Marijuana more potent than ever

Marijuana is more potent than at any time since scientific analysis of the drug began in the 1970s, according to a report from the University of Mississippi’s Potency Monitoring Project. The average amount of THC in marijuana, the primary psychoactive ingredient in the drug, was tested at 9.6% --more than double the potency of marijuana in 1983.

The highest concentration of THC found in a single sample was 37.2%.

Since 1975, the group, which is funded through the National Institute on Drug Abuse, has analyzed and compiled data on nearly 63,000 cannabis samples, mostly seized in drug arrests, in 48 states.

"The increases in marijuana potency are of concern since they increase the likelihood of acute toxicity, including mental impairment," Dr. Nora Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, says in a news release. "Particularly worrisome is the possibility that the more potent THC might be more effective at triggering the changes in the brain that can lead to addiction; however, more research is needed to establish this link between higher THC potency and higher addiction risk."

--Janet Cromley

Photo: Robert Durrell / Los Angeles Times

Comments

[none]

I hate it when people make such dumb statements like that.
So it's more potent, that just means people don't need as much to get the same amount of thc, it's not like they couldn't get just as much by using more less potent marijuana.
Also more potent marijuana would generally cost more...
It's quite funny hearing about toxicity and addiction for a drug that is far less harmful in both cases than alcohol, which no one seems to have a problem with.

[Matt Smith]

I wonder if this increased potency also carries with it increased risks to human health.

[Donja]

I think someone might get a little too high! LOL

[Wow Misiformation!]

This is a big heap of misinformation! Also if the potency went up, it would be a better thing as it would cause people to smoke less. Therefore reducing the already "harmful" effects of smoking. It is well known that cannabinoids help kill aging lung cells therefore smoking cannabis protects to a degree from lung cancer.

-----------

"The increases in marijuana potency are of concern since they increase the likelihood of acute toxicity, including mental impairment," Dr. Nora Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, says in a news release. "Particularly worrisome is the possibility that the more potent THC might be more effective at triggering the changes in the brain that can lead to addiction; however, more research is needed to establish this link between higher THC potency and higher addiction risk."

Marijuana is responsible for neurogenesis, the creation of new brain cells. Caffeine, the DRUG in coffee, chocolate, tea, and energy drinks have a greater addiction potential than cannabis. Yes, the drink you can not start the day without has greater withdrawl symptoms then Marijuana, the drug the government told you that you will see monsters on. Cannabis does not have physical addiction potential, Alcohol does. Anything has addiction potential if you feel you like it enough.

--------------------------

The U.S. Govt also said that some depressed teenagers have smoked pot. Even though EVERYBODY knows that it is a rough period in time adjusting and learning about life. I can show a correlation similar to the way the govt did. Everybody that has done Heroin has drank water before that time.

-----------
"But there is no data showing that a higher potency in marijuana leads to more addiction, Earleywine said, and marijuana's withdrawal symptoms are mild, at most. "Mild irritability, craving for marijuana and decreased appetite - I mean those are laughable when you talk about withdrawal from a drug. Caffeine is worse." "

Quoted from International Herald Tribune( http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/12/america/pot.php)

Exactly..

[Dude]

From the article:

>>>
[...] however, more research is needed to establish this link between higher THC potency and higher addiction risk.
<<<

Of course, none of this research is even *possible* since the plant has been legally classified as a Schedule 1 drug, meaning the current government deems it as dangerous as heroin, although our founding father George Washington smoked it (not heroin).

By the way, how would you determine that its potency has changed? I've been smoking for over 40 years and I haven't noticed any difference. Sure, my statement is anecdotal, but where is their evidence? Where are their numbers?

Dude. We're at war. Of course they'll lie in their propaganda.

[jsknow]

You can only get just so high on pot and no one in history has ever died from a pot overdose. More potent pot means those that smoke it, smoke less... less smoke is better than more smoke. PROHIBITION never works it just CAUSES CRIME & VIOLENCE. The USA spends $69 billion a year on the drug war, builds 900 new prison beds and hires 150 more correction officers every two weeks, arrests someone on a drug charge every 17 seconds, jails more people than any nation and has killed over 100,000 citizens in the drug war. In 1914 when there were NO PROHIBITED DRUGS 1.3% of our population was addicted to drugs, TODAY 1.3% of our population is STILL ADDICTED TO DRUGS BUT THERE’S WAY MORE CRIME AND VIOLENCE BECAUSE OF THE HUGE PROFITS PROHIBITION GENERATES. DRUGS TODAY ARE ALSO MORE POTENT, MORE READILY AVAILABLE AND LESS EXPENSIVE THAN THEY WERE IN THE EARLY 70’S WHEN RICHARD NIXON STARTED THE WAR ON DRUGS. The only way to control drugs is to REGULATE THEM AND END THE PROFITS AVAILABLE TO CRIMINALS just like ending alcohol prohibition did. There’s only been one drug success story in history, tobacco, BY FAR THE MOST DEADLY and one of the MOST ADDICTIVE drugs. Almost half the users quit because of REGULATION, ACCURATE INFORMATION AND MEDICAL TREATMENT. No one went to jail and no one got killed. But what about the kids?... PROHIBITED DRUGS ARE WAY EASIER FOR KIDS TO GET THAN REGULATED DRUGS!
JOIN THE EMAIL LIST AND WATCH THE VIDEOS ON THIS WEBSITE:
Internet Explorer: http://jsknow.angelfire.com/home
Other Browsers: http://jsknow.angelfire.com/index.html

[dude]

does this mean I am going to need bigger bags of doritos?

[Gary]

Today's cannabis is better quality then ever.More potency is good.it's cleaner, safer and more affective,why is this news benig reported as a negative one.If peple have stigma of smoking it try volcano where u are able to get the pure thc whitout the smoke or edibles.Stop lying to us it will only back fire to your face(us goverment).

[Shane Hubbard]

I agree with the guy/women who basically said what is the big deal with more potent marijuana and who also mentioned how "mary jane" is way less harmful than alcohol. I'm actually doing a paper on how we should legalize marijuana and make alcohol iilegal. Seeing that the history of making alcohol illegal hasn't stood the test of time, it is very unlikely but why not try. Maybe if we call it a trade off people will think its a "fair" compromise.

[Sparky]

Actually, it's not more potent. There's just less low-quality imported stuff that's full of stems and seeds. So, the AVERAGE potency has increased.

There's always been high potency marijuana, and much more potent hash has been around for thousands of years.

But the increase in average potency is a direct result of enforcement efforts that have resulted in more plentiful high-quality, domestic marijuana. Good job Uncle Sam!

[dan]

More potent marijuana would actually mean fewer health risks because less combusted plant material would be ingested for the same effects. Also remember that commercial grade hash available during the 1970's caries roughly the same potency of well grown marijuana at the present.

[Wilbur Varela]

The government needs the drug war because it creates money for law enforcement. The power to seize vehicles, money and property is a godsend to small town american police. They have lied for fifty years, so why should anyone believe a word they say? Alcohol and cigarettes kill millions each year, and yet they are legal. What a joke. Hypocrites and fascists rule.

[John Walters]

So does hard liquor pose more of a threat than beer? Thats pretty much what theyre implying. Just another excuse to keep marijuana illegal, and having millions more dying from alcohol and tobacco related incidents.

[aross]

i think its time to go get high

[Patricia]

If you want to regulate the potency, then make it legal, so that potency standards can be enforced.

It's really that simple. Works with beer, wine and hard liquor.

Otherwise, quit complaining.

Unregulated marijuana potency is a logical and inevitable consequence of marijuana prohibition.

If you support marijuana prohibition, then you should accept the inevitable consequences of your choice with some amount of grace.

[Patricia]

You can choose to regulate the potency or you can choose to ban it entirely.

It's magical thinking to believe you can do both at once.

Once you ban a substance entirely, the potency is obviously going to be unregulatable by law.

It's a pity that our drug policy runs according to magical thinking.

It's like the we think the elves are going to make all the pot disappear one day.

Not going to happen.

If you want to gain the power to regulate the potency, there's no option but to legalize marijuana.

[newageblues]

marijuana prohibition? Nothing more than blatantly hypocritical alcohol supremacist bigotry, that no one even bothers to defend anymore, though plenty of them still want it enforced. If you want people to respect the law, then don't pass laws that are a piece of junk.

[me]

LA Times, don't you think using federal research regarding marijuana may be bias, also the fact that the FDA offers a pill with synthetic marijuana that is 100% THC. Marijuana that you call 'potent' only contains 20-30%.

[mke jones]

One agree all else disagree. Isnt this a democracy? why are the feds busting voter approved state legislation in medical marijuana cases? Isnt this a democracy? Use the money to feed the poor or buy the aids vaccine. Or hell rebuild New Orleans. California violent crimes have dipped for 3 years straight, there is no way it has anything to do with the pot dispensaries or the decriminalization of the herb. DE-crim-in-nal-ize IT the lowest bidder will advertise it. Blue Dreams!!

[koby]

Potent pot certainly nothing to be concerned about. Indeed, saying that potent pot is reason for keeping marijuana illegal is akin to saying that alcohol should be banned because gin has higher alcohol content than beer. It makes no sense. The pharmacological affects of consuming 1 "chemically supercharged" joint, as various US attorneys like to say, versus x number of "dad's joints" would be no different if the amount of THC consumed is the same. As for consumption, just as people do not drink the same volume of gin as beer, the higher the THC level in pot the less people consume. Hence, ironically more potent pot, a been pointed out by a whole host of posters, may be a welcome development. After all, one of the most prominent health effect related to marijuana, if not the most, is that it is usually smoked. The more potent the pot, the less people have to smoke to achieve the same high. Lester Grinspoon of Harvard Medical School concurs, so does Mitch Earleywine of the University of Southern California and so does UCLA's Mark Kleiman.

Comparing marijuana strength through the years is "absurd," according to Lester Grinspoon, an emeritus professor at Harvard Medical School , who consults patients, many of them elderly, on using marijuana to relieve pain and nausea. "The whole issue on potency is a red herring," he said. "The more potent the pot, the less you use."Grinspoon said that studies have shown -- and his patients' experiences confirm -- that marijuana users smoke until they feel high -- or, as he prefers to say, "achieve symptom relief," -- and then stop, whether it took two hits or an entire joint. In this regard, today's higher-potency pot is no more "dangerous" than the bunk weed of yesteryear, he said.

unlike the speculative claims of increased danger, peer-reviewed scientific data show that higher potency marijuana reduces health risks. Just as with alcohol, people who smoke marijuana generally consume until they reach the desired effect, then stop. So people who smoke more potent marijuana smoke less - the same way most drinkers consume a smaller amount of vodka than they would of beer - and incur less chance of smoking-related damage to their lungs.

The original ONDCP "Facts" correspond with estimates from UCLA professor Mark Kleiman that marijuana has roughly tripled in potency. Kleiman also notes that there is no evidence at all that marijuana is getting kids more stoned than it used to. Writing on his own blog, Kleiman cites the respected annual University of Michigan study that asks respondents about levels of intoxication. Writes Kleiman: "The line for marijuana is flat as a pancake. Kids who get stoned today aren't getting any more stoned than their parents were. That ought to be the end of the argument." Kleiman points out that the average joint is now half its former size, so even if kids are smoking more powerful pot, they are smoking less of it. " 'Not your father's pot' is a great way to convince [boomer parents] to ignore their own experience, personal orvicarious, and believe what they are told to believe."

That said, if potency is the concern, then it should be legalized. The only way to regulate the potency of pot is to legalize it. Moreover, so long as the drug is illegal, producers will seek to increase potency. The higher the potency the smaller the package the smaller the package the less likely they will get caught.

Finally, the distinction between potent pot and your dad's marijuana is too clever by half. After all, it begs the following question. If today's marijuana is truly different in kind from "dads marijuana", would it be ok to legalize "dad's marijuana", i.e., low potency pot?

[kachina]

Marijuanna is not addictive. I wish people would get over that. As posted previously alcohol is far worse.

[Dr Spaceman]

I am only in favor of responsible medical use and the right for the states to decide if they want to allow it. It would seem to me that if it is stronger then you would have to injest less...isn't that a good thing (for a medicine)?

BK

"I'm up to my ears in these things"

[stacey]

i think that if we work with it and not against it, we could come up with a combination that is the right highness for us all as inderviduals, givin you choose to smoke it... i'd choose 3 cones a session over 15 any day... the chamicals should be looked over, i'd rather not go insain due to the wrong chamicals used... its natural imbrace it (know your limits)

[mikeybongton]

wow, i went on this site thinking, its a mainstream website, people are gonna be hating on pot, i was ready to throw down some technical terms and school a whole bunch of noobs,lol. but yall keepin it real.

[travis]

We love our weed out here on the west coast, which is why we legalized medical use of it, and decriminalized it for everyone else. The higher the potency the better it is, as far I'm concerned. One day it will be fully legalized out here, one day soon. At that point I hope we don't get stupid and try to make the weed crappy by lessening its potency

[newageblues]

theses comments are sure an alcohol supremacist free zone. but talk about a cheap thrill. I see my name highlighted, but not my quote! Use my name, use my quote! The quote actually used is amazing though, showing quite vividly how prohibition is driving the increase in potency. So if you think that increase is a problem- the mirror, please.
Legalize, regulate, reasonably tax commercial sales, help unite the country ("united states"- ha, ha) being bitterly divided and weakened by this stupidest of wars. Well, I guess there's a lot of competition for that title, but it's a contender, especially since it's gone on for 70 years and counting.
mikeybongton: it's not just this website, believe me. If you know of mainstream websites where alcohol supremacists flourish, let us know about it. We'll make them think about what they're saying.

[newageblues]

wish you would highlight my claim that no one bothers to defend alcohol supremacism anymore, maybe it would flush one of those rascals out of hiding.

[newageblues]

Dr. Nora Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, says in a news release that higher potency means more danger of "acute toxicity". Acute toxicity IS a dead serious issue when the drug in question is alcohol. You can die of an overdose, or devastate your fetus, or kill innocent people because it shortcircuits your brain, that's how toxic ALCOHOL is. There's a word for the way NIDA is acting- demagogues.

[bd]

So what does this have to do with the commoners who follow the law? We're not movie stars, and we are not rich enough to afford to buy this illegal drug. Wake me up when I can buy some marijuana in the liquor store with my everclear and tobacco cigarettes.

[martin weiss]

Legal hemp would also replace carcinogenic petro-diesel as bio-diesel. After the oil is extracted, the fiber would replace wood from national forests being cut for toilet paper, preserving our environment.
The plant grows "like a weed" on marginal soils and never needs replanting.
Would they rather send money to sponsors of terrorism or grow legal hemp?
Ending the drug prohibition would end murderous turf wars and generate tax revenue, too, not to mention literally millions of Americans now in prison for non-violent pot crime returning to social productivity and not costing thirty thousand each per year to incarcerate.
In all recorded history, no one has ever overdosed on pot, or become addicted. This is so petty and unimportant. We are waging war while the dealers and alcohol lobby is set on keeping pot illegal. The salmon run is dying, there is mercury in our air and water, and pot is way down the list of priorities, but law enforcement is chasing pot smokers! Do I detect a hidden agenda? Cause their actions make no sense otherwise.
There are many reasons to legalize and innocent youth are imprisoned, yet pot is still being called toxic. Compared to alcohol, pot is like aspirin.

[thomas demitrious]

Why do you reprint this propaganda?

Marijuana should be legal. Alcohol should not.