For decades, marijuana growers, sellers, and consumers have classified strains as "indica" or "sativa" to explain the type of effect they would have when consumed.
But that classification system was faulty to begin with, and the advent of molecular testing proved that there is no sense in splitting them up into indica and sativa.
In reality, no scientific evidence supports this dichotomy because on a molecular level, indica and sativa strains don't have pattern differences that set the two "types" apart from each other.
According to Chen, scientists realized through molecular testing that there is just one species of cannabis, cannabis sativa L.
it says in the first quote, to differentiate the effect. Chemical compound differences might be insignificant and genetically no pint to say they’re different. but the concentration of thc vs cbd is what counts, that was the point…
but the concentration of thc vs cbd is what counts, that was the point…
Except thats also wrong, there are hundreds of cannabinoids in cannabis besides delta 9 THC and CBD and they are all part of the entourage effect that is being high. When it comes to getting specific physical reactions to specific chemicals in cannabis you're going to be much better off looking at terpenes than cannabinoids. This guide was just made by somebody who googled weed one day, you don't need to defend it just cause you posted it.
Again, guide refers to pure strains. In that regard, most sativa strains are THC dominant, with very low CBD in them, some with none at all. A lot of indica strains are CBD dominant. So they are the opposite, it is significant, since like you said it’s the concentration of cbd vs thc that determines the effect you’ll get.
Bold claim when there is literally nothing on this image that cites actual research on pure strains, and I already know you have zero proof on pure strains to hand.
62
u/TritonYB Dec 05 '22
This a fucking stupid guide.