Are Strain Review Sites Useful?

[darbarikanada]

in legal states there's a huge # of strains available. there are many sites that review them, which should help people choose. most of the reviews submitted by the public seem useless to me - IME about 1 in 10 attempt a serious review (at best). the editors seem to take their job seriously, try to come up with useful descriptions. nonetheless, I'm starting to wonder if these descriptions have any value at all beyond letting people know where the strain falls on the indica-sativa spectrum. my question to FC users: do you use these reviewing sites to help choose strains, and, if so, do you find them to be generally accurate?

 

[rabblerouser]

I get more out of the strain descriptions and strain lineage from sites like leafly. I especially like seeing what the original seed company website says about a strain. The reviews can be helpful, but more-so if you can read a bunch and then generalize from them.

 

[CarolKing]

Also take into consideration - it depends a lot on how the plant was grown and taken care of during the curing process. I do rely a lot on info from leafy - lineage and characteristics I take into consideration. I'm not a fan of diesel - I see that I usually steer away. I like fruit, berry and woodsy vapor taste.

 

[HighSeasSailor]

I like the strain lineage and effects info, but user reviews are sadly worthless. Still, a lot can be learned from heritage and history.

 

[CalyxSmokr]

I just like to see big hits and melt shots.
What they got called one thing is not going to be what you get called that.

 

[hillbill]

Seedfinder is nice for researching strain ancestry.

 

[Baron23]

I get more out of the strain descriptions and strain lineage from sites like leafly.

This ^^ +1

 

[Tranquility]

While I don't think strain reviews are useful yet, I think it is where the future of the industry lies. There is going to be more and more data on how the different genotypes (phenotypes?) of cannabis interact with different people. We will someday choose cannabis with the exact profile that works for us and our particular mood of the moment.

Someday.

 

[rabblerouser]

While I don't think strain reviews are useful yet, I think it is where the future of the industry lies. There is going to be more and more data on how the different genotypes (phenotypes?) of cannabis interact with different people. We will someday choose cannabis with the exact profile that works for us and our particular mood of the moment.

Someday.

chemotypes are what we want for this purpose, phenotypes could potentially just look / grow different but give the same effects (even though diff phenotypes may well be diff chemotypes, not necessarily).

But, someday european DOC style, must have spec'd range of limonene, carophyllene, CBG, CBC, and so on...

I think the science still isn't there yet though to say what is the same enough to count. Is it ratios of components that matter more than absolute amounts?

I think all the anecdotal stuff is what we have while the science gets hashed out, but you want to aggregate and just get a general picture and understand that each strain has a range of possible expressions.

 

[Tranquility]

I think all the anecdotal stuff is what we have while the science gets hashed out, but you want to aggregate and just get a general picture and understand that each strain has a range of possible expressions.

I think I disagree with this and that disagreement gets to my point. Right now, each "strain" is some mix of genes to get results without really knowing why. Soon, the why switches will be known and they should be able to grow plants that end up with specific expressions. (Which is why I like phenotype as the term.) The knowledge that is a bit further out is how the particular mixes act on different types of people.

https://oxigem2015.wordpress.com/20...gy-is-making-medical-marijuana-drugs-cheaper/

 

[howie105]

If everybody were reviewing the same exact samples, using the same vapes in the same ways and each reviewer shared the same tastes then review results would be a lot more focused and useful to me. However everyone can be looking for something different in a review so its all good.

 

[jirodreamsofbooty]

Before any of it's useful, I think terpenes need more study to see if they have any real effect beyond flavor and smell. Lots and lots of talk about myrcene does this and pinene does this but no double-blind comparisons that I'm aware - two samples with equal cannabinoid profiles but different terpenes.

 

[Godspeed]

I am a new medical user (seizures) and sites like Leafly and others at least gave me a starting point.

As mentioned above, if all reviewers were testing the same sample in the exact same device (and were able to actually compose a useful review) you would have a better starting point but it would still be subjective.

 

[rabblerouser]

I am a new medical user (seizures) and sites like Leafly and others at least gave me a starting point.

As mentioned above, if all reviewers were testing the same sample in the exact same device (and were able to actually compose a useful review) you would have a better starting point but it would still be subjective.

yeah, even once it's standardized different people respond differently to the same strains, further muddying the waters... my favourites may or may not be anyone else's favourites.

That's why it's best to grow your own medicine.

 

[grokit]

These guys are my go-to, they have many different seeds available from 100's of different breeders and overall the most complete information about growing conditions, yield, lineage, cannabinoid profile etc.

https://www.worldwide-marijuana-seeds.com/

 

[rabblerouser]

I think I disagree with this and that disagreement gets to my point. Right now, each "strain" is some mix of genes to get results without really knowing why. Soon, the why switches will be known and they should be able to grow plants that end up with specific expressions. (Which is why I like phenotype as the term.) The knowledge that is a bit further out is how the particular mixes act on different types of people.

nah, each 'strain' rarely breeds true and even with identical growing conditions different seeds will not express the same traits. Inbred lines, on the otherhand will largely breed true and only express 1 phenotype.

 

[TeeJay1952]

But what about crooks? Say you are a dispensary with various strains. Folks come in and ask continually for "Girl Scout Cookies." You have a jar that isn't moving. New label and out the door.
A review site can only tell you a story that already happened. Few people will fight over a wrong designation. Mostly growers care about genetics because they will have a pile o the stuff. No one goes to the mattresses over an 1/8th.

 

[looney2nz]

Before any of it's useful, I think terpenes need more study to see if they have any real effect beyond flavor and smell. Lots and lots of talk about myrcene does this and pinene does this but no double-blind comparisons that I'm aware - two samples with equal cannabinoid profiles but different terpenes.

well, between choice of strain and how you ingest it... I've found this to be true:
I got the most profound 'entourage effect' after using a cold process preparation that maintains all the raw cannabinoids (THCa, THCv, CBDa, CBC, CBG, etc.) and all the terpenes. Since there was little more than THC, THCa, CBD, CBDa, a small amount of CBN in the strain I was using (tested both AC/DC and Cannatonic, have made preps with other strains and even combined some), it wasn't terribly complex on that level, but the terpenes sure seem to have definite activity. Which backs up the research I know of.

But you are indeed correct, we need much more study into the terpenes as well as the 'minor' cannabinoids.
Alongside http://www.cannabis-med.org/english/bulletin/iacm.php, the 'Reader' is great here: http://www.beyondthc.com/ and http://theleafonline.com/c/science/2014/10/terpene-profile-caryophyllene/ and O'Shaunessy's (sp?) had a special issue on this some time ago: http://www.os-extra.cannabisclinicians.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/EntourageEffect.pdf

Aside from tinkering for gene expression, synbio (synthetic biology, usually some customized yeast strain that produces a specific compound (say myrcene)) is also in the mix... not sure if there are any issues with these yet.

 

[jirodreamsofbooty]

I'm skeptical of most marijuana information sites that claim to collect research (avalanches of bro-science) and when someone like Steep Hill Labs start emphasizing terpenes what I hear is a value-added service, since they test for them.

In the Cannabis Clinicians article, it uses pull quotes like "Limonene has been shown to decrease anxiety in mice via the serotonin receptors." That may be true - but at what dosage?

Something like this: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12587690 implies that most terpenes are active in doses of many mg/kg of bodyweight - a far cry from inhaling (at most) 10-12mg.

For now, it appears to me that the most that can be said with even a little bit of certainty is that effects are highly dependent on the two most common cannabinoids (THC and CBD), possibly modified by CBN (due to aging) and occasionally an oddball like the high-THCV strains (that don't exist in the wild yet).

 

[Chandler]

do you use these reviewing sites to help choose strains, and, if so, do you find them to be generally accurate?

I like sites that allow customers to rate and review each strain they sell. i buy a strain and i'll post a review so i know the people reviewing are real... when a strain gets 5 stars and all ten reviewers are like: very intense buzz, long lasting, energetic, focused, uplifted etc.... i find strains will generally have those same effects.

when sites don't offer reviews i rely on leafly for their descriptions and information. i find that their descriptions of effects tend to be correct.

i like reviews from real people though. its nice to have user input. there probably is a thread here dedicated to strains possibly? if not, there should be!

 

[archangelz001]

For now, it appears to me that the most that can be said with even a little bit of certainty is that effects are highly dependent on the two most common cannabinoids (THC and CBD), possibly modified by CBN (due to aging) and occasionally an oddball like the high-THCV strains (that don't exist in the wild yet).

Since most strains I obtain at NorCal dispensaries have very similar cannabinoid profiles of THC and CBD, etc., it's tempting to assume that the 20% THC of Jack Herer and the 20% THC of a GDP should have the same effect. But they don't. Jack gets me up and awake, while GDP will put me down and sleepy. The only difference then is in the terpene profile to account for the difference in effect.

 

[jirodreamsofbooty]

There's a much bigger factor there that you're not accounting for: your knowledge of what 'strain' is being sold to you. The placebo effect is massive - perhaps if you're sold "energetic" cannabis, you may be priming yourself for it to be energetic and act accordingly - you'll smoke/vape it when you plan to be moving around (or whatever) rather than imbibe and immediately lay back on the couch.

I'm not aware of any double-blind "sativa" vs. "indica" studies but that's a very clear and easy starting point - two samples with comparable cannabinoid profiles in the same setting (with a few days in between).

 

[jirodreamsofbooty]

For instance:
https://www.leafly.com/indica/granddaddy-purple

GDP at the absolute top end has 1.6% myrcene with a range of .3 to 1.6, so the average sample should have ~.8%. Assuming you imbibe an entire gram at once and all myrcene is captured, that's 8mg myrcene. I'm aware of no studies showing that myrcene has effects in such small doses.

 

[MinnBobber]

I'm aware of no studies showing that myrcene has effects in such small doses.

.........................................................................................

myrcene allows certain chemicals, such as THC, to cross the blood-brain barrier more easily. Myrcene has also been shown to increase the maximum saturation level of the endocannabinoid system’s CB1 receptor.
As such, it helps increase the effects of cannabis.
And bear in mind, many other strains have much less Myrcene so GDP provides a strong dose of it.

 

[archangelz001]

There's a much bigger factor there that you're not accounting for: your knowledge of what 'strain' is being sold to you. The placebo effect is massive - perhaps if you're sold "energetic" cannabis, you may be priming yourself for it to be energetic and act accordingly - you'll smoke/vape it when you plan to be moving around (or whatever) rather than imbibe and immediately lay back on the couch.

I'm not aware of any double-blind "sativa" vs. "indica" studies but that's a very clear and easy starting point - two samples with comparable cannabinoid profiles in the same setting (with a few days in between).

I appreciate that the placebo effect is real (BTW I'm a retired RN with 40 years of acute hospital care experience) and I don't discount that expectations can affect the experience. But I have several times vaped what I thought was an Indica strain near bedtime only to be wide awake for 90 minutes. Luckily I put little tags on my vaporizers to write down the strain it contains because I frequently load enough for two sessions on different days. I assumed I had Indica but in fact had Sativa in it. Oops, my bad. I'm not as sensitive to the differences in strain-specific effects now as I was 3 years ago because, though I still microdose, my tolerance is greater now. So, there is something else going on other than placebo effect. Just because you don't feel it doesn't mean others don't. It's always a bad idea to extrapolate a generalization to a whole population from an N of 1. THC is cerebrally stimulating no matter the strain. I never expect to fall asleep immediately. But I do expect sleep to come in 30-60 minutes. So I'll only vape Sativas in the late evening at least 2 hours before expected sleep time. Indicas just feel more sedative and are quicker acting in that way. I just don't believe this is a stoner myth, it's based on the collective stoner experience of the past 30-40 years. But a double blind study would be good to do. Come on over and I'll give you mystery cannabis to analyze the effects.