Hacker News Reader

>THC is potentiated by other cannabinoids

I have never seen any reliable evidence for this. CBD, the second most prevalent cannabinoid, acts as a negative allosteric modulator at CB2. There's a weak case that this may decrease cannabis-associated anxiety (because the synthetic JWH-018 was a strong CB2 ligand and caused severe anxiety). CBD is at high doses a DRD2 partial antagonist (antipsychotic effect), but it's very unlikely to reach this level with recreational use. The third-most common cannabinoid is THCV, which acts as an antagonist at the cannabinoid receptors. Beta-caryophyllene, not a cannabinoid, is a very low potency CB2 agonist; it is present in cannabis but also in rosemary, oregano and basil, herbs widely known for their pernicious addictive properties.

THC is a potent CB1 and CB2 partial agonist. It is predominantly responsible for the effects of cannabis. The minor cannabinoids appear, if anything, to reduce the effect of THC.

>I think a lot of people agree that cannabis offers a very favorable ratio of drawbacks and benefits compared to other drugs, including alcohol. Will this still be the case as new formulations are developed?

My only real concern is that dab pens seem to be to joints what smartphones were to the laptop. You used to have to think about what you were doing for a few minutes before inhaling.

Anecdotally speaking I definitely feel an effect by combining multiple minor cannabinoids. It’s not necessarily more potent per se but you get the benefit of having multiple effects and areas of effect (feeling a full head buzz, forehead only buzz, chest buzz, etc) at once.

I think what people should be more concerned about is the race to find the most potent cannabinoids possible. AFAIK THCp and HHCp hold the crown currently and they’re ~20-30 times more potent than THC (exact experienced potency is different for everyone). While you can buy it straight from a lab or bulk marketplace most products that hit store shelves only contain 2.5-5% because manufacturers are concerned about negative publicity and triggering panic attacks.

Note on B-Caryophylline, it ONLY binds with CB2 and apparently has no intoxicant effects via CB1, yet is strongly correlated with anti-inflammatory effects

There are already some extremely potent products on the market, and overuse is easy and can cause some really gnarly side effects.

I always recommend people stick with flower and home made edibles for safety sake. I dabbled in the stronger stuff, and it's nothing like how weed should feel. Insanely anxiety inducing.

I think that what works for one person doesn't always work for the other, and people try to project their experience as "this is what will happen to you."

Most of people's worst experiences I've been witness to have been with homemade edibles.

If you're making firecrackers or just throwing rough weed into butter, it can be rough. It's a drug, and you should partake safely. Weigh the flower, estimate the percentage of that weight that's THC (20% is usually safe), decarb it, infuse in a fat, and dose carefully and safely, estimating no more than 5 mg THC max for the first attempt, and giving at least 2 full hours (or preferably another day) before trying more.

Edibles are a lot more work and deliberation, and can give much more varied experiences due to digestion and personal metabolism (there are suggestions of enzyme differences that can make a major difference too). I never suggest it without a full rundown full of details and warnings. I only bring it up because I can't in good conscience simply recommend smoking anything to somebody who might care about their lung health.

That said, I've seen and had some really bad experiences on some badly-dosed edibles, but it doesn't compare to the worst I've seen messing around with real concentrates. Overdoses aside, I've had friends graduate from flower to edibles to tinctures to BHOs and just end up imbibing hundreds of milligrams of THC a day, and the results are often chronic anxiety, hyperemesis, inability to sleep, paranoia, and intense withdrawal when you quit. People who say "it's just a plant, it's harmless" haven't seen the effects of extreme abuse, and that's coming from somebody who generally likes using cannabis.

>estimate the percentage of that weight that's THC (20% is usually safe)

In my state, every package of THC product must contain a label with test results for that batch, including percentage of THC. There are rumors from internet folk from other states saying test cheating is rampant, but I've never experienced an unexpectedly hot or weak batch.

I have to estimate because I get all mine homegrown from friends and family.

This points to needing _more_ regulation, not less. Potency could be mandated with clear warnings/notices at the point of purchase (like alcohol). The FDA (or whatever governing body) could also limit the potency.

The current status quo is that no one knows what they are getting until it's used, at which point its too late. If you could know exactly what you are getting (plus the means to seek help without fear of legal repercussions), then this would be a non-issue.

You could also have made a similar case with alcohol, but at some point the potency makes the product worse. For example, how many people do you see drinking everclear?

Some bud tenders I've spoke to say that the ~30% you can find now is basically the max feasible. A high potency weed just means that you have to inhale less burning plant matter. Most adult use just involves way fewer hits than someone would have in the 70s. You can also find much lower potency strains for cheap. I imagine this is state by state though.

Everclear has existed forever, and even dumb college kids understand drinking an entire bottle would be stupid. We still haven't had teens or adults dying from cannabis overdose, even though you can go find stupid videos of people with nothing better to do smoking a whole gram of extract in a couple minutes. There has been at least one infant dying from cannabis exposure though. In babies it seems it can depress breathing to the point of suffocation.

After searching, I assume you're talking about this infant death?

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/kids-health/doctors-debate-wh...

That doesn't seem clear cut enough to say "There has been at least one infant dying from cannabis exposure". I'm not saying there's no danger, it's just that I'm pro-legalization so that the health effects can be studied, and I'm interested in hearing about this sort of thing. It is a good reminder to make sure infants can't access things they shouldn't.

It's not really the THC percentage I'm concerned about, it's the potential for other added chemicals which could potentiate the THC.

There seems to be a better understanding that CBD is favorable and a growing understanding of the other cannibinoids. I wouldn't be surprised if the greatest risk for bad selective over-breeding for THC content would have more been during the illegal periods with less legal science available and a lot more concentration of breeding among fewer breeders with unbalanced incentives of an illegal market.

A legal market is, in theory at least, going to have much more opportunities to do science out in the open, more opportunities to track breeding experiments and not just over-select one direction or another, more available research not just on the one notable desirable ingredient, but the larger ecology of them.