Stoned California Seniors Headed to ER's By the Thousands: UCSD Study

[Zorro]

According to researchers, 12,167 California seniors made trips to emergency rooms in 2019

Stoned seniors — and we're not talking high-school kids — are visiting emergency rooms for cannabis-related issues in unprecedented numbers, according to a new study by UC San Diego researchers.

According to the study conducted by the University of California San Diego School of Medicine, just 366 Californians over the age of 65 visited ER's in 2005 for cannabis-related concerns. By 2019, that figure had skyrocketed nearly 3200%, when 12,167 seniors made trips to emergency rooms.

While a law was passed by the state way back in '96 approving the use of medical marijuana, a second law was passed in 2003 clarifying the legislation prior to its use becoming more widespread. Recreational use of marijuana was approved by state voters in 2016. It's worth noting that the study shows that, while ER visits spiked between 2013-17, they plateaued in 2017, the year weed became legally available for recreational use, so legalization does not appear to be connected to an increase in ER visits by seniors for cannabis-related issues.

“Many patients assume they aren’t going to have adverse side-effects from cannabis because they often don’t view it as seriously as they would a prescription drug,” said Dr. Benjamin Han, a geriatrician who authored the study. “I do see a lot of older adults who are overly confident, saying they know how to handle it — yet as they have gotten older, their bodies are more sensitive, and the concentrations are very different from what they may have tried when they were younger.”

https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/stoned-california-seniors-headed-to-ers-by-the-thousands-ucsd-study/3139189/

[Javaman]

1. Wow, that's some really good shit! nt

[enough]

5. 😂

[housecat]

69. heh

[BadGimp]

86. INdeed it is :)

[Fullduplexxx]

2. Old people getting high and freaking out

[azureblue]

34. these "old People" were smoking before you were born

And are not used to the potency of modern pot. Used to, we could roll a couple and go about the day just fine - but this new stuff is one hit only. Same goes for edibles. A modern time brownie will quite properly wreck you, and you sure don't want to be spaced when the grand kids come over. But, hey, we may be old but we learn fast...

Now -- this article reeks of scare tactics..

[Fullduplexxx]

42. yea i know about the increased potency - i feel it's probably the edibles. you have better control

through smoking but once you ingest it you get it all. btw im 61 they may have been smoking before i was born but not by much

[RobinA]

113. Not Only Potency

but almost EVERYBODY forgets that tolerance happens and unhappens. If you smoked regularly in the day and haven't smoked for 40 years and then puff at your former level right off the bat you are bound to be in for a big surprise.

Heard from a friend.

[MichMan]

3. I know many people use edibles, but smoking is still very popular

I don't care if it's a Marlboro or a joint, inhaling anything into your lungs isn't good for you. I don't know why so many people pretend smoking pot is harmless. That is why I totally quit 15 years ago.

[getagrip_already]

33. You can vape it also.... (not liquid)

I'm not talking about liquid vaporizers. You can also gets vapes that will use flower. It only gets hot enough to cause the volatile to turn gaseous. It doesn't cause a lot of smoke and smoke by products. There is a little, but not nearly as much as smoking the normal way.

I've tried it. It is much easier on the lungs. It also doesn't stink the room up.

[JanMichael]

4. Didn't Saturday Night Live have a good skit on this?

A bunch of professors getting high and calling the 911 line and say things like there's spiders on my face? All were was high but they we're so stoned they went goofy?

[maxsolomon]

6. Seniors not understanding the strength of edibles.

See: Maureen Dowd's I-laid-on-the-floor-in-a-fetal-position column from 8 years ago:
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/06/opinion/a-scary-experience-with-edible-marijuana.html#:~:text=Maureen%20Dowd%20writes%20of%20her,paranoid%20and%20unable%20to%20move

Pro Tip: Talk to your Bud Tender and ask for an Indica or Indica-hybrid with a THCA of around 20%. It will be like the 70s weed you remember, not what we called "Cancer-Patient" weed in the dark days before decriminalization.

DO NOT GET CANNABIS SATIVA >30% THCA. DO NOT EAT ENTIRE EDIBLES, old n00bs.

[GoCubsGo]

23. Yes. When they say the dose is one gummy, they mean ONE gummy.

Or, brownie, or whatever the hell Mo Do consumed. You don't want to wind up like my sister, who just had to have that second brownie, and found herself standing out in the backyard, unable to figure out what to do next. She's lucky other family were around to guide her inside to sleep it off, or she'd have stood out there all night.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

25. Exactly wrong.

[ancianita]

31. ...

hilarious because it's true. Rule #1: Do NOT eat entire edibles.

[getagrip_already]

38. Well, more like 15%....

The old Panama red and Acapulco gold strains were only about 15%. Ditch weed was a little lower. Brick weed, who cares.

Don't believe the lab numbers anyway. A lot are, shall we say, a bit loose with the analysis.

[Wednesdays]

39. I made that mistake the first time I tried "edible"

I smoked weed a little bit around 40 years ago, but never had tried going the "edible" route until around two years ago.

What I did first was swallow a pinch of flower. Nothing happened, because I didn't yet know about "decarboxylation" (activating the THC through heating). Well, I warmed up the flower in the oven for an hour, and then swallowed a large pinch of it, figuring it was about the amount for one joint and therefore enough for a mild to moderate high.

Boy, did I ever underestimate its potency! It wasn't enough to put me in the hospital, but I barely managed to crawl into bed to sleep it off!

Same thing with gummies: even the mildest ones are enough to knock me out if I take so much as half of one!

[Quakerfriend]

54. Too funny! I smoked quite a bit in college 45 years ago

but, have not had any interest since then.

Several weeks ago my husband got some free edibles & convinced me to try some of three different varieties-
I tried several - some 600mg -but, noticed little or nothing.

However, several nights
ago I took a sativa edible -100mg
and, OMG!- We were cooking together & it was as if I had completely lost my short term memory!!

I had to repeatedly ask for the ingredients & amounts to add- Of course we were giggling the whole time!

I was glad when it was all over!
-Not sure I’ll try that again.

[inthewind21]

132. Edibles

Will knock you on your ass. I smoked a LOT when I was younger and smoked regularly for back pain as an adult. Then I was offered an edible. A chocolate bar. Whoo boy! I barely made it across the street to my house and had to crawl on my hands an knees upstairs to bed. It was like a really REALLY bad drunk. If you wanna try edibles, READ THE LABLEL and FOLLOW IT. DO NOT, I repeat DO NOT eat more than the recommended amount.

[Quixote1818]

72. I take 5mg for sleep pretty often. Hardly feel high at all but it knocks me right out. nt

[Mz Pip]

43. Been there

Ate a 20mg candy a few years back. 3 hours later it hit. I could barely get off the couch and get into bed. I just lay there for 3 hours waiting for it to go away. Not pleasant at all.

[Celerity]

74. Weed in the 70s & 80s was nowhere near 20% THC. Most were 1 to 5% with an 8 to 10% (rare) max range

https://www.revolutionaryclinics.org/thc-potency-over-time/

In the early days of cannabis engineering, THC levels were extremely low by today’s standards. In fact, average THC levels in the 1970s hovered just under 5% (sometimes even lower, depending on the quality of your cannabis). Because THC is central to the psychoactive effects pursued by many weed users, high-THC cannabis has always been in high demand — and when there’s a demand, the market will supply.


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6312155/

The primary problem with the current available cannabis in dispensaries in Colorado is that the THC content is not like it used to be. Prior to the 1990s it was less than 2%. In the 1990s it grew to 4%, and between 1995 and 2015 there has been a 212% increase in THC content in the marijuana flower. In 2017 the most popular strains found in dispensaries in Colorado had a range of THC content from 17–28% such as found in the popular strain named “Girl Scout Cookie.” Sadly these plants producing high levels of THC are incapable of producing much CBD, the protective component of the plant so these strains have minimal CBD. For example the Girl Scout Cookie strain has only 0.09–0.2% CBD.

The flower or leaves that are generally smoked or vaped are only one formulation. We now have concentrated THC products such as oil, shatter, dab, and edibles that have been able to get the THC concentration upwards of 95%. There is absolutely no research that indicates this level of THC is beneficial for any medical condition. The purpose of these products is to produce a high, and the increased potency makes them potentially more dangerous and more likely to result in addiction.


https://herb.co/learn/modern-day-weed-vs-hippie-weed/

[fierywoman]

79. I noticed that between late 60s and early 90s (when I occasionally smoked a joint)

the weed kept getting stronger.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

106. Infographics like this one are comparing the results of "illicit samples" the 1970's

with include marijuana leaf (as opposed to bud) and other low quality pot from the 1970's with pure dispensary buds from later times.

They do not compare the primo quality flowers from the sort of CA sinsemilla, Thai, and Hawaiian strains of the 1970s and 80s that many people enjoyed during that era. It was superior to today's dispensary herb.

Garbage in, garbage out.

[Celerity]

107. Weed had already grown more potent long before legal dispensaries came into existence in the US.

By all means, if you have evidence that weed in the 70s and 80s was, on average, as strong as even in the noughties and earlier parts of the 2010s (let alone now) then post it.

It certainly was not 20% THC, which was the claim I replied to originally.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

109. The "on average" part is the rub.

Any data sets that compare marijuana leaf with seedless bud, or a seeded mix of some (likely immature) bud mixed with leaf against seedless bub, will make the seedless bud test stronger. 100%.

What measurements like this fail to do, is to identify that there were plenty of people in the 1970s and 80s who were not smoking "ragweed," and instead where enjoying the finest outdoor grown sativa like CA Sinsemilla, Thai, and Hawaiian.

Again, it is garbage in, garbage out.

Apples and oranges comparisons.

[Johnny2X2X]

142. But that's the discussion

What was available then on average. Sure, there might have been small groups of people getting hydro grown stuff back then that was much better than the average stuff out there, but most people in the 70s were smoking really weak weed compared to today. Today, anyone in my state, can walk into a store and buy 25% THC buds for a very very reasonable price. That type of stuff is available everywhere it's legal. Back in the 70s or 80s, you had to know someone who really knew their stuff to get some Kin Buds that were not only sexed properly, but cultivated higher THC levels.

These old folks likely remember the weed they smoked in the 70s that was the type of brick weed imported from Mexico whose THC content was 1% or lower by the time they got it. The type of weed you could share a joint with a friend of and then feel mellow and listen to some music. Where as the stuff today is like smoking 15 joints at once with a friend and then losing your shit.

And outdoor grown Sinsemilla, Thai, and Hawaiian would be considered amateur hour for modern grow houses who have now spent thousands of generations of plants making it better and better in controlled environments and with the benefit of a laboratory above board doing their testing. It's a completely different deal now with it being legal to grow and test.

And even with the best buds from the 70s and 80s, I think you'd be hard pressed to find buds 1/3 as strong as today's best. It can be overwhelming for anyone who's not used to it.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

144. Is it though?

Seems like the claims are much more categorical. The truth is more complex.

The claim that "outdoor grown Sinsemilla, Thai, and Hawaiian would be considered amateur hour for modern grow houses" is fantastical. Certainly not true is one is judging the end product.

The advantage of hybridized (Indica) varieties is that they are easily adaptable to grow-house cultivation. That makes these strains popular with the industry. But the quality is inferior.

Gone is the sweet aroma and the energizing high.

Hybridization and indoor growing has come at a significant cost in terms of quality.

[Johnny2X2X]

147. Quality in terms of aroma or in terms of potency

Because they have ways to measure potency and it's never been more potent. Aroma is a matter of personal taste. Just like I hate Sativa(energy high) and would only consume Indica. But you can find many strains of Sativa in dispensaries all over the country too.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

150. Both. And in terms of "potency" is is more a matter of the balance of canabloids

and the sort of high they produce, rather than just a measure of THC.

Today's industrially indoor grown indica hybrids have plenty of "potency," they just lack the balance that make golden era sativa so superior (to those who prefer a more energizing high).

Classic CA Sinsemilla was also a "one hit" variety. These types of data sets assume everyone in the 70s was smoking leaf or low grade ragweed, when that's not the universal case.

If you don't like the so-called "sativa-dominant" strains available today (which pale next to the real thing), you might not prefer classic golden age CA Sinsemilla either. People have different tastes. That's fair.

For me, the hybridization of sativa strains with indica has resulted in a huge loss of quality (for my tastes).

[Johnny2X2X]

151. But that's the whole point of the article

That the standard weed people uses it he 70s was nowhere near as close to potent as what is the standard weed today.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

152. But it compares apples and oranges.

One can't measure the THC in, say, marijuana leaf vs bud and then claim that all the marijuana from the 70s was far less potent that what is found today, as that isn't true.

Statistics can give false impressions. This is one of those occasions.

High quality herb of the golden age was much superior to what is widely available today, at least for those people who prefer non-stupefying high.

[womanofthehills]

138. Now, many of the top strains are 30%

Runtz Muffin comes to mind. People love it because you can smoke less.

[Johnny2X2X]

140. 1 hit sh*t

In the 90s, I started to see really dank hydroponically grown buds. But even that stuff was just not up to par with the weed available widely in states that have legal recreational weed. Now that it's legal to grow, growers have been able to share and test methods out and we're getting to a more refined product.

[The_REAL_Ecumenist]

80. Sativas are NOT the strains that are high in THC, INDICAS are. I know because they are what I used

to save my life after being diagnosed with stage 4B carcinoma. Sativas are MUCH higher in CBD's whereas Indicas are MUCH heavier in THC.

[womanofthehills]

141. The majority of the strains now are mixed Sativa/Indica

Pure sativas are rare - most sativa strains are 70% sativa/30% indica where you can still get 100% Indica strains. You can now get both Indicas and mostly sativas at 30% THC levels.

According to the internets, indicas can have a slightly higher CBD. If a person is mostly into CBD, you can get a high CBD strain - over 8% CBC with a low THC.

[The_REAL_Ecumenist]

157. The "Internets" are WRONG. Now, while there may be hybrids of sativa & indica strains that have

HIGHER THC percentages & even a few sativa strains that have higher levels of THC , INDICAS are known and renown for their high THC levels due to their shorter bushier growth pattern, their faster growth cycles & their shorter flowering periods, which allows them to produce more THC.
Sativas are generally taller and thinner than indicas, with narrower leaves. They grow more slowly and mature later. Sativas are also known for their higher CBD levels, which can make them less potent (and possibly less addictive).

The difference between indica and sativa strains? It all comes down to THC and CBD levels. Indicas have higher THC levels, which can make them more potent (and possibly more addictive). Sativas have higher CBD levels, which can make them less potent (and possibly less addictive).

[FoxNewsSucks]

111. That still annoys the hell out of me

Stupid *** *** ate the whole chocolate bar, instead of 1/16th. Which was the serving. And is pre-shaped for breaking up.

Then went on TV to ***** about it.

[msfiddlestix]

121. I learned the hard way, 80% tincture + edibles... see post at end of this thread.

[dflprincess]

7. I'm so wasted!

[redwitch]

13. Spicoli is that you?

Your post has me laughing because I read it in his voice.

[Initech]

8. Seriously, how much weed are they smoking?

Do grandma and grandpa have copies of Super Troopers and Half Baked in their DVD collection? Is Nana buying tickets to Cali Vibes this year?

[dflprincess]

11. Either eating too many gummies

Or didn't know it's a lot stronger than it was in our day.

Talking about my generation.

[SergeStorms]

73. My generation.

And Daltry didn't live up to his hope of dying before he got old. He'll turn 79 on March 1st. 😉

[dflprincess]

82. Not long ago I was ferrying a grandnephew to an event

and the song came. I was semi singing along and when I got to that line the smart-ass kid who has no respect looked at me and said "Too late."

[electric_blue68]

110. And he still sings great, and Pete still plays great ...

couldn't catch them this (their last?) tour, but saw them yet again at MSG in Sept '19.

[msfiddlestix]

122. it's not the smoke, it's the edibles and tincture drops on the tongue

[Initech]

131. Ah yes of course edibles.

Edibles can be extremely dangerous depending on how much you eat.

[Chainfire]

9. I haven't smoked any pot in a long, long time. The last time I did, I became very uncomfortably

high, and felt sick after a couple of tokes. I understand why people may head to the ER feeling that way. My lungs are so damaged from decades of construction work, I couldn't smoke a joint without choking half to death. That said, I wouldn't mind trying an edible. I don't know how my family doctor would feel about prescribing it, but I may ask at my next appt. Even seniors could do with getting a little buzz on every now and again; lay in a pile of groceries and give it a try.

I have a cardiologist visit tomorrow, I will ask him if my heart is healthy enough for pot. He is a former Marine Corps doctor, so he my not find it amusing. I am already on his bad side; when I had my stents and was being rolled past the nurses station on the way to the OR, he was standing there looking at some charts. When he came into the OR, I asked the head nurse over and whispered, just loud enough for him to hear, "Nurse, pleas make sure he washes his hand good, I saw him picking his nose at the nurses station." He objected vociferously, and the rest of the staff had to hide the smiles. Yea, I know, sometimes I don't use the best of judgement.

[Wednesdays]

50. It's not for everybody

Having said that, there are a lot of good therapeutic uses for cannabis. I use it for my arthritis, and it works well.

Cannabis can lower blood pressure, YMMV. Be cautious with gummies (see #39, above), but a 1/4 of the mildest indica gummy is a good sleep aid.

Definitely talk to your doctor. He/she may even be knowledgeable about what conditions you have that may benefit from it.

[asiliveandbreathe]

10. cannabis related issues..I'm having a hard time, having read through

this article to find what the cannabis related issued are..is it injury from falls, or auto accidents (shouldn't drive stoned), or hallucinations?? If someone has read through this article and found what the issues with MJ are that 65+ patients are going to the ER for, please advise...

You never know who is behind an article like this..

[Flo Mingo]

15. Exactly my take as well asiliveandbreathe

This reeks of pharmaceutical influence.

[asiliveandbreathe]

16. Bazinga..this crap was in the news when MJ was being legalized...so stupid

[PufPuf23]

17. Got high (age 70) and the cat accidently tackled me but

I caught my sandwich before it hit the floor.

[msfiddlestix]

123. Laughed out loud, really funny.

[paleotn]

24. There are none.

Strange article. Other than buying out Taco Bell and overindulging on the worst "Mexican" food evaa!, I don't see an issue. Personal experience. It was the Taco Bell that damn near killed me. Not the weed.

[asiliveandbreathe]

30. OMG..too funny...

[ancianita]

41. wiping eyes...

[IbogaProject]

28. Decreased Pharmaceutical Profits

Is a major side effect of cannabis use.

[1WorldHope]

29. I'm betting edibles.

My friend ate an edible and then had two drinks. 2 hours later she said, "I think I'm gonna die, I feel like my soul is leaving my body." I told her, " nobody has ever overdosed on pot, I'm not taking you to the hospital. But I can put you in your car and push you down the alley a ways." She started laughing and I asked her, do you feel sick? Which caused her to start gagging immediately. I ran and got her a puke bag, she lost her cookies and felt fine. Edibles sneak up on you.

[Wednesdays]

51. Ten to One it was the "drinks" that made her puke.

[SheltieLover]

75. Oding on chocolate?

[MrsCoffee]

127. They probably just admitted to smoking/using cannabis when asked the basic questions.

So anything where any of them are cannabis users is most likely gonna get tossed into the mix.

I don't know that for a fact and I'm too lazy to research it. Just my gut feeling on most of the reefer madness stuff I read.

[asiliveandbreathe]

130. You are onto something ..how often was the question asked in years gone

by...now, standard operating procedure SOP...for whatevah ails ya'..gots to be smoking MJ..



Happy New Year 2023

[MrsCoffee]

160. Happy New Year to you!

[tirebiter]

12. Sounds like another red wave freak out.

Guess they needed to make some shit up along with the kids are eating their parents’ gummies yarn.

[jcgoldie]

14. Todays weed aint like the stuff...

… that you stole from dad’s cigar box in the closet or bought in the parking lot at school in the 70s. I grow my own and its not even close to as potent as the dispensary shit… and I’m ok with that! 😵?💫

[Johnny2X2X]

19. This

Weed today between 6 and 50 times more potent than most of the stuff from the 70s and 80s. It’s no joke and 1 hit of 10% THC weed can be overwhelming.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

26. Not remotely true if one lived in California in the 70s.

This is a myth.

[maxsolomon]

27. Not everyone lived in CA during the 70s.

In fact, the majority didn't. Still don't.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

37. Nevertheless, it makes it a mistake to over generalize.

[jcgoldie]

60. Haha!

You are very reliable I'll say that

[Just A Box Of Rain]

63. I am utterly reliable.

The mid seventies was a gold era. That was before everything got hybridized with indica crossings and plants were grown to maturity outdoors.

The quality was much superior.

[jcgoldie]

64. Haha

Ridiculously uninformed and I can only assume you have intentional bad takes based on prior opinions... or... well at least you picked a great song.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

65. I would suggest that you find some back issues of High Times magazine from 1979

or thereabouts and you can straighten out your misconceptions just my looking at the pictures of big kola buds dripping resin from the red-hairs.

The herb then was far superior (assuming one had access to California Sinsemilla, Thai, and/or Hawaiian strains).

But I'm ridiculously misinformed. LOL

Do go on.

[jcgoldie]

68. right..

Pictures of buds in High Times. Thats pretty good evidence of THC content and psychotropic effects.

Here's some science based articles including one from your choice of source High Times:

https://hightimes.com/culture/potent-pot-weed-getting-stronger/

https://www.mic.com/articles/168922/is-marijuana-stronger-than-it-used-to-be-heres-what-the-science-says

https://www.vice.com/en/article/pa7anb/why-weed-should-be-legal-its-getting-stronger-more-potent

If you don't like these a simple google search will give you tons more objective articles.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

70. No, what's good evidence is people who were there telling you what time it is.

Any "weed is getting stronger" data begs the question of what herbs are being compared.

If one compares dispensary herb to marijuana leaf, or the common Mexican seeded pot or Columbian brown of that era, then the dispensary herb herb will measure much stronger.

Not so with the high grade CA Sinsemilla of the day, or the similar Thai or Hawaiian, which were grown outdoors to maturity and which were not crossed with indica.

These strains were superior to what's found in dispensaries today, which are all indica-sativa crosses (at best).

You should stick to subjects where you know what you are talking about, as opposed to making insults that reveal ignorance.

[jcgoldie]

71. man

Theres definitely one of us who doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about and refuses to accept objective evidence. "Grown outdoors." What the fuck do you think that means? I've been growing pot outside for 15 years. Read something and learn. Have a nice day.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

77. Grown outdoors means that a plant is started in early spring and allowed to mature

until they develop very large bubs that swell with sticky THC-loaded resin. The trick is to let the harvest go as late as possible before the fall rains come in.

This because every bit of extra-time allows more resin to develop in the buds. These plants would get to 12 feet tall at maturity and are very sticky and fragrant. Like Christmas trees.

The danger was that the rains would ruin the harvest by inducing mold in freshly harvested plants. So always a risk.

But for best quality, waiting until a plant fully matures, produces the most "fruit."

Indoor plants are continually harvested. They are never grown from start to finish the way pure sativa plants are, but are rather kept small and continually harvested (which is possible due to the crosses made with indica plants).

Indica crosses work for the "industry," where growing sativa outdoors does not.

When people are ignorant and obnoxious, it isn't a good look.

[jcgoldie]

81. like I said

Been doing that OUTSIDE year after year. Inside too. I know the difference. And I also know I can't get the THC potency they get in dispensary dope. What do you got? Some dope porn from 1977 in High Times who today says your premise is wrong? Here's one that will blow your mind... that Indica/Sativa thing... its 90% bullshit... different strains have different effects but there aren't any pure ones and thats just mostly shit they use to market seeds at this point. I would forward the links on that but I already know you don't read so google it yourself.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

84. You horticultural failures are your own. It isn't only about growing outdoors,

one also needs the correct strains (and pure sativa strains are nearly extinct), and a knowledge of how to keep pinching back the developing buds throughout the growing process to grow optimally dense flowers that drip with THC-rich resin.

You are very deeply misinformed on the nature of different strains, and the nature of the crosses that make indoor growing feasible.

Maybe you should stick with topics you know something about?

[jcgoldie]

85. ok man

I can see that you are in your element and I am out of my league when it comes to pure bullshit.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

87. No, you just don't know what you are talking about when it comes to this subject,

but seem ready to insult those who are far more knowledgeable than yourself.

That's not a good look.

[jcgoldie]

94. Not a good look

Another thing you seem to have expertise in.

More knowledgeable? Not so much.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

95. When you grow foot long cola/kola buds, get back to me.

[jcgoldie]

97. When you find a single objective source to support your argument

Or respond to one... get back to me. Or just keep exposing yourself for...

[Just A Box Of Rain]

98. Just keep digging yourself deeper.

[jcgoldie]

99. I guess thats a no?

[Just A Box Of Rain]

101. I'm also aware that on a clear day the sky appears to be blue.

Do you need a source?

[jcgoldie]

102. Well evidence is preferable if you want to make a coherent argument

If you think purely subjective bullshit makes an argument then yes source would be better.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

103. I'm sorry that you deride those of us who have actual experience in the matter.

Again, it is a very bad look.

[Torchlight]

114. "Good evidence". Rich.

[Mr.Bill]

44. True, good stuff was

beginning to show up by the early 70s. Thai Stick coming home with soldiers from Vietnam, some of the first Hawaiian weed, etc.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

48. And classic (all sativa) red-haired California Sinsemilla dripping with resin.

Far superior to what's found in dispensaries today.

[Richard D]

47. I lived in CA in the 70's . . .

. . . at least I think I remember living there!

We used to roll a joint and pass it around and around and around a group of friends. Then another, and maybe another one after that.

The dispensary weed today is one hit. Sometimes that's even too much. Fergetabout dabs.

I always liked hashish, preferably Nepalese. That didn't seem as strong as some of the weed now.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

49. Then you lived in the wrong neighborhood. Sorry.

[Richard D]

57. Berkeley . . . SF . . .

Pretty good hoods.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

61. Hard to believe.

You did not have access to quality California Sinsemilla?

Only seeded low-quality Mexican and Colombian brown? Those were quite low quality, but in Berkeley and San Francisco?

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

117. Well, yeah, we were good for the times, the very best, but things have changed.

We grew great strains of weed from seeds brought in from around the world back in the day, and hybridized many of them for early flowering, maximum potency, and high yield, but the THC content of even the most potent of those strains did not approach the THC levels of today's what I call polio weed. We were good at what we did, but could not compete with today's strains developed in an environment where cannabis is legal, and there is basically unlimited access to seeds and clones of the most potent strains of herb in existence.

THC Content Has Increased By Up to 5.7mg Per Year Since the 1970s

Cannabis users who claim the drug is stronger than what they remember are probably right. According to a systematic review and meta-analysis published in Addiction, THC content has increases steadily over the past several decades.

Analyzing studies from the United States, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, France, Denmark, Italy and New Zealand, between 1970 and 2017, the researchers found that delta‐9‐tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content in cannabis resin has increased by .57% each year, a 28.5% increase between 1970 and 2020. Levels of cannabidiol (CBD) have remained relatively stable through the same time period. Use of high-THC cannabis is associated with an increased risk of psychotic disorders.

The researchers pulled studies from Embase, MEDLINE, Epub Ahead of Print, and In‐Process, as well as Global Health, PsycINFO and Scopus, from inception to March 2019. The researchers looked for observational studies reporting changes in THC and/or CBD concentration. Ultimately, they identified 12 studies from the US, the UK, the Netherlands, France, Denmark, Italy, and New Zealand, with studies taking place anywhere between 1970 and 2017.

THC concentrations in herbal cannabis increased by 0.29% each year (95% CI: 0.11, 0.47, P < .001) based on 66,747 cannabis samples from 8 studies conducted between 1970 and 2017.

https://www.psychiatryadvisor.com/home/topics/addiction/cannabis-use-disorder/thc-content-has-increased-by-up-to-5-7mg-per-year-over-since-the-1970s/

[Just A Box Of Rain]

124. The hybridization (with skunk weed aka Indica) killed off those classic sativa strains.

People were not "good at what they did," unless you define "good" as allowing growers to have industrial plants that could be grown indoors and semi-perpetually harvested, but that lack the psycho-active effects (and the sweet fragrance) of herbs such as CA Sinsemilla, Hawaiian, and Thai varieties.

Indica crosses sacrifice too much. They are unbalanced, and tend to be soporific ("stoney&quot and make people slow and stupid. The classic sativa strains, in stark contrast, were energizing and encouraged creative thought.

Big loss, in the name of the profits that come with industrial growing.

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

126. Sinsemilla simply means "without seeds", it is not a strain of cannabis.

That said, yuppers, I totally agree with your post. Those outdoor sativa strains from back in the day, despite having lower THC content, had a delicious flavor and aroma, and much more pleasant effect than the super potent indoor grown herb they grow nowadays. Back in the day, I would not smoke indoor grown herb, no matter how potent.

I could not agree more with your assessment.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

129. CA Sinsemilla was a stain of pure sativa. People did not use the term "strain" back in the day

but that was the case. Growers learned that by culling male plants that they could keep the plants seedless (or "sinsemilla" ) to maximize flowering but as is the case often in English (borrowing from Spanish), the term CA Sinsemilla had two meanings, one part referred to the variety and other to the horticultural practices that maximize the end product.

So CA Sinsemilla was both a variety of plant and a plant grown in a way to provide maximum flowering and resin.

I don't agree that today's strains of indoor grown indica and india crosses (that are sold as "sativa dominant" strains) are more "potent." Unless one defines "potent" as being stupefying and one likes feeling "out of it."

The classic sativa, if well-grown, was highly potent (one hit) herb back in the mid-70s. The difference is that it not only had a beautiful perfume, but it made people feel energetic, talkative, sociable, and creative. All in all, far superior to today's offerings--unless one just wants to fit on a couch and space out.

Sounds like we both have memories of what's been lost.

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

134. Then where did the "California Pure Sativa Sinsemilla Strain" originate?

Bakersfield?

Many of my friends were Marin, Lake, and Humboldt growers. We talked about strains all the time, and imported seed of various strains from a company in Amsterdam. Everyone knew they had to pull their male plants so that the females would not get pollinated. Most of us were experts in Mendelian genetics, at least when it came to cannabis cultivation.

Potency is generally considered a term for THC content, not the characteristic effects of the strain of herb. Again, I agree with you that expertly grown sativa strains such as those grown outdoors in California back in the day were superior to the disabling indoor polio weed
commonly grown today.

Cannabis sinsemilla (Spanish pronunciation: [sinseˈmiʝa]) also known as sensimilla, sinse or sensi (can be translated into English as seedless cannabis) is the female Cannabis plant that has not been fertilized and therefore does not develop seeds, increasing the density of cannabinoids and terpenes. This cultivation technique was developed in Sinaloa, Mexico, in the 1970s, by the drug trafficker Rafael Caro Quintero[1][2] and consists of separating male plants as soon as they are known to be male, in order to avoid pollination of female pistils.[3] The seeds are not useful for recreational purposes, and require the plant to make a great expenditure of energy that could be invested in increasing the tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) of the inflorescences (buds).

The technique became popular in the United States as sinsemilla, sinsemilia, sinse, or sense.[4] In 1980, an American study indicated that the average THC of street marijuana was 1.8%, while sinsemilla reached 6%.[5] Sinsemilla cannabis is a cultivation technique, so it should not be confused with skunk, which refers to strains with a high percentage of THC. The expression sinsemilla is practically obsolete since feminized seeds emerged in the 1990s, genetically modified seeds to always sprout females.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinsemilla

In order for you to gain a more complete understanding of cannabis cultivation in the 1970's, I strongly suggest you read the classic Marijuana Growers Guide, by Mel Frank and Ed Rosenthal.

https://www.abebooks.com/9780915904266/Marijuana-Growers-Guide-Mel-Frank-0915904268/plp

[Just A Box Of Rain]

135. I don't know where the original variety that came to be known as CA Sinsemilla originated.

It was similar to Thai and Hawaiian strains, yet distinct.

I already stated that male plants needed to be culled in order to maximize the flowering and to stop the plants from setting seed.

Actually, there was an alternative--albeit a labour-intensive one if the plants were scarce and culling was too big a loss--as with very careful pruning techniques a male plant can be turned into a female plant. It is not practical if one has plenty of starters, or one is growing clones, but it is possible if one has the expertise.

As to the claim that "Sinsemilla cannabis is a cultivation technique," that is correct--to a point--however "California Sinsemilla" was the product of both a cultivation technique AND the use of a particular pure sativa variety. Other varieties could (and are) grown without producing seeds, but that does not make them California Sinsemilla.

We at least agree on the main thrust, that expertly grown sativa strains such as those grown outdoors in California back in the day were superior to what is found in dispensaries today.

They produced a more energizing and creativity inspiring high compared to the stoney high you've characterized as "polio-inducing" high of indica strains.

It is a big loss.

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

136. Here -

Seeds in the early days of West Coast cannabis production came primarily from strains from the State of Oaxaca in Mexico, not far from the border of Guatemala. Half a century ago, the fabled Oaxacan Highland Gold strain was cultivated by small-scale Oaxacan farmers using landrace genetics that had grown in the region for at least a hundred – if not several hundred – years. It was imported into the U.S. as primo weed that rivaled Colombian Gold, Panama Red, and Jamaican Lamb’s Bread as one of the most heady strains available. Because it came from Oaxaca’s mountainous region, well hidden from neighboring pollen, seedless cannabis was occasionally, though not necessarily intentionally, produced.

In the early 1970s, a handful of American growers began to grow sinsemilla, and by the mid ’70s, it was the primary style of cultivation. Sativas bred in North America in those early years were a cross between faster-finishing Mexican or Jamaican landraces and more potent, but longer-finishing Panamanian, Thai, and Colombian landraces. Repeated inbreeding of these original hybrids created some of the most legendary sativas of the 1970s: Maui Wowie, Big Sur Holy Weed, Original Haze, Purple Haze, Eden Gold, Kona Gold, Polly, Three Way, and Matanuska Thunderfuck. 
snip-----
Another staple of the cannabis gene pool is Original Haze, a pure sativa from Central California. Haze found worldwide notoriety in 1984 when Sam the Skunkman moved to Holland, taking the Haze genetics with him. How this strain became hybridized is unique even among the fabled origin stories of cannabis. It was stabilized from crossing all the best females with a male of a different imported sativa variety each year. The first crop saw a crossing of male Colombian/Mexican hybrids grown from seed, followed by pollen from a South Indian male plant the second year, and a Thai male plant the third year. Depending on which year the Haze seeds were collected, they resembled either Colombian, South Indian, or Thai plants. As a result, Original Haze can vary in taste from citrus Thai, the spicy Colombian flavor of Dutch Haze strains, and the whole spectrum of sativa notes. Today, Original Haze is in the family tree of around 15 per cent of Dutch varieties. 

https://doobienights.com/evolution-of-sinsemilla-the-origins-of-modern-cannabis/

Any Colour You Like, my friend

[Just A Box Of Rain]

139. I retain some skepticism of this account as the Oaxacan herb of that era was

substantially different that of classic CA sinsemilla, which was much more similar to Thai and Hawaiian varieties.

[Maeve]

18. Edibles make it easy to regulate the dose

But it takes some experience to find the right amount for your age, size and tolerance. Like any medication, it's not something to take unthinkingly. And that goes for both medical and recreational use.
Be cool, my fellow oldsters.

[Earth-shine]

52. Sometimes, the edibles take a long time to take effect, and then people eat more ...

before the first dose hits them.

And then, it all hits at once.

At that point, they either 1) have a great time 2) pass out, or 3) beg to go to the hospital.

[Maeve]

83. Had that problem with brownies back in the '70's

Ah, college memories!
Agreed that can be a problem....again, cautious experimentation is needed.

[csziggy]

128. Yeah, I had a couple of bad experiences with edibles back in the day

Got hold of a brick of pot that was pretty much powder with stems so it couldn't be rolled. Made brownies and granola with it. Ate two brownies and I was still high the next day when I had to go to work on payday so I couldn't call out. My supervisor sent me home as soon as the checks came out.

I still didn't learn - I took the granola to the theater to watch Godzilla vs. ? - old Japanese movie dubbed to English. It was surealistic I still get flashbacks when I try to watch old Godzilla movies.

I've avoided edibles since, but I'm thinking of getting a medical marijuana prescription to see it will help with back pain and insomnia. You can believe that I will be VERY careful when consuming any modern pot!

[Maeve]

148. The legal edibles have a dosage listed, so you know what you're getting

With smoking weed, it's all a guess. (the gummies aren't bad, but I prefer my whiskey)

[csziggy]

158. Yes, I am tempted to try the modern edibles - at least I'll know what I'm getting

I plan to talk to my GP at my next visit since here only medical marijuana is legal.

[walkingman]

20. Makes me want to try some of the "good stuff" I think I could handle it responsibly.

But I live in Texas so I suspect I will be dead before it becomes legal in this shithole.

[womanofthehills]

145. Just drive over to NM

We are awash in marijuana.

[Faux pas]

21. I

can understand it if it's because of edibles. There's no way to gauge the dosage. With the actual bud, two or three hits and I'm good

[Mr.Bill]

46. We make some great cookies.

We make them small, and test with a single bite, then let that wear off and go from there.

[H2O Man]

22. Recommended.

I'm in NYS. Back when pot was much weaker, politicians had made it illegal because it was dangerous. But now that it is way, way stronger, it is safe and legal. Hence, I decided to try a hit of the demon weed.

Call me paranoid, but I wanted to be safer than safe. So I had two policement, a psychologist, a medical doctor, three high school health teachers, and a piano in the room with me. I was glad I did.

On a more serious note, an old friend -- who has smoked pot for 50+ years, and done a massive amount of LSD in his youth, recently ate a brownie. He said that he sat on his couch, scared as hell. Thus, as others here have noted, the amount one ate years ago is not in the neighborhood of what is pleasant to consume today. When I was young, I liked to eat a gram of hash. I wouldn't consider consuming a gram of it today. And I told my friend that his experience is exactly why I'd never eat one of the brownies my son makes. I had warned him, and suffered the jokes the two of them directed at me.

On the bright side, abag of weed lasts way longer these days. One hit is all that is required.

[70sEraVet]

36. What a long, strange trip YOU'VE been on!

"Call me paranoid, but I wanted to be safer than safe. So I had two policement, a psychologist, a medical doctor, three high school health teachers, and a piano in the room with me..."
H2O Man, that room would have made me paranoid WITHOUT the pot!
Except the piano. That's the only item that made sense.
Hope you had a nice, safe, experiential event!

[H2O Man]

93. My fear is that

I will have a pot flashback and think I'm flying. The mere thought is giving me the urge to call my doctor and demand an increase in my daily placebo (x 9) as she says I have the most savage case of hypochondria that she has ever seen. She said that cyanide might be the only thing she can treat me with.

[70sEraVet]

116. Ah! That's why you wanted the piano!

If you started flying, they could tie you down to the piano! Perfect sense.
And yes, I agree about the cyanide treatment. Quite affordable, too. My Medicare Part D covers it, while the medical marijuana is NOT covered!
Let me know how the piano lessons are coming along.

[Wednesdays]

53. Certain strains will induce paranoia in certain people

Best to do homework on a strain before indulging.

[H2O Man]

104. I've been cramming

for decades!

[Lucinda]

55. I've always heard there were three reasons

racism
alcohol lobby
cotton lobby

this provides info on the racism, but doesnt talk about the connections to use the racism to protect the alcohol industry
https://www.britannica.com/story/why-is-marijuana-illegal-in-the-us

[H2O Man]

105. Right.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

67. We had better herb in the mid-70s here in CA than what's sold in dispensaries today.

Similar "strength" but with better pharmacological properties.

[H2O Man]

91. My brother

used to send local photos to High Times. They used one in the magazine, and another on the cover of a book on CA growing.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

92. It was a golden era.

Today's dispensary herb just isn't the same due to the strains used and the growing methods (which are related issues).

Pure sativa strains do not do well in the indoor grow-house farming method.

And something special has been largely lost.

Cool about your brother.

[H2O Man]

96. Oh, my brother was

a pain in the ass when it came to that. I used to remind him that there was no advantage accrued in showing off, or telling people.

This is just a guess on my part, but I think the trick is to keep a line going. Just speculation, but if some extended family members keep some going for, say, 50+ years, adding new tings into the mix, what can be grown today is much better than anything one could buy, including those "vaps" (which are nice).

[Just A Box Of Rain]

133. To my mind there are three components that made golden age sinsemilla so great.

One was starting with plants that were pure sativa, as opposed to being hybridized with indica (as all stains that are commercially grown indoors are "crosses," even those that claim otherwise).

Two, is making the commitment to growing the plants to full maturity, which takes 9 months (or more) before harvesting.

Three, it takes intensive horticultural work, including very careful pruning and culling, to spur the development of big cola/kola buds that drip with resin. This takes some knowledge, skill, and work. But a well-tended sativa plant will grow 9-12 feet tall outdoors and will be loaded with sticky buds.

And the smell? Transportational!

[womanofthehills]

146. It's legal to grow here in NM - it's hard to grow pure sativas

Maybe they can be grown in California but they need so much time to mature that outdoors in NM not a thing - snow would be here first. Also indoors, their lanky branches are not good candidates for being under lights. When new strains can be flowered in 60 days, why plant strains that have super long growing and flowering times?

[Just A Box Of Rain]

149. Yes, the long growing season of classic CA Sinsemilla makes its cultivation more difficult.

The plants are too tall to grow in the typical indoor grow-houses, and they resent continual harvesting. They need to be grown to full maturity, and that takes time and intensive pruning.

Having to wait 9 months (or so) makes growing classic sativa strains economically undesirable for commercial grow-houses.

But to your question of "why" one would want to have such varieties, it is do to both the marvelous fragrances these resin-rich buds produce and the qualitatively different sort of high that they produce. More of a "cerebral" high, rather than being stupefying.

Not a close contest by my preferences.

[Farmer-Rick]

89. Call me paranoid.....hehe

Yup, every time I ever tried pot it made me extremely paranoid. I would never take it recreationally, ever.

But I do get that cannabis cream for the arthritis in my hands. It never makes me high or paranoid and the affects on my pain is amazing.

[H2O Man]

100. Years ago,

I was driving my youngest kid home after a semester ended. She said, "Um, I don't want to upset you, but they say that pot is good for chronic pain. Maybe you should consider it." I said I don't drive high, but would try it when we got home.

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

125. I have a funny "brownie story", (well, it's funny now, but

at the time....not so much)

I was at home, and had a rare craving for something sweet, and remembered that my partner had left a brownie in the fridge. Perfect, right? Looked like a gourmet brownie, and without reading the package in any detail, I gobbled that sucker down like a starving puppy on a piece of ribeye. Well, a little while later, I started to feel strange, and soon felt the need to lay down. As the feeling progressed, it felt like I had taken some bad acid, which I actually had taken once, in college back east, which caused me to spend a night doubled over on a filthy piece of ground on the shore Sheepshead Bay in Brooklyn, feeling like I was going to die.

Anyway, feeling like I was soon going to be leaving this mortal coil, I called my partner at work, and told her she needed to come home, that I was really sick, and had to go to the hospital. She was skeptical, but came home, and I told her I thought I was dying. My only symptoms were a weird, profound sense of slipping away, and feeling like I was dying. We waited a bit to see if my condition improved, and when it got worse, we made prepared to go to the ER.

Just before we were about to leave for the ER, she came into the bedroom and asked, "Wait, did you eat that brownie that was in the fridge?" Yup, I sure did, guilty as charged.

Relieved, she then told me that she had found a brownie, (a 100mg THC indica brownie) that was left abandoned in a refrigerator where she works. So we got on the internet and looked up "marijuana overdose", and sure enough, I displayed the classic symptoms, one of which was the feeling of impending death. I was relieved, but still extremely uncomfortable, to the point where I wasn't positive that a pot brownie could do that to me. Naturally, the effects of the brownie wore off, and I survived, with no after effects except a funny story
to tell in social situations, and a commitment to from then on to always reading the label on anything I ate that came in a package.

I don't smoke herb anymore, because I don't like smoke in my lungs, but I smoked large quantities back in the day. I do use edibles medicinally now, but had not used any cannabis in any form for many years prior to my adventure down the rabbit hole at Willy Wonka's Cannabis Infused chocolate Factory.

My very chagrined and remorseful partner will not be bringing home any more psychoactive goodies without warning me immediately.

[Mr.Bill]

32. Weed from the 60s is like cheap canned beer.

Weed from now is like a huge selection of fine hard liquors.

Funny thing is, at 69 years old, 55 of those years smoking the stuff, somehow legalization has made me somewhat lose interest in it. I still use it occasionally, but it's just not the same kind of fun as it was when it was illegal.

I mean imagine you're in high school in the 60s and your girlfriend is baby-sitting for the science teacher and it's an over-nighter. You are going to spend the night with her, the teacher knows about it and gives you some weed to smoke while you are there. I mean how cool is that? This actually happened to me. And with the laws back then, this teacher was risking the end of his career and a lengthy prison sentence. It still amazes me to think about it.

[moonshinegnomie]

35. the problem with edibles is they take a long time to take effect

you take for example a 10mg gummy and 30 minutes later you dont feel anything. so you take another.
and 30-45 minute slater your wasted

[FoxNewsSucks]

112. That describes my first edible.

Used to the immediacy of smoking a joint. I didn't have a second cookie, and was glad of that when 40 minutes later it kicked in.

[spanone]

40. K&R

[Evolve Dammit]

45. It's a potency issue. Today's products are one-hit typically, especially for older folks.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

59. People who are now "old folks" and were well connected, smoked better herb in the mid-1970s

than one can fine in dispensaries today.

The California Sinsemilla, Mowie Wowie and other Hawaiian strains, and Thai were pure outdoor grown sativa strains.

The indoor grown dispensary herb today has all been hybridized, to the detriment of the quality, to make growing and harvesting easier.

Today's stuff is inferior.

[MrsCheaplaugh]

90. I very much agree.

This whole "weed today is x times more potent than 60s or 70s" is a myth that the prohibition lobby spread. The opposite is the case.

[Evolve Dammit]

153. Had all of those and appreciated each and every one. The new stuff is potent. Hopefully no paraquat

[Evolve Dammit]

154. PS. What I wouldn't give for some Panama Red or Thai stick.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

155. The new stuff is potent. It just tends to be "down" rather than "up."

That goes against my preferences.

[Demsrule86]

56. Bunch of BS promoted by the Pharmaceutical industry

[getagrip_already]

58. The problem isn't the weed, it's the thugs who grow it...

I've had a look at how the sausage gets made, and it isn't pretty.

I'm talking about black market commercial growers here. Legal growers get a lot more scrutiny.

Ok. So when you grow a large quantity in one confined place, your goal is speed to harvest and no crop losses. So you dose the plants for bugs, and diseases, and to get them to grow faster.

Then you dry it, trim it, and sell it by the kilo as fast as you can.

Black market weed is as healthy for you as picking herbs on the new jersey turnpike near Trenton.

The growers don't care what's in it. It's money to them. Lots of money depending on where you live.

But despite what people tell you, flower isn't really that much more potent than it was. It is, but you will just reach a high sooner, not a bigger high.

It's the edibles that are stronger. They start with highly potent extracts (which have all the contaminants from the flowers, plus the chemicals used during extraction), in a more concentrated form.

We used to make pot brownies with flowers and leaves. Now we use extracts and can make them highly potent.

Unfortunately, there really isn't any place where this gets made visible. So caveat emptor.

One of the reasons I grow it myself and make my own extracts. And I don't even use it as a rule... my friends and family like it though.

[ancianita]

62. This thread has taught me more about DU than DU Lounge. Funny AF!

Thank you. I thought since my 70's weed days, that I've "been there done that," but now with edibles in the next room, I know what to do. No Taco Bell, no ER!

[dflprincess]

66. To be fair, the article does say some seniors are experimenting with it for "palliative care"

Good story for the kids when they have to pick you up at the hospital.

[cate94]

76. There is a solution without going to the E.R.

Eat a peppercorn. This is advice from David Crosby, if I recall correctly. A friend of mine called me in severe distress, and I told her to try it, she argued, I said “what have you got to lose?” It worked. I personally have never needed it, but it certainly can’t hurt you.

[Lucky Luciano]

78. I never smoke no shit like that man!

[IcyPeas]

88. My local dispensary has a 15 % discount for seniors

[ZonkerHarris]

108. Go easy on the THC gummies people!

[Emile]

115. Hydrate, Eat, Take a shower, Walk, there are many

ways to come down without going to a god damn hospital.

[bluedigger]

118. And they expect the hospital to do what, exactly?

Send them to the cafeteria and tell them to ride it out? This sounds really bad, to be honest. How many seniors have we lost? Oh. Not one... This chronic 62 year old user is unimpressed by this scaremongering.

[msfiddlestix]

119. self deleted duplicate posting

[msfiddlestix]

120. It's overdosing on the Edibles and Tincture. I was almost one of those Seniors, EMT's came to me

I think it was summer of 2020, cuz I think they were wearing masks.

A neighbor dropped by one evening with her bag of prescriptions just delivered. She wanted to share, I was in the mood to experiment.

A buffet of edibles laid out, tempting me to try each one, but I only ate a few different ones, didn't want to get too stoned.

Then she brought out the tincture, gave me a few drops of 80%. which I never tried before. About 45 minutes later, my entire body was paralyzed.

I could barely manage to scroll through contacts on my phoneto call a different neighbor to help me get into bed.

I was torn about her driving me to ER, didn't see how I could manage it.

so she called 911 and they came to me. Asked me what happened, I told them, and was reassured this would wear off in a few hours and I'll be ok. Chief EMT asked me if this was my first time. I said with edibles, but it never happened when I smoked it.

I think it was the tincture combined with the edibles which I had never experienced and later learned that 80% was seriously high dosage. So relieved to wake up the next day feeling just fine. I think experimenting days are long over.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

137. Did any of them die from consuming cannabis? (nt)

[BComplex]

143. As we age, our bodies change as radically, again, as they did during puberty. Things are totally

different. And there is seriously little research into dealing with those changes by our (for-profit) medical system. Dosages for everything from blood pressure medicine to cholesterol medicine, and marijuana, need to be adjusted according to each individual.

Collagen is only one of the critical things that changes as we age, and it is lost at varying degrees with each individual. Bone density is different for each. So many different degrees of change.

People are like trees, or any other thing in nature. Some break easily, some never seem to die.

[Bucky]

156. Maybe the FDA needs to start regulating the strength of cannibis.

I keep hearing (okay, reading) about how powerful the stuff is now. Imagine a world where there was only vodka and no beer.

Maybe the government needs to regulate it so that we go back to having beer-caliber weed and make the hard stuff harder to get.

[KentuckyWoman]

159. The best part about this thread is how long it is.

Put Stoned and Seniors in the same post and it's a winner every time.

I never have done recreational anything. Not drugs, weed, tobacco, alcohol. I'm boring as all heck.

But this LONG thread did make me smile.