• CD Moderators: someguyontheinternet
  • Cannabis Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules

[MEGA] Indica vs. Sativa

negrogesic said:
So, the presence of CBD does mediate some of the activity of THC (at least, in marijuana), and could explain the difference between strains....
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that study administered doses of up to 10mg/kg THC and 50mg/kg CBD to mice.

When you smoke reefer, you might be ingesting 10mg of THC tops during a heavy smoke session.

In a 75 kg human, that's .13 mg/kg, almost 100x less than the amounts administered to the mice.

My guess is that the pharmacological interactions between THC and CBD are not significant enough at these levels.

Indica v Sativa = placebo effect.
 
Then again, we are no mice. The modulatory effects of CBD were described elsewhere, too. For example:

Abstract

The nonpsychoactive plant cannabinoid, (-)-cannabidiol, modulates in vivo responses to delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol. We have found that cannabidiol can also interact with cannabinoid CB1 receptor agonists in the mouse vas deferens, a tissue in which prejunctional cannabinoid CB1 receptors mediate inhibition of electrically evoked contractions by suppressing noradrenaline and/or ATP release. Cannabidiol (0.316–10 µM) attenuated the ability of R-(+)-WIN55212 to inhibit contractions in a concentration-related, surmountable manner with a KB value (120.3 nM) well below its reported cannabinoid receptor CB1/CB2 Ki values. Cannabidiol (10 µM) also antagonized CP55940 (KB =34 nM) and DAMGO (KB = 5.6 AM) and attenuated contractile responses to noradrenaline, phenylephrine and methoxamine but not to beta,gamma-methyleneadenosine 5'-triphosphate. At 3.16–10 µM, it increased the amplitude of evoked contractions, probably by enhancing contractile neurotransmitter release. We conclude that cannabidiol antagonizes R-(+)-WIN55212 and CP55940 by acting at prejunctional sites that are unlikely to be cannabinoid CB1 or CB2 receptors.
Click to expand...
Ref: Eur J Pharmacol 2002, 456, p.99

Peace! Murphy

P.S. Is the level of dicsussion now high enough for ADD? ... :/
 
I strongly recommend the "Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology, Vol. 168: Cannabinoids" as a reading. Very nice source on the whole topic!!!
 
Seriously, is the info stated in this documentary to be taken seriously? How reliable in terms of scientific facts, are the statements?

For one thing, this could explain to me, why some of the synthetic cannabinoids seem to induce more frequently panic than for example 'simple' THC, speaking in particular about the AAI-series. The modulatory action of CBD (or maybe another of the natural products) is just missing with some of those compounds. Just pure agonists (or am I missing something?) seem to be worse in terms of the over-all quality of the high.

Again: Can we take this docu for granted?

One thing that I didn't understood (and what actually suspicious): What do their mean with "cannabanoid" (sic!) all the time? CBD?

Who is this doctor that is overseeing the experiment? Anybody known?

Peace! Murphy
 
wungchow said:
^To add...you don't hear tobacco smokers comparing the different "highs" of different brands of smokes. True, there are many different flavors and varieties of tobacco, but they all deliver nicotine, which is what you're after.
Click to expand...

You are kidding?

Cigars, pipe tobacco, smokeless tobacco (snuff, swedish 'snus', quids), filter cigarettes, self-rolled, all have different characteristics in the "high", depending on several factors, and smokeless tobacco does not do some of the things tobacco smoke usually do which contributes to the "high". Add to this the possible different qualities of the material, and you've got a wide variety of "highs".
 
For one thing, this could explain to me, why some of the synthetic cannabinoids seem to induce more frequently panic than for example 'simple' THC, speaking in particular about the AAI-series. The modulatory action of CBD (or maybe another of the natural products) is just missing with some of those compounds. Just pure agonists (or am I missing something?) seem to be worse in terms of the over-all quality of the high.
Click to expand...

Are they more prone to panic attacks? I just thought it was because they seem to vary very widely in individual effects, and people often take too much of it.

But I think that the CBD can change the high with differing amount. As Murphy said, we are not mice. From most of what I've read the ED50 and LD50 from mice to humans is a lot different in terms of mg/kg, with mice being a lot higher. You have to remember that they have much higher metabolisms than humans which will affect the dosages needed and the extrapolations we can draw from that.
 
I was given THC pills from a Doctors girlfriend once. The Doctor proscribed them to an A.I.D.S patient who died and somehow she got hold of the scipt. I didn't know at the time such a thing existed. I have to say it was the best MJ high I ever had, absolutely no paranoia and the shit lasted strong for hours. I wish I knew more doctors girlfriends.

:)Dutch
 
Sturnam said:
Are they more prone to panic attacks? I just thought it was because they seem to vary very widely in individual effects, and people often take too much of it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you've got a point. It was just my subjective impression that the synthetics are a bit more problematic but that is of course biased due to then difficult measuring out of such small quantities.
 
i just find indica is more of a 'couch lock' buzz, and sativa on the other hand is a bit more social, and leaves you with more energy...
 
wungchow said:
THC is really the only psychoactive compound in marijuana.

Bored stoners are insistent on all this weed snobbery with different kinds of "BUBBLE KUSH x BLACK WIDOW x STRAWBERRY DIESEL COUGH" but it really comes down to one single psychoactive ingredient.

CBD and CBN are the two other cannabinoids present in significant concentrations, and they are not psychoactive.

Case in point: Smoke some Spice Gold (which has (1) active ingredient) and tell me it isn't more or less exactly like weed.
Click to expand...


i beg to differ

while THC main be the main psychoactive compound in marijuana, it definitely isnt the only one

cbn, while not as psychoactive as thc is still some what psychoactive

and the levels of thcv in the plant, while it may not be psychoactive, is definitely potentiants thc
 
CBN and CBD are only active in a synergistic way with THC.
Synergistic activity is activity anyway. Let the non-believers say what they wish, different mushroom species have different profiles for activity also which to me is more of a mystery than the differences between different strains of weed.
 
Have CBN and D been tested seperately though? They may not be active as CB1 ligands, but seem sedative on their own.
 
Aren't there something like over 60 cannabinoids in marijuana, those are all chemicals unique to the plant in nature right?

I have my doubts that the synergistic properties of all of those with each-other have been studied enough to be fully known at this point in time. I have read there are 200 to 400 other chemical ingredients in cannabis besides the cannabinoids too, which might account for something.

Marijuana truly is a polydrug by itself. I'm sure most people do less disparate chemical substances at once when they're doing even highly cut heroin or cocaine.
 
Indica has a more 'up' feel to it owing to its higher percentage of 4-(n)-propyl thc.
Sativa has a more 'down' feel to it owing to its higher percentage of 4-(n)-pentyl thc.
 
an excerpt from the lycaeum

Tetrahydrocannabivarin - THCV is the propyl homologue of THC. In the aromatic ring the usual five-carbon pentyl is replaced by a short three-carbon propyl chain. The propyl cannabinoids have so far been found in some varieties originating from Southeast and Central Asia and parts of Africa. What are considered some very potent marijuana varieties contain propyl cannabinoids. In one study, THCV made up to 48.23 percent (Afghanistan strain) and 53.69 percent (South Africa) of the cannabinoids found (136). We've seen no reports on its activity in humans. From animal studies it appears to be much faster in onset and quicker to dissipate than THC (181). It may be the constituent of one- or two-toke grass, but its activity appears to be somewhat less than that of THC.

apparently landrace marijuana has alot of this stuff in it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top