Quest for mold-resistant strains, Hawaii outdoor greenhouse grow

[cbdhemp808]

More on the origins of cannabis, from a joint study by the Max Planck Institute and Chinese Academy of Sciences in 2019...

https://www.science.org/content/article/oldest-evidence-marijuana-use-discovered-2500-year-old-cemetery-peaks-western-china

(The above article refers to the study: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aaw1391)

"Cannabis, also known as hemp or marijuana, evolved about 28 million years ago on the eastern Tibetan Plateau, according to a pollen study published in May. A close relative of the common hop found in beer, the plant still grows wild across Central Asia. More than 4000 years ago, Chinese farmers began to grow it for oil and for fiber to make rope, clothing, and paper."​

• • •​

"The cannabis burned 2500 years** ago at the Jirzankal cemetery, [9,800 ft.] high in the Pamir Mountains in far western China, was [psychoactive]. Excavations there have uncovered skeletons and wooden plates, bowls, and Chinese harps, as well as wooden braziers that held burning material." [** approx. 470 BC]​

• • •​

"They found unusually high levels of THC compared with typical wild cannabis, although much less than in today's highly bred plants. The cannabis was apparently burned in an enclosed space, so mourners almost certainly inhaled THC-laced fumes..."​

• • •​

"The region's high altitude could have stressed the cannabis, creating plants naturally high in THC, says co-author Robert Spengler, also of [The Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History]. "It is quite likely that people came across cannabis plants at higher elevations that were naturally producing higher THC levels," he says."​

So, another factor: high elevation can stress cannabis plants to produce more THC.

To be continued...

 

[cbdhemp808]

And they have a drink called "bhang" (?) made from the flower and milk, and heated. Don't know how old that is but likely pretty ancient.

So they obviously figured out the relationship regarding extracting into a fat.

And bhang butter, aka sacred ghee.

 

[cbdhemp808]

Yes, Mechoulam in 1963 and 1964. [CBD and THC]

Correction... From Mechoulam...

"The first real progress was achieved in the early 1940s by Lord Todd in England and Roger Adams in the US, who independently isolated cannabinol, a very weak psychoactive constituent, and cannabidiol which is inactive. Synthetic studies led to compounds with cannabis-like activity, but the main active component of the plant was still beyond their reach (Mechoulam, 1973).​

​

In the early 1960s we established the structure and stereochemistry of cannabidiol (Mechoulam and Shvo, 1963)."​

​

[ source ]​

 

[cbdhemp808]

Today in the veg house... all clones in 10 gal pots.

Clockwise starting with the foreground: White Widow, Humboldt Dream, Blueberry, and HI-BISCUS. I'm just waiting for the clones to take, then I'll start transferring to the flower house.

 

[CBDMed]

It's not surprising that the communist government of China, in its control of Hong Kong, would suppress cannabis. In their eyes, the plant is too powerful to even allow the people access to its CBD forms, let alone its THC forms.

Yes, many chemical-medical pharmaceutical doctors do not like natural medicine, as it eat$ into their profit$.

 

[CBDMed]

I'm sure the ancient Chinese practitioners knew of the value of the flowers as medicine. As to whether or not their flowers contained CBD, I think it's just a matter of historical timing. Surely the closer you get to modern-day, the more obvious it is that their flowers contained CBD, and in terms of the ancient Chinese, I think it's very possible... as soon as they got their hands on sativa and sativa/indica hybrid genetics. Of course, they very well probably didn't know that they were working with two distinct molecules (THC and CBD)—they just knew that the effects were different. So, they originally were working with type I indicas. Then they may have been working with type II indicas and sativas. As to whether they had access to type III (high CBD, very low THC), that's a tough call. BUT... the landraces developed to the west of China may have included type III phenotypes. Eventually growers and breeders in China probably also had these phenotypes.

Well, it may well have been that the farmers were aware of what they had (especially closer to India), and maybe someone knew how to differentiate between CBD and THC, and what conditions to apply it? Only, if such knowledge perhaps made its way from the farmers into the ancient medical community, it did not make its way into the ancient medical texts.

I took a look at the Brand/Zhao study, and it seems to be purposely skewed toward the use of the seeds. The authors sort of dance around the subject of the use of the flowers. They even describe in detail a concoction made from stir-fried seeds boiled in alcohol as a treatment for "severe pain" (circa 1070 AD?), and conjecture that maybe the seeds still had resinous bracts intact. ...Like as if the ancient Chinese weren't fully aware of the pain-relieving effects of the flowers!

No, sorry. It is not a treatise on recreational, wellness, or home medicinal use of cannabis in ancient China. He's doing a survey of the ancient medicinal texts regarding prescription medicinal cannabis use.

Like I said, it seems that they were not able to differentiate between the CBD and the THC strains at the medical level. (It may well be that some farmers had this knowledge, but apparently it did not make its way into the medical literature before 1070 CE..)

The ancient Chinese bencao texts go back to 220 BC. The Shang Dynasty goes back to 1600 BC. Surely the Chinese culture existed long before the Shang Dynasty, but lets just grab that number "1600 BC". So, before the bencao texts appeared, there was a period of Chinese culture extending at least 1,380 years. That's a long time.

[EDIT: Just came across this... "The first documented case of its use dates back to 2800 BC, when it was listed in the Emperor Shen-Nung's (regarded as the father of Chinese medicine) pharmacopoeia." source. Shen-Nung is known as a "mythical emperor" whatever that means! ]

Well, have you heard of the legend of King Arthur and the round table?

Shen Nung is thought to have been a real historical figure. Of course there's a lot of legend and myth that springing up around him also, but he has reported to have left many medical texts that are attributed to him.

(I hesitate to bring up King David. Some consider him mythological in spite of all the archaeological evidence.)

The cannabis first used in ancient China would surely have been the indigenous high-THC indica varieties, not the sativa hemp varieties or hybrids from the west. So, the ancient Chinese were likely very well aware of the psychoactive properties, and medicinal properties, of their local cannabis plants.

I do not doubt in any sense that they were well aware of any psychoactive properties. I don't think that part is in question.
I am much less familiar with the Indian Ayurvedic system of vata pita kapha (there is a fraternity for you!), and I do know that the two medical systems are complementary (both being natural medical systems rely on herbs and minerals and things). However I am relatively familiar with the Chinese system, and I know from trying to learn the Indian Vedic system that the two are not the same and the approach to issues is not the same.

Untold billions of people are familiar with the effects of alcohol intoxication, and there are some doctors who will prescribe alcohol medicinally. However, they are the exception, rather than the rule. (There might be some prescription use of alcohol in the allopathic medical canon, but not much.)
My point is that human and cultural knowledge of the effects of alcohol and intoxication in today's culture have very little correspondence to the acknowledged canonical medicinal uses.
Further, the US government and most states still look critically at medical cannabis, even though that is not an accurate reflection of the general knowledge among the population, which now favors legalization for medicinal uses. (But for political reasons, the government denies any medicinal benefits.)

Meanwhile, in India to the south, they also had access to high-THC indica plants. Their system of medicine, Ayurveda, is even older than the Chinese system, going back to the Rig Veda (3000-2500 BCE)...

"Cannabis is known as “Bhanga” in Ayurveda. Atharva Veda [1200-1000 BCE] mentions cannabis as one of the five most sacred plants on Earth and refers to it as a “Freedom for Distress” or a “joy-giver”. Therapeutic value of this plant is mentioned in many of the Ayurvedic texts like the Charaka Samhita, Sushruta Samhita, and Shargandhara Samhita.​

​

Anandakand has a whole chapter dedicated to the herb, which describes various purification methods, formulations and antidotal therapy to counter the side effects of overdose of cannabis.​

​

There are around 209 formulations mentioned in Ayurveda using Cannabis as single ingredient." [ source ]​

Cool. I will have to check it out someday.

So, you can't tell me that the ancient Chinese practitioners weren't fully aware of all this.

"The exchange of traditional medicine between China and India began in the Qin and Han Dynasties (221 BC–220 AD), prospered in the Tang Dynasty (618–907 AD), and declined after the Song Dynasty (960–1279 AD). It was also directly related to the rise and fall of Buddhism. The traditional medicines of the two countries are highly complementary..."​

[ source ]​

Big sigh...
I am NOT looking for an argument (and I have little time). But no, I don't have any issue at all with the concept of the ancient Chinese people were aware of medicinal and recreational properties of cannabis. I think it is obvious, and intuitive. All native peoples are going to explore the world around them, to see what good they can derive from their immediate surroundings, without money. That's just common sense.

Also, it seems like good information that there was medical exchange between the two countries. However, from what I know of the Chinese and the Indians, no, I do not believe it is obvious or intuitive that this knowledge made its way into the Chinese medical canon, because classical Chinese medicine and Indian Ayurveda are too totally and completely separate systems that work well together, but which have different takes and outlook on life.

Further, I celebrate and rejoice that the Indian medicinal practitioners were able to recognize the obvious health and wellness value of this genus and species, and I will have to check into it. Thank you for listing the sources. HOWEVER, from what I know of Chinese medical theory (which is considerable, because I almost signed up for a PhD in Chinese Medical Theory at one point), they were not able to isolate the differences between CBD and THC, then they were unlikely to prescribe cannabis flowers as medicine, because they would've been uncertain about what effects it would generate.

Are you aware of any research indicating that the ancient Chinese (or the Indians, for that matter) differentiated between THC and CBD cannabis? Such data would change my mind, but I have not been able to find any. Are you aware of such data? I would be very appreciative if you had such data to share.

 

[CBDMed]

And they have a drink called "bhang" (?) made from the flower and milk, and heated. Don't know how old that is but likely pretty ancient.

So they obviously figured out the relationship regarding extracting into a fat.

Good stuff

I think Indian Ayurveda is much more in tune with mystical and spiritual concepts. I think they embrace THC much more readily.

From what I know of the Chinese, they can be very hard-over regarding their martial concepts. I have not heard of a similar Chinese drink.

 

[CBDMed]

And bhang butter, aka sacred ghee.

Yes, good stuff!

I have not seen anything like that in the Chinese system.

Doubtless Ghee and Bhang were imported by some in ancient China. (I am not sure why anyone who cares about people would want to restrict a wellness plant, but human politics is what it is [which is why I am thankful for 420].)

 

[cbdhemp808]

Well, it may well have been that the farmers were aware of what they had (especially closer to India), and maybe someone knew how to differentiate between CBD and THC, and what conditions to apply it? Only, if such knowledge perhaps made its way from the farmers into the ancient medical community, it did not make its way into the ancient medical texts.


No, sorry. It is not a treatise on recreational, wellness, or home medicinal use of cannabis in ancient China. He's doing a survey of the ancient medicinal texts regarding prescription medicinal cannabis use.

Like I said, it seems that they were not able to differentiate between the CBD and the THC strains at the medical level. (It may well be that some farmers had this knowledge, but apparently it did not make its way into the medical literature before 1070 CE..)


Well, have you heard of the legend of King Arthur and the round table?

Shen Nung is thought to have been a real historical figure. Of course there's a lot of legend and myth that springing up around him also, but he has reported to have left many medical texts that are attributed to him.

(I hesitate to bring up King David. Some consider him mythological in spite of all the archaeological evidence.)


I do not doubt in any sense that they were well aware of any psychoactive properties. I don't think that part is in question.
I am much less familiar with the Indian Ayurvedic system of vata pita kapha (there is a fraternity for you!), and I do know that the two medical systems are complementary (both being natural medical systems rely on herbs and minerals and things). However I am relatively familiar with the Chinese system, and I know from trying to learn the Indian Vedic system that the two are not the same and the approach to issues is not the same.

Untold billions of people are familiar with the effects of alcohol intoxication, and there are some doctors who will prescribe alcohol medicinally. However, they are the exception, rather than the rule. (There might be some prescription use of alcohol in the allopathic medical canon, but not much.)
My point is that human and cultural knowledge of the effects of alcohol and intoxication in today's culture have very little correspondence to the acknowledged canonical medicinal uses.
Further, the US government and most states still look critically at medical cannabis, even though that is not an accurate reflection of the general knowledge among the population, which now favors legalization for medicinal uses. (But for political reasons, the government denies any medicinal benefits.)


Cool. I will have to check it out someday.



Big sigh...
I am NOT looking for an argument (and I have little time). But no, I don't have any issue at all with the concept of the ancient Chinese people were aware of medicinal and recreational properties of cannabis. I think it is obvious, and intuitive. All native peoples are going to explore the world around them, to see what good they can derive from their immediate surroundings, without money. That's just common sense.

Also, it seems like good information that there was medical exchange between the two countries. However, from what I know of the Chinese and the Indians, no, I do not believe it is obvious or intuitive that this knowledge made its way into the Chinese medical canon, because classical Chinese medicine and Indian Ayurveda are too totally and completely separate systems that work well together, but which have different takes and outlook on life.

Further, I celebrate and rejoice that the Indian medicinal practitioners were able to recognize the obvious health and wellness value of this genus and species, and I will have to check into it. Thank you for listing the sources. HOWEVER, from what I know of Chinese medical theory (which is considerable, because I almost signed up for a PhD in Chinese Medical Theory at one point), they were not able to isolate the differences between CBD and THC, then they were unlikely to prescribe cannabis flowers as medicine, because they would've been uncertain about what effects it would generate.

Are you aware of any research indicating that the ancient Chinese (or the Indians, for that matter) differentiated between THC and CBD cannabis? Such data would change my mind, but I have not been able to find any. Are you aware of such data? I would be very appreciative if you had such data to share.

I think we disagree on some points. We are attempting to look back at ancient China and make some guesses as to what was going on with cannabis and their developing system of medicine. What happened early on in China is obviously different than what developed let's say in the past 500 to 1000 years, up to modern day teaching and practice of TCM. One thing is for sure—the traditional medicine of China is very focused on the use of herbs. So, it's kind of hard to believe that they wouldn't fully explore and put to use what is probably the most powerful herb there is. You may be right that, due to cultural and government influences, there was an avoidance of cannabis as an intoxicant (i.e. they perceived the intoxicating effects as outweighing the medicinal effects). Perhaps that view intensified in more modern times.

I also don't think that the distinction of THC vs. CBD, in ancient times, somehow changes the importance of the plant in those times, whether used with or without the guidance of a practitioner. It's not even clear that, early on, they even had access to CBD plants (sativas) in China. It seems more likely they were high-THC indicas. While THC is psychoactive, it is also medicinal. (Of course, the potency and the dose are super important, which is basically the case with all herbs.) It is well known in our time that both THC and CBD are useful for a variety of ailments and conditions, both alone and in combination.

Regarding U.S. states and medical cannabis, I count 37 states that have legal medical cannabis. That's 74% of U.S. states. As for the federal government, I think it's mainly big pharma and the AMA responsible for suppressing cannabis, exerting their power and influence on the government. I think this goes back to Rockefeller and Carnegie, with their funding of the medical system (incl. pharma) and medical schools in the U.S., and smear campaign against natural medicine.

Anyway... yes, we disagree on some points. But let's leave it there. I'd like to get back to a discussion of the origins of cannabis, sativa vs. indica, and so on. Feel free to continue the China discussion on your thread.

 

[CBDMed]

I think we disagree on some points. We are attempting to look back at ancient China and make some guesses as to what was going on with cannabis and their developing system of medicine. What happened early on in China is obviously different than what developed let's say in the past 500 to 1000 years, up to modern day teaching and practice of TCM. One thing is for sure—the traditional medicine of China is very focused on the use of herbs. So, it's kind of hard to believe that they wouldn't fully explore and put to use what is probably the most powerful herb there is. You may be right that, due to cultural and government influences, there was an avoidance of cannabis as an intoxicant (i.e. they perceived the intoxicating effects as outweighing the medicinal effects). Perhaps that view intensified in more modern times.

I also don't think that the distinction of THC vs. CBD, in ancient times, somehow changes the importance of the plant in those times, whether used with or without the guidance of a practitioner. It's not even clear that, early on, they even had access to CBD plants (sativas) in China. It seems more likely they were high-THC indicas. While THC is psychoactive, it is also medicinal. (Of course, the potency and the dose are super important, which is basically the case with all herbs.) It is well known in our time that both THC and CBD are useful for a variety of ailments and conditions, both alone and in combination.

Regarding U.S. states and medical cannabis, I count 37 states that have legal medical cannabis. That's 74% of U.S. states. As for the federal government, I think it's mainly big pharma and the AMA responsible for suppressing cannabis, exerting their power and influence on the government. I think this goes back to Rockefeller and Carnegie, with their funding of the medical system (incl. pharma) and medical schools in the U.S., and smear campaign against natural medicine.

Anyway... yes, we disagree on some points. But let's leave it there. I'd like to get back to a discussion of the origins of cannabis, sativa vs. indica, and so on. Feel free to continue the China discussion on your thread.

EDIT: I am 100% fine with that. I posted the Chinese medical parts on my thread, and at first I only posted the parts on your thread that pertained to taxonomy of cannabis, since that seems to be more your interest.
The. You wanted to discuss the article more, and challenged my statement, so I just responded in amistad.
But if you prefer to focus more on the origins of cannabis (and Indica versus sativa etc.) on your thread, I am totally fine with that. I am learning lots of good things, and I'm enjoying the discussion. Already I learned many good things about phenos!!
And I am looking forward to putting this knowledge into action. So thank you.

 

[cbdhemp808]

EDIT: I am 100% fine with that. I posted the Chinese medical parts on my thread, and at first I only posted the parts on your thread that pertained to taxonomy of cannabis, since that seems to be more your interest.
The. You wanted to discuss the article more, and challenged my statement, so I just responded in amistad.
But if you prefer to focus more on the origins of cannabis (and Indica versus sativa etc.) on your thread, I am totally fine with that. I am learning lots of good things, and I'm enjoying the discussion. Already I learned many good things about phenos!!
And I am looking forward to putting this knowledge into action. So thank you.

Sorry, it was late last night (wee hours) and I failed to include...

And thank you very much for your input and for spurring debate! It's one thing I love about this forum, when we bring our unique perspectives and knowledge to a discussion, and then new information gets flushed out.

For one thing (and I think there are others), your input on the use of cannabis in Chinese medicine lead me to this very cool interview of John McPartland, which I included parts of in this post, and the semi-crazy revelation (for me) that Cannabis sativa subspecies indica var. indica is what we are currently calling "sativa". This is the scientific confirmation of what I was beginning to understand regarding the original landrace and wild sativas vs. what we call a sativa in modern times (which is the result of cross breeding with indica). Take for example one landrace that has come up in recent discussions, Thai sativa—I realized the THC potency was achieved by crossbreeding with indica. So, "landrace" does not mean pure sativa or pure indica.

Then, the McPartland info lead me to the Max Planck and Chinese Academy study of 2019 (my post here), with the stunning info (for me) that cannabis "evolved about 28 million years ago on the eastern Tibetan Plateau". So there's the epicenter right there! East Asia, very high elevation. (The Tibetan Plateau avg. elevation is 16,000 ft.!!) If true, that's very convincing evidence that indica types were the first cannabis. The study also uncovers tantalizing info on the earliest known use of THC cannabis based on physical evidence, with findings regarding ritual use, lack of CBD, the impact of elevation on potency, etc.

[I just found the article and study, also in 2019, that suggests the Tibetan Plateau origin! HERE and HERE. McPartland is the lead author.]

I will try to unpack this all more, going forward, with the discussion of what it really means to be 100% sativa or 100% indica.

 

[cbdhemp808]

The possible epicenter of cannabis ("center of origin"), eastern Tibetan Plateau, near Qinghai Lake, elevation 10,500 ft., according to the 2019 study by McPartland, Hegman, and Long. (Review | Study). Also showing the location of Jirzankal Cemetery (ca. 500 BCE) near the border of Tajikistan, elevation 9,800 ft, which is the location of the 2019 study, The origins of cannabis smoking: Chemical residue evidence from the first millennium BCE in the Pamirs. (Review | Study).

Map data © 2024 Google, TMap Mobility

 

[CBDMed]

Crazy. Cannabis grew up here???
But today it likes 78F???

 

[CBDMed]

You know this looks nothing like the inside of my SIP bucket!!