Rambling On...

Call to Breeders!

With the major cannabinoids content seemingly hanging on a plateau, which is good, and with a great variety of flavor than decades past, also consider that horticultural refinement is not only focused on maximizing prize resin, but in minimizing the wealth of undesirables. Reducing impurities such as nicotine and the tars and waxes found in most leafy plants, are also goals. It'll take new ideas. Not an easy task but look at what you've done for potency, flavor and smell. This wasn't done by guys in labcoats... Blueberry x Bubblegum came from breeders like you - self-taught! Science and learning are catalysts to change, but it CAN be done without expensive equipment and theory. Use your senses and your knoggin'. "The smoother the smoke, the safer the vapor". Safer vapor carries political clout.

Consider basics: Tars and waxes tend to be heavy, they are larger molecules and often polymers. Heavier molecules usually have higher boiling points. One type of experiment might involve using a very sensitive balance and weighing a sample, say 1g. The sample is vaporized to say 204 degrees Celcius, which is 420 degrees Fahrenheit, exposure time and airflow consistent with every sample. The sample (and assembly) is weighed again and the difference noted. This tells the breeder the weight of the volatiles that evaporated under those conditions. Next, the sample would be heated to say 600F, same flow etc. After cooling, the sample is weighed again. Now calculate the weight loss of each sample from the 420F-to-600F range. Repeat the procedure for different varieties* and record the number. Which varieties have fewer "high-boilers"? Selctively breed desirable characteristics.**

*On comparing multiple varieties: When measurement range includes 100C/212F, the water content must be known, or the samples must be dried to eliminate variability. Water may be ignored for sample already exposed above b.p. of water as they are 'dry' or anhydrous.

**There is idle debate about the medicinal value of many of the non-cannabinoid oils (i.e. alkanes, terpenes). Many patients claim that inhalation of cannabis vapor (vaporization, not smoking) does not give the full therapeutic effect experienced with smoking or eating; the claim specifically that indica-like qualities are less prevalent, and that the effect is subtly more akin to the consumption of sativa varieties - cerebral, social, uplifting and insightful. Patients with inflammatory/pain issues tend to prefer indica-type effects, tending toward more physically sedate and relaxed. So why do so many perceive that vaporized cannabis oil (up to ~200C/400F) is slightly inferior in certain regards?

Might some of the higher boiling oils, which are not consumed but left in the plant material, contribute to the indica-like body effects? 'Spent' cannabis left over from vaporization often finds its way into baked goods and is widely claimed to contribute toward reducing the severity of certain inflammatory issues.

Who can determine which drug name can be used to make these top (out of 50,001) phrases? It’s one word.

A Botanical Nerd Thorny A Cannibal Yonder Troth

A Cinnabar Threnody Lot A Blatancy Odor Thinner

A Banyan Chortled Intro A Incarnated Born Hotly

A Anecdotal Briny North A Chardonnay Nobler Tit

A Antacid Brother Nylon or better, A Nylon Antacid Brother!

A Chardonnay Boner Tilt – we have a winner!

A Draconian Bro Tenthly A Contraband Her Lint Yo

Cannabis & Alcohol – What to Expect

The first important idea for EVERYONE to remember, regardless of your stance on cannabis, is that alcohol is a “potentiator” of many other chemicals found in herbs and pharmaceuticals. What’s that mean? A potentiator is a drug that can magnify or modify the effects of a second drug, sometimes acting in synergy to provide a result much stronger than either of the two drugs could cause on their own (1+1=3).

Alcohol is a powerful potentiator and it can be EXTEREMLEY DANGEROUS to mix other drugs with it, especially drugs in different classes (e.g. stimulants and depressants). That’s because one drug will tell the body to do one thing and the second drug tells the body to do something else, perhaps the opposite of the first drug. The brain can become confused, damaged, or just quit working in some cases. Human physiology is an orchestra in action and if the conductor sends the wrong signal to the bassoonist, then the entire piece is at risk of failure.

Realistically speaking, there is no lack of human experience in consuming alcohol and cannabis together. It is not advocated or advised, and the detailed physiological implications will not be discussed here, but instead speculated upon. Those that have had the experience report a somewhat common result that varies with certain parameters:

Order of Consumption
Volume of Consumption
Relative Time of Introduction for Second Component

Alcohol disturbs one’s equilibrium (ability to stay balanced), impairs gross motor coordination and depresses the CNS. Over-consumption of alcohol often results in vomiting, however light to moderate consumption doesn’t often give this result. Comparatively, the effects of cannabis are fractional compared to CNS depressants in the classic definition. Cannabis is an anti-emetic, a drug that is effective against vomiting and nausea, and is typically used to treat motion sickness and the side-effects of some opiate analgesics (painkillers) and cancer chemotherapy drugs. The CNS mediates vomiting, it decides when and where. In contrast to alcohol, increasing cannabinoid consumption further suppresses nausea and in fact induces hunger.

Subjectively speaking, consuming alcohol and cannabis together distinctly produces the effects of both substances Whether the overall effect may be considered ‘potentiated’ (1+1=3, synergy) or ‘additive’ (1+1=2), the combining of the two sometimes results in vomiting and additional loss of balance and coordination.

This result is reported to occur with higher incidence when alcohol ingestion precedes cannabis ingestion by several hours; essentially cannabis being consumed after alcohol intoxication. Furthermore, this phenomenon appears more heavily dependent on the volume of alcohol consumed than the amount of cannabis, which is consistent with the pharmacology of each compound – alcohol effects overshadow cannabis effects. Consider that only a few inhalations of cannabis by someone that is staggering drunk can accelerate the onset of the inevitable vomiting and passing-out, even in weathered professionals.

In contrast, for those that consume cannabis hours before, or in conjunction with alcohol, tend to experience significantly lower incidence of nausea. In many cases less alcohol is consumed when preceded by cannabis, which in this opinion is exponentially SAFER.

One may think they are a better driver under the influence of cannabis. And they may also think that they drive sufficiently well after having a couple drinks. However, due to one’s equilibrium being significantly affected, driving in this condition, regardless of time frame, order or volume of consumption, it is a very stupid move and extremely poor judgment call. One’s perfect history is not justification and it does not change the science, or your future abilities.

Cannabis is an anti-emetic, so why doesn’t cannabis suppress the alcohol-induced nausea? It seems as though in some cases cannabis indirectly induces nausea in the drunken. Could it be that cannabis influences the body to purge the alcohol toxin? Cannabinoid studies already postulate that they serve to nurture and protect the organism.

Alcohol already demonstrates that it confuses communication in certain parts of the brain, which is why drunkards fail sobriety tests regardless of how much they have studied. It seems more likely that the contributing factors to decreased balance and increased vomiting are caused by:

Alcohol suppressing or overshadowing the anti-emesis effects of cannabis; the part of the brain that controls vomiting (pons) is a part of the CNS, thus that part is impaired.

2. Cannabis further contributing to alcohol-impaired equilibrium. Though cannabis alone does not tend to cause the equilibrium disturbance associated with alcohol, it does appear to subtly affect depth perception and balance with higher does.

It would be interesting to compare data on the amount of sugar in the alcoholic beverages in order to better understand the variables. Often times over-consumption of drinks with high amounts of sugar have a tendency to lead to vomiting, more so than in low-sugar drinks.

MOST PSYCHOACTIVE DRUGS ARE GATEWAY DRUGS, EVEN CAFFEINE

The 'gateway argument' is a common denominator with MOST drugs. Caffeine, alcohol, khat, sugar for some folks, you name it, nature's consumers are often curious to explore the world around them. Anthropologist have written books and theses on the tendancy of some animal species to actively explore altered states of consciousness. Alcohol is the #1 'gateway drug', plus it makes your nose all big and red with gin blossoms, like some scoundrel politician with high cholesterol and two vacation homes.

INCREASED CANNABIS POTENCY IS NOT A NEGATIVE POINT

Increased cannabinoid potency results in decreased intake of the other 400+ compounds, it decreases the amount of combustion products consumed and it decreases pyrolized byproducts. Increased potency decreases biomass demand and decreases the amount of cannabis consumed over time. Because inhaled (vaporized or smoked) cannabis is self-titrating, less cannabis is consumed versus lower potency varieties. The result of increased potency is a safer smoke for those that choose combustion as the mode of consumption. Vaporization is healthier than smoking, and increased cannabis potency reduces the amount of total extraneous (undesirable, unnecessary) compounds inhaled.

Fact: Cannabis and naturally extracted THC are Schedule I substances. Synthetic THC mixed with sesame oil (Marinol, Dronabinol) is Schedule III. Natural THC and synthetic THC are chemically and structurally identical. Marinol's success gives several pharmaceutical executives exceedingly large compensation for bringing it to market.

Help voters and lawmakers think more critically, analytically. Pass it on.

Mass Defect?

Lying With Statistics, it's a book title. The concept is true and is based on the fact that by using statistics, one can augment any argument to look more favorable or less favorable, depending on what is desired. Sometimes it is as simple as turning a big number into a small percent.

When researchers and reporters look for cannabis data to share, they come up with numbers reported by scientists, organizations, media and the government. These numbers are often used to support a ridiculous claim. Here are some common examples of how numbers lie...

Water-Content: Hundreds of agencies report figures such as confiscations or even traffiking estimations, but not even the most disciplined reporting methods accounts for the moisture content of the cannabis. Cannabis as a commodity is generally marketed at an estimated 4% to 15% moisture by weight. If we assume the average to be 10% water, then for each ton reported, there are 200lbs of water being counted as contraband. This drastically inflates figures and screws any other comparison; all calculations based on these numbers have the error from the beginning. Meanwhile, the inflated figures are used as arguments and instruments to justify budget increases and the scapegoat War on Cannabis, about 10% of which is a War on Water.
This huge degree of error is much less significant in the reporting of synthetic or 'dry' drugs. It is the natural, plant-based, moisture-containing drugs that suffer most from this kind of bias. Legislation is needed to correct this problem. The (wrong) numbers reported through history are the foundation for decision making today. Does that bother you?

THC-Content: Much like with water-content, the variability of THC-content from plant-to-plant is significant, from 0-25% by weight, if we're to believe it. Let's assume an an average THC content of 12%. Here, the statistics can work either favorably or unfavorably, depending on who is using them. For example, it can be argued that a large portion of reported confiscated cannabis was of the 0-3% variety (remember that THC content is decreases with time). Cannabis with such low THC content would be of low-to-worthless value. Its bulk and threat would outweigh potential value. But as contraband, 0.01% THC cannabis counts the same as 25% THC cannabis, yet they have wildly different pharmacologic effects and sociological potency.

0% THC (Zero-Weed): So what about the cannabis with no THC? In this case we have to view plant matter (biomass, cellulose) as merely a dilution of THC. The result is that regardless of how much THC (drug) is present, what is reported and how sentencing is determined is almost exclusively influenced by non-psychoactive biomass. The determination of 'how bad you are' generally has little to do with Overall Pharmacological Equivalence (OPE - how high and for how long?). Cannabis flowers with 0% THC are still perceived somehow as a threat by some people. THIS is a huge hole in the logic of the law. We need legislation to correct for this archaic, biased and grandfathered approach to measuring contraband biomass. Ignoring variation in cannabinoid and water content while relying strictly on overall mass is a small-minded approach to determining OPE.

Useless Biomass: As with the 0% THC marijuana example, reported cannabis statistics are hellishly skewed for a variety of reasons. Consider the numerous reported estimations or manipulaitons that are sometimes made by anti-cannabis staff. For example: A) wet, hanging plants (drying) are considered 'end-product' - a wet plant may be 80% water and must be slowly dried to ~10% before use. An ounce is reported as a pound. B) Cannabis is often not manicured until it is dry, therfore the plant still possess a large overall mass of useless material such as leaves, petioles, stems, roots, branches, water, debris and seeds. This mass is often included in statistics and reports. C) Articles have appeared with reports that, either because knowledge is lacking or ignorance is prevalent, busted growers have had the trash bin wrongly considered as viable product. Often enough the mass (weight) of the trash bin itself is included. D) Some "large" outdoor cultivation busts mysteriously report seizing numbers of plants that are ridiculously large compared to the size of the garden. The Men In Black have been repeatedly videotaped doing their work: Imagine a field of plants 8 feet tall. A crew of overly-armed, paid cannabis-eradicators go at the crop with machetes and hack each plant into manageable branches to carry to the pile. Meanwhile Bubba counts some branches as whole plants. It occurs from ignorance and it occurs from dishonesty. It occurs regularly. Meanwhile, budget increa se for next year.

Missing Biomass? It has been demonstrated time and again that some anti-cannabis enforcers prefer to assume a hypothetical potential yield and report that figure as an actual seizure. That's creating matter from nothing and usually gets you a Nobel Prize. Otherwise, it gets included in annual government reports as tangible seizures, used to justify more of the same. Here's the example: Someone with a say three medicinal plants under a fluorescent light would get visited by the enforcers. The story is augmented to be "Three plants capable of producing 1 pound each" and suddenly everyone involved in the process takes the assumption (potential) and makes it truth. The truth is that nobody in the queue, because science and logic are often a conflict of interest with prohibition, recognizes that this absurd potential could never be reached. This medical garden had the potential to produce about 4% of the assumed value but because in 1970 on the equator of planet Mercury a mutated F1 yielded a pound of schwag, it is somehow applicable to some poor patient's awful, yellow, lanky ruderalis sitting under Edison's original incandescent tungsten bulb.

______________________________________________________

What If Ocean-Faring Cargo Vessels Served As Self-Contained Horticultural Research Facilities on International Waters?

______________________________________________________

What is the REAL Origin of the Term "4:20"?

It's not a California Penal Code, it's not how many chemicals are in cannabis. The true story is told at length by Steven Hager at Hight Times magazine. To summarize, back in the 70's at San Rafael High School, across the Golden Gate Bridge from San Francisco, a group of about a dozen friends would meet at a statue of Louis Pasteur after school around 4:20. The group called themselves "The Waldos" and sometimes they would head up to Mt. Tamalpais to meet...

______________________________________________________

The Cannabis "Movement" 2008

The internet is a catalyst unmatched. Just 20 years ago it was hard to come by information on subversive subjects like marijuana. It was taboo and underground. Today’s accelerated information exchange is responsible for the mushrooming of knowledge about cannabis by the average person. Sixteen year old potheads today know as much as about cannabis horticulture and medicinal applications as many judges, and more than most reporters that so many people believe are intelligent, for some reason. (reading a producer-written news teleprompter is not journalism) With this new information the masses are gaining in numbers and the movement more or less thumbs its nose at governments. The government witnessing this movement wants to stop this opposition. Its like when a younger generation comes along with something fancy and the old man call the teens 'whipper-snappers', wants to put them back in their place. But we know how that works out.Some twenty years ago High-Times magazine promoted the idea of OVERGROW. That is, if everybody's doing it, most everybody will have no trouble, and the numbers will represent the people and most of all. Familiarity is extremely critical to the success of cannabis - please do your part to make people familiar with the positive aspects. The OVERGROW campaign is a SUCCESS twenty years later. And with each new fence the government builds in the name of cannabis prohibition (like tightening border security) they provide yet ANOTHER driving engine for domestic OVERGROWING, regardless of your country.The internet has provided the means for the movement to make real progress in only 20 years and we can see that progress in

1) information availability

2) Greater widespread understanding of the information

3) a major turn from importation to domestic production

4) State-legal medical programs with the feds 'attempting' to stay out of it 5) stable market prices despite global inflation and increased potency

6) the list goes on...To overcome, the movement needs leaders that (I hate to say it) are well-versed in corporate arguments and lobbying - NORML x1000 ...the movement needs a few CEO types, a few politician types to be taking OUR arguments and spinning them in terms that the other politicians and CEOs can relate to. Once we convince these people of the economic rewards, we will see major change. When you convince these people that capitalism applies to decriminalized cannabis, and you really get them excited about making money on it, I PROMISE YOU THAT THEY WILL DO THE ADVOCATING and they will raise the marketing dollars to promote 'their idea'.We can reason with people all day long about personal decisions and rights but if those people are already content with what they have, and it doesn't involve cannabis, why would they care? Contentment is complacency.The cannabis industry is spawning new gadgets, inventions and technology. Cannabinoid drug-research is at an all-time high and finally, doctors are really starting to get an idea of what cannabis does. There is a long way to go and don't expect it all to be positive. All drugs have some negative associations and cannabis will too.Drug Wars are bug business. They allow agencies to get REALLY BIG BUDGETS and the people to get big paychecks to support their families, and whatever threatens that, they will resist. Would you want your job and job industry to fall apart? If we remove cannabis from the equation, the Drug War budgets are much less justified. Consider how much (%) of all Drug War money is budgeted based on cannabis statistics. The simple act of decriminalization will hurt that budget. WHEN the laws change the money goes away to a new home. As above, that's why we need economists and business leaders to come forth and support the idea that all though the government would lose much of its operating budget from the Drug War, that money will come back to them in the form of vice-tax like with liquor, and in the form of entrepreneurial growth. Decriminalization will result in a huge initial outgrowth in the industries that already cater to the cannabis savvy.

Horticulture, genetics, drug research, biological research (thousands of animals have natural cannabinoids for a reason!), alternative fuels research, materials science, community programs, medicine...nearly every important industry can benefit from such an opportunity. What would you call a situation in which a large number of industries benefits? I believe that's called ECONOMIC GROWTH...whatever that is. You already know this: prohibition makes no sense, but it does tend to make sinsemilla. Did it work for alcohol? Not quite. It doesn't matter if its a plants, emeralds or contraband widgets, if you prohibit it, you might decrease the demand but you will certainly increase the desire and grossly inflate the remaining market, thus attracting a few seedy characters. Prohibition is a sort of business model employed by authority and because it benefits them so well, it is disadvantageous to get rid of.What's it all about?

1) Productivity - People with bright, wide eyes are convinced that if you consume cannabis, you'll become a less productive member of society.

2) Ignorance - People think that cannabis makes you permanently and cumulatively as ignorant as they are, while claiming that they of course are superior. How ironic.

3) More Ignorance - The proactive mentality "Shoot first, think later" gets cannabis users berated with extremely poor, tired and shallow arguments. Often, these arguments are unoriginal and the result of a poor understanding of science.

4) Laziness, Contentment, Complacency - "The president says it's bad so it must be. Now, I ain't no doctor or nothin' but I seen a man smoke that stuff and he was just acting a fool, all smiling and being Friendly Frank to everybody, talking about the future like some kinda idiot"

Isn't it extremely odd that the truth that scientists produce for the rest of the world seems only to come from those very narrow corners in our society like research labs and universities. Will it always be a case of one judge and one economist arguing publicly over something neither one of them truly understand, like stem cells, like global warming, like cannabis-science.com ? The judge and the economist only know what summaries they have read, which was prepared by their advisors, which happen to have the same damn educational background in politics, not analytical thinking heavy on science and physical systems. They don't understand underlying theory , or why things are as they are, and this deficit impedes their ability to smell bullshit. Much like they have speeches prepared by SOMEONE ELSE, lunch prepared by someone else, the car washed by someone else, the kids raised by someone else...do you really expect that what they are saying is based on original or accurate research. On charged subjects, often not. It came from someone else with similar beliefs, similar agendas and similar goals. Inbreeding at it's finest - the political system.

Consider that NIDA is funded mainly by the government. Also consider that the majority of anti-drug information is based on NIDA studies, and that NIDA has been known to make unethical decisions about which scientific data they decide to share. Decriminalization needs to occur now because things like Executive Orders to ignore the Constitution, increased satellite technology and increasingly sensitive chemical testing methods will kill all hopes in the future. Satellites can already read the date from a coin, probably much more (assume that your body’s IR signature could be seen inside your house by satellite, but classified). Satellites can distinguish extremely small changes in temperature and color (wavelength). If you think infrared detection can only be done from helicopters then it'll be unsettling for you to know that the same is easily done from a satellite with automated software. This is a great opportunity for the paranoid. Homes may berandomly surveyed for heat signature and outdoor foliage/crops are surveyed by color to look for "nutrient deficiencies". Likewise, the technology already exists and it is a matter of time before you get pulled over and the officer points a laser pointer at your arm and determines what drugs are in your system. Cannabis-Science.com

Cannabis Science Home | Cannabis News | Contact | Disclaimer