I don't want to downplay anybody, but I have to respectfully disagree about the terpene thing. If it were terpenes, could we not just add a terpene dropwise to our buds for a desired effect? I am not saying that they have no effects because science has shown that certain terpenes have specific effects. BUT, there are something like 80 different cannabinoids that have not been thoroughly researched, just identified. These cannabinoids could have psychoactive or medicinal effects just like THC and CBD. In fact, there are cannabinoids that are strain specific and may only found in certain strains grown in certain regions, Lebanon is a good example.
Then there is the synergystic effect....
I hope that federal legalization does not corrupt this beautiful plant. I hope we can learn more about what it has to offer because I am pretty sure we have only scratched the surface.
I wouldn't downplay the terpes or dismiss them. I think what maybe would be more accurate of a statement would be to say the entourage effect. The cannabinoids in conjunction with terps and the rest of the plant matter we might not understand yet.
I will say that I pretty much dismiss the notion of simply adding terpenes, especially artificial (remember how well that synthetic THC worked out with SPICE?) and it being equal to a plants naturally produced terpenes and will give us the high we are looking for. I don't think we can ever make something artificial to replicate mother nature's natural stuff. But thats just my opinion.
Just curious, if you doubt that the terpes have anything to do with the some of those potent effects , but say in the same sentence that science has shown them to have specific effects...which is it? Is it just the ones that have been studied and "found" to have certain effects that you can buy off on? Wasn't it not long ago that "scientists" had studied and found cannabis was just bad for us? Science is like most other things.....it goes where money is.
And how does one truly measure the potency of weed if most of us are in agreement that its not simply the numeric value of the THC. And what makes the effects of indica vs sativa so different? Why can a Sativa at 19% have me out digging outdoors for hours without tiring while that same 19% in a Hindu Kush will have me snoring after I devoured everything in the house? The cannabinoid make up of the two were virtually identical.....but the terpene profiles were very different. Hmm....same cannabinoids, same THC values, drastically different effects, different terpenes.....
Understanding the effects and why a plant at 15% THC can stomp a 25% plant into the dirt in terms of powerful high is difficult indeed. But here is the kicker.....everyone is different. What stomps your crank into the dirt weed wise might be drastically different than what does it for me. What does that mean?? I have friends that love strains of mine that I would rather not smoke cause its kind of bland to me. Then other friends that hate the sativas that I love.
That means each individual is a whole new variable into the weed equation. What effect you one way, might not do that at all to me.....in fact it might have a completely different effect all together. Nothing in the plant changed....but the effects on that individuals endo-cannabiniod system are very different.
But back to terpenes....there are plants out there now hitting 5,6, and reportedly 7% (Sour Pineapple by Annunaki Genetics) in terpes. That is by far the second largest % make up behind only the THC or CBD of those strains....I would certainly have a hard time dismissing them as not impacting the effects of the high perhaps even being a necessary catalyst . Or maybe is it lack of those terpenes that leave a high THC strain seeming like flatline high......
Some cool things to think about huh Lazy? Please don't take this as me jumping on you bud, cause its not that at all....its all discussions and about learning and trying to understand things brother! Cheers!
... and esters and flavonoids too.
