"Not
Your
Father's
Marijuana"
Canard
Again
Exposed
--
This
Time
by
DEA
2/4/05
The refrain is familiar:
The marijuana of today is worthy of increased concern because it is so
much more potent than the pot smoked by the hippies of yore, who are the
parents and grandparents of today. Today's marijuana is eight, 16,
25, or even 50 times as potent as in the good old days, warn
public health web sites and "experts." All of these "experts,"
as well as a whole army of anti-drug crusaders who continue to promote
the "not your father's marijuana" line, took their cue from Office
of National Drug Control Policy head John Walters, who a little more
than two years ago warned that "the potency of available marijuana has
not merely 'doubled,' but increased as much as 30 times."
Drug czar Walters and the
ONDCP have since backed away from that wildly exaggerated claim.
According to the ONDCP web site now, "the average potency of samples of
all cannabis types increased from 3% in 1991 to 5.2% in 2001... The concentration
of THC in sinsemilla was about 6% in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and
averaged more than 9% in 2001."
But such lies, distortions,
and half-truths have a long shelf life, so it is worth noting that this
particular myth has again been essentially debunked, this time by the Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA). In its annual Drugs
of Abuse report released last month, the DEA reported on the potency
of marijuana seized between 1998 and 2002. While the anti-drug agency
attempted to use the findings to make the case that domestically grown
marijuana is becoming stronger, the real news is the overall potency findings:
"Although marijuana grown
in the United States was once considered inferior because of a low concentration
of THC, advancements in plant selection and cultivation have resulted in
higher THC-containing domestic marijuana," the report argued. "In
1974, the average THC content of illicit marijuana was less than one percent.
Today most commercial grade marijuana from Mexico/Columbia and domestic
outdoor cultivated marijuana has an average THC content of about four to
six percent. Between 1998 and 2002, NIDA-sponsored Marijuana Potency
Monitoring System (MPMP) analyzed 4,603 domestic samples. Of those samples,
379 tested over 15 percent THC, 69 samples tested between 20 and 25 percent
THC and four samples tested over 25 percent THC."
Leaving aside the astounding
claim that the pot that stoned the hippies was less than one percent THC,
what the MPMP figures cited by the DEA show is that less than 10 percent
of the seized samples came in above 15 percent -- a somewhat arbitrary
dividing line between commercial and high-grade, high-dollar boutique marijuana.
This is not to say that high-THC marijuana doesn't exist -- it certainly
does -- but it is not the stuff smoked by the vast majority of marijuana
consumers in the US, and is even less likely to be the weed of choice for
penny-pinching teenage pot-smokers.
Still, Conrad suggested,
government marijuana testers are skewing the results vis a vis older samples
to hype the "stronger marijuana" threat. "They manipulate the numbers
to get the higher THC percentages," he told DRCNet. "They originally
included stems, seeds, and leaf in the samples they tested, but now they're
just testing the buds, so the percentage is naturally increasing."
Be that as it may, another
expert marijuana cultivator, Philippe Lucas of the Vancouver
Island Compassion Society, told DRCNet the DEA figures were similar
to those reported by the Canadian Royal Mounted Police. "These stats
are a little bit older than the DEA figures," he said, "but out of more
than the 3,000 samples, only eight came in at more than 20 percent THC.
It is simply ridiculous to assume a tripling of potency in mass market
marijuana since then."
What the figures mean, said
Lucas, is that "sadly, around 90% of Americans are still smoking schwag."
Conrad concurred. "I
still talk to a lot of people who are consuming the Mexican brick weed,"
he said. Conrad lives and works in the San Francisco Bay area, a
hotbed of high-grade marijuana production, but even there, Mexican still
reigns supreme.
According to the US government,
and despite the hype about the threat of the dreaded (or much vaunted,
depending on one's perspective) "BC Bud," only about two percent of US
marijuana imports are coming from Canada. Mexico is the dominant
marijuana exporter to the US, with annual seizures in the hundreds of tons,
compared with much smaller numbers from Canada.
But while experts like Conrad
and Lucas argue convincingly that most marijuana consumed in the US is
commercial grade Mexican or American outdoor with similar potency levels,
by no means do they deny the existence of superior strains. Quite
the contrary. "At the Vancouver Island Compassion Society," said
Lucas, "we have had over 100 tests done on about 35 different genetics
we are currently producing, and only one of our strains (a Blueberry) has
consistently tested below 15 percent THC. Our strongest strains (Sweet
Skunk, Romulan, God, and varied crosses) have all tested over 20 percent,
although we have yet to break the 25 percent barrier."
That marijuana is destined
for medical users, and for them, high-potency marijuana is a good thing,
said Lucas. "When it comes to medical use, stronger cannabis is better
cannabis. People self-titrate to achieve the desired dose.
With stronger cannabis, they get the amount of THC they need by using less
cannabis. Similarly, I have seen studies that show stronger cannabis
has a lower tar to weight ratio than weaker cannabis," he said. "An
increase in cannabis potency may be viewed as a threat by the US government,
but it is a boon for medical users." That's right, said Conrad.
"You want to get the THC compounds while minimizing the amount of smoke
and exposure to potentially carcinogenic matter. It is an odd thing
to argue that medicines should be weaker."
Still, the "not your father's
marijuana" argument remains an oft-used arrow in the prohibitionist quiver
-- one that must be blunted as long as it continues to be made, and not
merely by denying that high-potency pot exists. "This argument is
one that just keeps circulating and coming back. As with other debunked
theories like the stepping stone theory, it just keeps popping up every
few years," said Lucas. "It's amazing that we are still rehashing
this. In terms of scientific research, there is absolutely no suggestion
that we should be concerned about greater potential for dependency, no
indication it is more addictive, no suggestions that a higher level of
cannabinoids are more harmful. This stronger cannabis is somehow
more dangerous is a straw man argument." |