Salutations,
This study actually appeared to validate said USA patent a long while ago:
Too bad our Canuck self-serving politicians rely on brains which prove consistently slow at picking up sufficient processing speed…
Or maybe they’re simply pretending.
Good day, have fun!! 
Their brains are lacking the necessary ingredient.
The same one they want to deny everyone else.
Strange behavior.
99%
Reefer Madness much?
People have been smoking pure hash for thousands of years, but the new “super strength skunk” strains on the streets of the UK will somehow make you psychotic?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2018/02/27/britain-flooded-super-strength-cannabis-could-driving-mental/
Why does everybody hide this shit from me?! Where can i get these seeds? Ha! Ha! 
this is why I just ordered some skunk seeds from Holland! I want IN on this super-weed. 
Salutations,
Bigot anti-cannabic prohibitionism based on story-teller “science” yet to be tested, with its foundations in half-truths and biased views on consumers called “naive”, while jumping from a vague notion of some CBD Ratio (assuming it’s being compared to THC) to an even more ambiguous definition of “potency” - e.g. go figure if it’s supposed to be THC alone…
In other words that deceiving UK article is going back to THC % expressed in absolute values again, just as in my own province not so long ago:
Truth is @ 1 % THC it doesn’t take much CBD at all to ruin the deal completely, not to mention i’d fear my vaporizer-pipe just wouldn’t function correctly anymore - on top of being exposed to an excessive amount of vegetal substrate potentially infused with pesticides and other contaminants.
Anyway non-consumers from UK trying to decide “what’s best” shall systematically translate as improved vilification! As far as i can tell…
Good day, have fun!!
When I once was in a not too nice place, they at least tested my weed for me and told me it was 27%, which I was not too unhappy with.
Seeing in the article that there are strains over 35%, well that’s a bit mental.
Hahaha.
That is the most purely asinine article about cannabis that I have read in quite some time. A truly scurrilous screed, totally devoid of facts.
A flailing, sputtering work of pathetically desperate propaganda.
Albeit, somewhat entertaining.
Hahahaha!
Salutations MicroDoser,
That would imply over 1 third of the flower weight is located in its trichome secretory vesicle, right? Which sounds as THC-centric as it can get, for all purposes!
Personally i’d never support any form of 3rd-party socio-toxic interference leading to more prohibition, though at 35 % THC i see no use except for medical applications and development of new hybrid genetics by advanced cultivators. So, assuming 35 % as the ultimate maximum amount of noble molecules i’d want to try something with some more balance in mind; why not 15 ~ 20 % THC, 3 ~ 15 % CBD (depending on the mission…) and the rest distributed between CBN, terpenes, flavonoïds and more.
My objective would be to cover a vast palette capable of meeting every possible expectations, inclusively please!
Alternately lets take note the zealots just love to juxtapose various disparate things like cannabis vs smoking, THC substance vs “criminal”/“recreative” intoxication, CBD substance vs “medical-and-yet-overtaxed” (cash-cow) speculation, potency vs equilibrium (THC % vs THC/CBD ratio), etc., etc.
Good day, have fun!!
Do not despair, common sense and justice will eventually prevail.
Excerpt from article:
Michael Hiller, the attorney serving as lead counsel to the plaintiffs in the federal lawsuit, said in a statement on Monday evening that his clients plan to appeal the court’s ruling, vowing that “this case will continue to move forward.”
“Resigning the plaintiffs to the petitioning administrative process is tantamount to a death sentence for those patients who need cannabis to live,” Hiller said. “The time has come for the courts to abandon decades-old precedent, notched with obsolete legal technicalities, and catch up with modern science and contemporary principles of constitutional law.”
…
Unbelievable.
All this over a freakin’ plant!
I like it! He got fired for being an anti-cannabis bigot!
“Thanks for the interest in our program,” Jeffcoat wrote. “Unfortunately, we are not recruiting players from the state of Colorado. In the past, players have had trouble passing our drug test. We have made a decision to not take a chance on Student-athletes from your state. You can thank your liberal politicians. Best of Luck wherever you decide to play.”
That story broke last night, on my drive home.
I didn’t think it would be national news so fast…
Good job by my favorite guy Darren McKee! (DMac104.3) called this idiot out.
Stay hazed
Jake
Look at this story! The criminal government of Denver, Colorado is trying to steal the Church of Cannabis from the hippies. We are living in a country where the police and government have become absolute bullying criminals - this is an unbelievable case! The jurors refused to even work on it! The penalty is now only $300 but these criminals want to seize the church:
from the “heartland”…thuggish cop gets high, his wife tried to get back at him by publishing the video…
My Hero!
What a jackass!
99%
Hummm…
Inspiring sample of “elite” police, 20 hey?..
Happy like a pig in mud
12345678901234567890
Oups!
Still short by a single character; can be so tricky conjugating pig & predator!
Almost there!
Something i didn’t know about USA and the UN/WHO, in a broader perspective:
[ https://www.tni.org/en/article/who-cocaine-project ]
(TransNational Institute, “Cocaïne Project”, 1995)
Publication banned
A decision in the World Health Assembly BANNED THE PUBLICATION OF THE STUDY. The US representative threatened that “if WHO activities relating to drugs failed to reinforce proven drug control approaches, funds for the relevant programmes should be curtailed”. This led to the decision to discontinue publication.
A part of the study has been recuperated and is now available on the TNI’s website. We feel this information is valid, important and needs to be available in the public domain.
I highly doubt these numbers are accurate, but interesting still.
Hi @Scissor-Hanz I found this to be quite dubious back in January.
The source cited is Seedo…IMO, the accuracy of which is questionable at the very least.
This is the same information from January…makes me wonder why they would regurgitate it now on March 2?
Probably trying to sell their overpriced, unnecessary product for those unfortunate humans that are incapable of growing a simple plant!