Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Congress just voted to legalize hemp

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 68 posts

Re: Congress just voted to legalize hemp

#11

Post by qwerty456127 »

gammateam wrote: post #5

The regulated psychoactive cannabis is way too strong for me. As long as its treated differently in its own licensing regime and establishments I think some form of education should accompany it, for consumers. Given generations of bad information. Its come up with others here in California, the THC products are REALLY strong and offputting for us casuals. The hybrids have potential

> The regulated psychoactive cannabis is way too strong for me.

Why not just smoke a sufficiently small particle then?

Re: Congress just voted to legalize hemp

#12

Post by kylek »

elhudy wrote: post #9
kylek wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s actually way, wayyy more nuanced than that unfortunately. THC is only one of a plethora of components at play (it’s been bred for higher and higher THC content for decades, mostly ignoring the other, more medicinal parts). Only recently have I started seeing products in dispensaries with cannabinoid/terpenoid profiles to give a more accurate picture of the effects, I think we’re going to start seeing more produc…

I have to ask: is terpene an actual scientifically defined word? I've only ever heard stoners use it to describe different marijuana strain's scents. Googling it yields nothing but pot-related results. How have I made it through so many years of studying plethoras of high level scientific subjects and am just now hearing this word? Now on HN nonetheless...

IANA (botanist, chemist?), but terpenoids are in most plants, e.g. pinene is abundant in pine trees, responsible for their smell, and happens to modulate cannabis’s subjective effects in very interesting ways.

A blend good for sleep might have a good amount of THC and CBN (and maybe some CBD) plus the mycrene and beta-caryophyllene terpenes (associated with the more sedating strains).

Indica/sativa don’t really mean anything, strains are mostly just variations of terpenes.

Re: Congress just voted to legalize hemp

#13

Post by pizza »

elhudy wrote: post #9
kylek wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s actually way, wayyy more nuanced than that unfortunately. THC is only one of a plethora of components at play (it’s been bred for higher and higher THC content for decades, mostly ignoring the other, more medicinal parts). Only recently have I started seeing products in dispensaries with cannabinoid/terpenoid profiles to give a more accurate picture of the effects, I think we’re going to start seeing more produc…

I have to ask: is terpene an actual scientifically defined word? I've only ever heard stoners use it to describe different marijuana strain's scents. Googling it yields nothing but pot-related results. How have I made it through so many years of studying plethoras of high level scientific subjects and am just now hearing this word? Now on HN nonetheless...

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terpene and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terpenoid

Re: Congress just voted to legalize hemp

#14

Post by nugga »

qwerty456127 wrote: post #11
gammateam wrote: post #5

The regulated psychoactive cannabis is way too strong for me. As long as its treated differently in its own licensing regime and establishments I think some form of education should accompany it, for consumers. Given generations of bad information. Its come up with others here in California, the THC products are REALLY strong and offputting for us casuals. The hybrids have potential

> The regulated psychoactive cannabis is way too strong for me. Why not just smoke a sufficiently small particle then?

I can't believe you got downvoted for basically suggesting to people who think 50% ABV whiskey is too strong to drink shots of it, mix it down with something or just drink beer.

Besides, it's leaving out a lot to say that today's weed is so strong and more so than what hippies had in the 70s. Surely cannabis strains were bred and cultivated back in the day and people with access did get the good stuff as opposed to some seedy mexican brick weed with stems and leaves in it?

If the stuff now is 20% thc and the garbage in the 70s you remember having was 5% just smoke a quarter instead, no big deal. Scales are not illegal nor expensive.

And if you desire a better THC:CBD ratio you only have to choose better, thanks to a regulated market.

Re: Congress just voted to legalize hemp

#15

Post by redwood »

14 wrote: post #6

What a disconnect from the population. State after state legalizing marijuana and congress moves to legalize hemp. At least at the state level people are being left alone to their own bidding.

Interestingly this will make it harder to grow high quality outdoor and even indoor (pollination risk rising; one reason it became relatively easy to grow high-quality outdoor is it the government ensured there were no males in vicinity!)

Re: Congress just voted to legalize hemp

#16

Post by Dowwie »

There is already a wide variety of hemp strains and they are used for a variety of applications. Taller strains are for fiber. Shorter, flowering strains are used for CBD. There's a really wide range of applications for hemp but I'm not sure how many are economically viable. Processing requires water, energy, chemicals, etc.

This is an exciting time for discovery.

Re: Congress just voted to legalize hemp

#17

Post by pessimizer »

gammateam wrote: post #5

The regulated psychoactive cannabis is way too strong for me. As long as its treated differently in its own licensing regime and establishments I think some form of education should accompany it, for consumers. Given generations of bad information. Its come up with others here in California, the THC products are REALLY strong and offputting for us casuals. The hybrids have potential

I would enjoy smoking the terrible pot we smoked 30 years ago, which got you very very high but took a good hour of smoking to do it, but I'm not sure my lungs would. It only seems good for people who like the process of smoking (which I probably do.) If you like the process of eating, you can find something else to eat after taking a bite of your edible. If you enjoyed the communal circle of playful discussion and pipe management, I'd advise playing a board game, or some other sort of verbal parlor game.

Re: Congress just voted to legalize hemp

#18

Post by pessimizer »

nugga wrote: post #14
qwerty456127 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The regulated psychoactive cannabis is way too strong for me. Why not just smoke a sufficiently small particle then?

I can't believe you got downvoted for basically suggesting to people who think 50% ABV whiskey is too strong to drink shots of it, mix it down with something or just drink beer. Besides, it's leaving out a lot to say that today's weed is so strong and more so than what hippies had in the 70s. Surely cannabis strains were bred and cultivated back in the day and people with access did get the good stuff as opposed to s…

> Surely cannabis strains were bred and cultivated back in the day and people with access did get the good stuff as opposed to some seedy mexican brick weed with stems and leaves in it?

No, it was universally worse, because those strains hadn't been bred yet. What you're doing is like assuming that some people in the 60s got to use the "good" computers.

Re: Congress just voted to legalize hemp

#19

Post by dannypgh »

nugga wrote: post #14
qwerty456127 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The regulated psychoactive cannabis is way too strong for me. Why not just smoke a sufficiently small particle then?

I can't believe you got downvoted for basically suggesting to people who think 50% ABV whiskey is too strong to drink shots of it, mix it down with something or just drink beer. Besides, it's leaving out a lot to say that today's weed is so strong and more so than what hippies had in the 70s. Surely cannabis strains were bred and cultivated back in the day and people with access did get the good stuff as opposed to s…

Hashish - extracts - have been with humans for several centuries. I'm told my grandfather (born circa 1895, died circa 1975) expressed confusion that people would smoke "leaves" of the plant (knowing that hash was a thing, having lived in Anatolia).

The fearmongering that it's different "now" tends to ignore this.

Re: Congress just voted to legalize hemp

#20

Post by refurb »

elhudy wrote: post #9
kylek wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s actually way, wayyy more nuanced than that unfortunately. THC is only one of a plethora of components at play (it’s been bred for higher and higher THC content for decades, mostly ignoring the other, more medicinal parts). Only recently have I started seeing products in dispensaries with cannabinoid/terpenoid profiles to give a more accurate picture of the effects, I think we’re going to start seeing more produc…

I have to ask: is terpene an actual scientifically defined word? I've only ever heard stoners use it to describe different marijuana strain's scents. Googling it yields nothing but pot-related results. How have I made it through so many years of studying plethoras of high level scientific subjects and am just now hearing this word? Now on HN nonetheless...

As a chemist, yes, terpenes are actual things. Natural products made up of 5 carbon units called isoprenes!
Post reply on HN