm

what?

sh@dy · Post by **sh@dy** » Thu 17th Dec 2009 07:13 pm

USBONGLORD wrote:what?

he asks how you can say the weed is strong after smoking it...obivously he`s a newb

Sir Niall of Essex-sire · Thu 17th Dec 2009 08:01 pm

There is a article somewhere. I think its a new report on coffeeshops in Denver? That said the owners are trying to get away from texture, taste and smell as being how to tell good smoke and go more towards actual scientific methods.

So there is other ways yes. But fuck knows what they are.

SeniorHippies · Post by **SeniorHippies** » Thu 17th Dec 2009 08:24 pm

After 42 years of experience I can tell the good weed from the bad. I can also make discriminating decisions as to what I will enjoy smoking. As the kind forumites have observed, one's 5 senses, actually hearing isn't too useful except to hear others' opinions, 4 senses are the best guide. But a certain consensus exists that there are two principle cannabinoids that pretty well determine the potency, though cojunct alkaloids abound. Does one really need a gas chromatograph to assay the amounts of THC and cannabidiol? I love the taste and smell of good weed, but if a given strain of weed had a significantly higher count of those 2 substances, would you care what it tasted like? Do these substances vary according to species, indica or sativa. Would or would not a little scientific rigor bring new vigor to breeding? How about bringing a little truth in advertising to the shops, would a rigorous analysis help?

Does anyone suppose this thread should be moved to a more general part of the forum?

Uncle Ron · Post by **Uncle Ron** » Thu 17th Dec 2009 10:48 pm

SeniorHippies,
I totally agree that the (my) preferred method of identifying the difference in quality is to use the four senses. I also agree to the idea of measuring the potency of gear and providing the information to consumers, somewhat like alcohol content in drinks. I do realize that this seems like a near impossible task, but given some time, why not? Some seed companies provide approximate levels of THC and CBD for certain strains. Good information to know, especially for medical patients.
Sir Niall of Essex-sire, C/S's in Denver? Dispensaries yes, shops no. Don't let the article confuse you. In part, Colorado law states:
"No patient shall: Engage in the medical use of marijuana in a way that endangers the health or well-being of any person; or engage in the medical use of marijuana in plain view of, or in a place open to, the general public. Law enforcement has informed the Medical Marijuana Registry of the following: Any place outside of the patient’s home is considered public. “In plain view” also includes the patient’s yard or garage if that patient can be seen using their medicine by neighbors. Bottom line, if someone can see you using your Medical Marijuana, you are in violation of the law."
Maybe I read to much into what you were trying to convey. Damn this haze is kicking my ass :]

Peace

Ingwey Gooblebogger · Fri 18th Dec 2009 08:20 am

In view of the scientific acuity demonstrated by most of the people posting in this area of the forum I post this question here. What are the scientific obstacles to a rigorous method of quantifying the potency of marijuana? I'll leave the question in this simple form lest my ignorance cloud the issues.

Doobydave is correct with his quote below:

Cannabis is a multi-molecule drug, with a potential to create over 80 different cannabinoids. Therefore, discussion surrounding it's potency currently remains purely subjective.

Someone should point this out to the Home Office, to stop them repeatedly coming out with nonsense regarding it's supposed "strength

There are many many cannabinoids in Cannabis (phytocannabinoids) not to mendtion that our bodies produce cannabinoids (endocannabinoids often refered to as anandamides). So while we can measure the the amounts of the various cannabinoids in sample of cannabis by several means (Mass or gas spec and so on), these methods would only give us a relatively modest idea about the potency.

That is, we could determine the quantities of the various cannabinoids and we could guess that, based on those numbers the cannabis sample might have a certain capacity to intoxicate.

Since we all have different preferences and we all react differently to different substances (and this can vary, even for the same person as the setting or mood changes through time), so given the way your own body reacts to both pytocannabinoids and endocannbinoids, your personal preferences, and the set and setting of the time you get high the "potency" of any cannabis sample would be highly subjective.

AND since the cannabinoid profile (i.e. both the quantities and relative proportions of those cannabinoids) along with personal preferences, helps to determine the potency. Knowing the numbers without knowing/understanding the interactions amonst trhe various cannabinoids (some of them potentiate the buzz, othes tend to mitigate it and on) would only give us an estimate as to the strength.

Thus the scientific problem; there is no objective way to determine the exact "potency" of the cannabis.

IMO, given the above info, your original question is like asking "What are the scientific obstacles to a rigorous method of quantifying the value of a movie/novel/artwork/etc".