SamuiGrower

24) Control unruly Farang tourist rigulation (sic). They come here and the next thing you know, we have Sex Tourism and now Cannabis Tourism. Let’s not blame cannabis or sex. Maybe medical sex should be legal but the “other” kind, not so much……….

I agree with thirsty21. All in favor of nice, dense, tasty nugs with that je nais se quois “Terpene Profile”, say aye! In the business back in the states, we had a regulatory body on both quality and pricing: Quality was strictly enforced by the consumer, a wide demographic of discerning smokers, who had several hundred dispensaries to chose from. If you missed the mark on quality, the cannabis fashionista would publicly crucify you on social media as well as any cannabis related network. They wanted and demanded the best. Here in Thailand, you are not the demographic. It’s the cannabis tourist. The market is a completely unregulated race-to-the-bottom. When one-off buyers will pay big baht by the gram and never return, why should they play to you, the “regular”? Go buy where you feel comfortable. Darwinism will triumph in the business and only successful business grow models will triumph. You will ultimately be left with “the Walmart”of weed and hopefully a cut above that. Imagine……lots of great LED lights and lots and lots of nimble fingers, hand trimming all those great nugs…….. Curious. You think a dispensary that professes to you, their knowledge of the genetics, cultivation techniques and terpene profiles of their flower, presents you a value added perspective and a better, more informed decision? I have this bridge you might be interested in…. Believing any information in regards to the flower you are considering buying is a complete fantasy, likely handed down by the seed bank the seeds came from. Here is how I quantify the difference in your bud pics. Good bud: tight, dense nugs, no leaf material, very tight trim. Bad Bud: leafy, airy, stemy, sloppy trimming, brown and OLD, degraded by humidity and light. Find a weed shop(s) that meet your criteria for the bud you like, or better, start a thread and datapoint all the great shops and share them with the expat peeps. They in turn, will share theirs and so on. Pricing. Capitalism is great and certainly promotes that Darwinism model. In Colorado, the CDR (Colorado Dept of Revenue) sets the pricing with a quarterly AMR (Average Market Rate). They use the data they collate from the seed-to-sale software, that every dispensary and grow op must use, and collate metrics. This is what happens in a regulated industry. The current AMR for 1 lb (454 grams) of retail flower is currently $645. That’s 49.00 baht a gram. In a fair, keystone retail business, the price would be 100 baht a gram. This somewhat correlates to the US$90.00 an ounce - out the door price that you see in Denver. Of course, the latest “Unicorn Poop” strain always sells for $260(ish). This is what regulates a fair market with balanced trade. Tourism and ‘whatever the market will bear’ pricing, dominates this market. If you have high standards, find your niche dealer and strike up a relationship for some dank cola bud. And, please, buy some weight. If you’re a gram buyer that likes to talk about what bothers you, I doubt you’ll get to the good stuff.

I was planning on posting this under its own tag/topic, but am opting to post it, this way, after reading the numerous postings on the relationship of cannabis to cancer or cannabis in relation to health, be it negative or positive. I have reviewed the posts on “Cannabis and cancer”, of which there are many and appear time-to-time. This is a reoccurring theme on this forum that presents itself in many different forms: Palliative care: for chemo symptoms, nausea, loss of appetite Alternative treatments: other than chemo or typical ontological protocols Vaping vs. smoking Cannabis cures cancer The responses/posts fall, overwhelmingly, into the following categories: Smoking/vaping cannabis cures cancer and is NOT carcinogenic Science denialism (complete with some ‘other’ left field cure) Google and YouTube myths See a trained MD/physician posts My take away: Science denial is pervasive, with some not willing to consider smoking cannabis (conventionally or vaping) as having known, scientifically proven, carcinogenic compounds. Some, double down and say, ‘science is often wrong, it’s semantics, “a game of words”, never been a known cancer case, depends what the definition of ‘is’ is, etc. A lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth can get its boots on. What-about-ism: YouTube says this, Google says that. There is a reason why academics, colleges and universities won’t (can’t) use general internet searches for citing anything: misinformation, disinformation, and just plain lies. Have a medical question? Look at CDC, NIH, FDA, AMA, News-Medical, ACS and a host of others. NOT YouTube or Google. The boundary between truth/fact/science and SEO positioning is very blurry and getting worse. If you have an anti-cancer ‘widget’ in the game, you can pay for search engine ranking. Think about that. We all love cannabis ????. At least, for those of us in this forum, of which I am one. Some refuse to accept that it is not a cure for all that ails you and can’t accept that Mary Jane can be bad in combustible form. Anything you smoke can/will be bad for you. Habitual smokers (of anything) have higher risks and occasional smokers, lower risks. Any MD will support this fact. And, yes, we all know the smoker of 50 years that’s healthy as an ox. This is evidence of nothing. A sample study of one, that wins no debate or settles any dispute. Just another ‘good genes’ anecdote. The truth: Smoking anything through conventional combustion has carcinogenic compounds. Eliminate the tar, residues and other nasties doesn’t make it safer it only minimizes the dose of carcinogenic compounds that are cumulative. Smoking or vaping cannabis has carcinogenic compounds as well, regardless of temperature or filtration (bubblers, bongs, etc.) In fact, smoking or vaporization of concentrated hydrocarbons (dabs in all its forms) has an increased set of risks outside the parameters of cigarette smoking. For palliative care: nausea or loss of appetite- smoke away. Whatever makes your quality of life better in the moment. More power to you. As a scientist, I was ‘chastised’ for posting, “smoking/vaping cannabis will NEVER be an accepted delivery system for cannabinoids as a medical treatment/protocol”. I stand by that statement, scientifically. Medically, cannabis will prove out to be effective in the treatment of many, many diseases - we should have no doubts. Cannabinoids will be separated into its fractions (CBD, THC and all its isomers, CBG, CBN, CBC and the like) and quantifiable doses with known efficacy will be administered through: ingestion, tinctures, sub-dermals, inhalers, oromucosal sprays, etc. There are already well known patented and multi-National cannabis pharmaceuticals that are making huge inroads in treatments. Sativex (and other Nabiximols), Nabilone, Dronabinol and Cesamet, to name a few. None are prescribed for cancer or tumors. There is a clinical trial, being conducted at present in the UK on cannabis and glioblastomas (brain tumors). The modality of dosing is NOT by smoking/vaping. Looking for a ‘carcinogen free’ way of using cannabis? Eat it. Edibles, medibles, tinctures, etc. In fact, ingestion is a good mode of dosing albeit ‘first pass metabolism’ through the liver, greatly diminishes the effective dose. In the case of THC, ingestion produces a much stronger psychoactive response as the liver converts the THC to a more powerful form (11-OH-THC). A better absorption, bypassing first-pass-metabolism, can be achieved by using MCT oil (medium chain triglycerides) as the carrier. If you have cancer, yes, you should first consult MD’s in the medical world that will inform you of known protocols, treatments and outcomes in the conventional treatments of known cancers. After you have been fully informed and you still wish to seek alternative treatments, do so, knowing your full array of options. Alternative treatments: RSO (Rick Simpson Oil) has a huge body of anecdotal evidence in the cure of cancer and tumors, so overwhelming, it can not be ignored. Yes, many of those testimonials are on YouTube and Forums alike as well as multiple websites. Other botanicals or cancer ‘cures’. Drill down and do your research. Many of these herbs/botanicals pose ‘other’ risks, especially to your endocrine system, CNS, GI system and enzyme synthesis. Many that I have researched, at minimum, lower blood pressure, affect blood clotting and lower blood glucose. They all ‘promise’ the same thing: positive lab studies (all in vivo of course) and the hope of a cure. The history of modern pharmacology originated through the use of botanics and pharmacokinetics show promise everyday in the use of natural plants. But please, exercise caution and first check with the FDA about any contraindications as to ingestion and use of anything. Remember, without human clinical trials, all claims remain unsubstantiated and purely anecdotal. I find it curious that studies that show ‘possible cancer curing’ phytochemicals and antioxidants from say, cruciferous vegetables, like Broccoli and cabbage, never lead to internet crazes that promote broccoli shakes that ‘cure’ cancer. Instead, it’s some leaf from an exotic fruit that is touted as the newest cure-all, usually replete with an infomercial, testimonial and advertisement for purchase. “Studies suggest that it could, might, may, possibly be effective……” Usually, if we are lucky enough that the medical profession has taken a remote interest in these botanicals, and yes, many show incredible anti-cancer effects (apoptosis), most of those studies are done on cells, ‘in vivo’, in lab Petri dishes that somehow, “jump the shark” and are then promoted on the net as a cure. It’s a huge leap! You should be aware there is an ample amount of medical quackery in the treatment of cancer by MD’s as well. These fringe doctors promote risky, expensive, unfounded and medically unrecognized treatments. Many hide behind their “fight” against the system (FDA, AMA, etc.) to distract from the controversy of their questionable treatments. Conclusions: Smoking as a modality of cannabinoid delivery as medicine: Unlikely/never. If you say, ‘…I smoke a few hits and it makes me sleep or it cures my insomnia’ and that’s proof of smoking as medicine. Or, it cures my anxiety or it gives me hunger……then you have discovered the narrow bandwidth to make your argument, BUT it is narrow at that. Cannabis WILL be an accepted medical treatment but not in the buds-to-bong approach. It will go through short-path fractional distillation or HPLC, and the slices of cannabinoids and isomers will be processed. Synthetic cannabinoids will predominate pharmacology and the medical world because of their metered, consistent and measurable quantification that evades naturally grown plant cannabinoids due to varying and unpredictable growing conditions. Keep it real and be informed. Try not to settle for the first ‘search’ that supports your theory, as much as you would like to believe it. Do a “360” approach and research as much as you can. Look at what you are researching from all angles and viewpoints. Truth/facts/science is not negotiable or relative based upon your perception or viewpoint. There is only one truth as inconvenient as it might be at times.

i should have been more accurate for you. no carcinogens linked to cancer. no proof cannabis use causes cancer. Uh, no, that’s incorrect or in your case, inaccurate. There are plenty of verifiable carcinogens in cannabis, I named a few above. The medical field is pretty much cut and dry with that. I read the article, it didn’t support your opinion. It said, “…..Cannabis smoke contains many of the same carcinogens as tobacco smoke, including greater concentrations of certain aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzopyrene, prompting fears that chronic marijuana inhalation may be a risk factor for tobacco-use related cancers. ” it goes on to extol the benefits of all the cannabinoids that you get to enjoy in the same carcinogenic puff. See my drift? Look, I can do the work for you and report back and let you know the real deal (isn’t that what I just did? ????) or you can continue to say no, no, no, except for soursop which is a yes. (please hold me down ????‍????). Certainly not out to change your mind but there are some disciples of science out there to be real with.

No, there is no truth in it other than it ranks pretty high on Google SEO but I digress…. Unless you are getting data from the NIH (National Institute of Health) or other accredited medical, fact based, science site, I would research further. If you do, you will find that News-Medical, NIH, John’s Hopkins, Sloan Kettering say the exact opposite with some medical studies saying it is more detrimental than nicotine. I tend to trust the datapoints of all those oncology patients that went through protocols. I know what SAFE is but what is SAFER? As I’ve said before, ad nauseam, talk to MD’s, oncologists, pulmonologists - I have. None recommend inhaling anything. Hard stop. Any type of “dab” related distillate will prove out to be the most deleterious on the lungs. It’s all lipophilic, oily, sticky, resiny fluid that is deposited on the mucosa lining of your lungs. When you dabbers clean your rig, think of that “reclaim” on your lungs. Right, 1/1000th safer. ???? Best way to get those cannabinoids through the blood-brain barrier - I’ll give you that! Im in the choir boys, believe me….but I don’t delude myself and yes, I’m representative of most of you.

Yes, unfortunately so. ???? Substitute the word combustion for vaporization and we have the same outcome. Concentrated forms may not have vegetal matter or the same particulate impurities as flower but those concentrated hydrocarbons do pose a known risk. So unfortunate.

Not exactly…. Except for: benzoprene (benzopyrene), benzanthracene, carbon monoxide, nitrosamines, polycyclic oxidative hydrocarbons and 27 other known carcinogens. Science, so inconvenient at times…..

Data services offering Insights into the legal cannabis industry in Thailand is inherently flawed from the start, offering nothing more than what “WeedMaps or Leafly” offers in the USA: a map and menu of locations and offerings. The “data” is cripplingly limited, as it is an uneven playing field rife with “bad actors”, illegal imports and more than dubious product as is blatantly obvious by reading the cannabis related posts in this forum. How does one produce data or metrics to analyze when there is no type of regulation that tracks quantity and analysis of products sold? One does not need to look further than the USA to see what valid metrics looks like. Seed-to-sale software in every dispensary and grow across the US is regulated by both, cannabis enforcement regulators as well as a department of revenue (specific to each state, i.e MED (Marijuana Enforcement Division and CDR (Colorado Department of Revenue) in Colorado). There is almost no mechanism for cheating and many avenues to be fined and penalized. Infractions are published. The sole purpose of universal, non-resident software is COMPLIANCE. The type of data and metrics that are produced: Total sales by category of product, I.e. flower, edibles, etc. This metric is cross referenced amongst other grows and dispensaries to show demographic feasibility and economic balance. Total yield by seed/clone. Also cross referenced amongst other grows to show yield and grow metrics. Audit trail and consolidation of every plant, clone, seed and finished gram of flower so that ‘rogue’ flower does not infiltrate the market. Inspection reports: licenses, taxation, employee verification (badges) Certificates of Analysis of flower: microbial, pesticide and THC Consolidation of documents and product manifests. Local and state taxation and compliance reporting Product and regulatory labeling (To name just a few. Forgetting more than I remember ????) By consistent and universal data tracking, economics of the cannabis industry becomes clear; how much is sold and for how much? Non-compliant growers that fail inspections lose their license after repeated failures/fines. Grow and Dispensary licenses are separate businesses (you need to be integrated to make money but it’s not necessary). Products that enter a dispensary are audited in real time and are cross referenced against seed-to-sale metrics and quantities. Product is not ‘released’ without COA’s. A grow can’t have 500 clones appear one day without an audit trail, and if they do, they are destroyed. A rating system of flower is done by the social media consumer market. What we call cannabis fashionistas, who drive the market in relation to quality and variety. Without an iota of regulation in this nascent market, what good is a rating system? What are the standards? Who is doing the rating? As per the OP: “This means that almost all the data on our state of industry page is directly provided by the shops themselves, ensuring accuracy and up-to-date information that can be trusted by users.” The data is provided by the shops themselves? Ensuring accuracy? Wow, really? Instills no confidence in me, whatsoever. Read poster, Bamnutsak’s synopsis of Meeting minutes with the Department of Thai Traditional and Alternative Medicine Agenda for some real in-site: https://aseannow.com/topic/1293676-the-bad-actors-in-thailand%E2%80%99s-cannabis-industry/?do=findComment&comment=18069357 As most of us know, the legalization was not well thought out, rolled out way too soon, and woefully remiss in any type of regulation. I liken Thailand to the USA, 11 years ago: under regulation to over regulation to controlling licenses and production to the utter decline and non-profitability of small(er) players within the market. So, I commend the effort to provide data but make it meaningful, measurable data. A list of articles, a weed map, menus of offerings….it’s a beginning but somehow I can’t help thinking it will be an ad based revenue portal.

You’re correct but the limiting factor is not humidity it’s the light, surprisingly enough. Equatorial strains all share the same trait: long finishing/maturing. 16 weeks flowering is not unusual at all. The cumulative light for a crop to mature and finish is called DLI (daily light integral). This is the intensity (measured in umol/ppfd) multiplied by time (hours) by square meter (canopy). Cannabis is a high DLI crop, perhaps the highest known. Cannabis needs around 50 DLI. There are 4 months in Thailand where the DLI is 40-45, the other 8 months, well below that (30-35). Since DLI, in relation to crop finishing (outdoors) is cumulative, finishing takes ‘forever’. When talking landrace strains, long finishing time is in the genetic coding (DNA). To be clear, when talking “landrace”, we mean pure C. Sativa, not hybridized with C. Indica.

Terpenes or “Terps” as they are colloquially called amongst us, are all the rage, if not the craze, amongst the stoner, grower and medical user community. We love to throw the word around but most don’t really know: what they are, or what they do. Here’s the science of it. Or, at least enough of it as to not make you glaze over. What are Terpenes? They are medium chain (C10) hydrocarbons associated with many, many plants of which cannabis is just one. Citrus fruits, oily herbs/spices (thyme, sage, basil, rosemary, peppercorns, etc. are just a few examples of plants with terpenes. They are the main components of all essential oils. We are more familiar with them in our lives than we think. Camphene (camphor), Eucalyptol, Thymol, citronellol, pinene, etc. They are in mouthwash, tiger balm, insect spray, perfumes and food and beverages, to name just a few. They are responsible for the aromas and flavors (organoleptic properties) of cannabis. It’s their association with cannabis that the conversation becomes contentious. More on this below. They are produced in cannabis as a stress response to combat UV exposure (sunscreen), low humidity and insect/animal predation (herbivory). They are expressed and isolated in the trichomes of the plant. These are the sticky/resinous glands that look like tiny mushrooms (stalked capitate glandular trichomes). The modern practice in cannabis growing is to create controlled stress to increase terpene (and all secondary metabolites for that matter) production. Low humidity in the last few weeks of flowering (weeks 5-8) will increase trichome production as well as controlled drought stress and UV-B spectrum light (the science is still a bit unclear on this). Here’s where the controversy begins. The word “Terpenes” is thrown around in the recreational cannabis world as a selling point, to convey how great the flower smells and tastes. Fair enough. In the medical cannabis world, the word is used in regards to its medicinal qualities and is usually paired with the phrase “Entourage Effect”. This is a re-manufactured term taken from “synergistic effect”. One proven example of the entourage effect NOT involving terpenes is the relationship of THC with CBD. We know they act in tandem and the net result is better than the sum of the parts alone. Simply stated, the hypothesis, and that’s all it is, is terpenes will enhance the effect of cannabinoids in a medical way, I.e. certain terpenes (in cannabis flower) will make you up, down, sleepy, calm, motivated, act as an anxiolytic (anti-anxiety), anti-emetic, etc. The entourage effect of terpenes in cannabis is purely hypothetical. There is no scientific or medical evidence that terpenes modulate the effect of cannabinoids on the endocannabinoid receptors in the body (CB1/CB2). In fact, there is more scientific evidence to state the contrary than to support it. When terpenes are isolated and studied (most are synthetically made and added, post production to distillates and extracts) they have medicinal qualities, i.e. Camphene acts as an anti-inflammatory and is a great transdermal for topical medications and Thymol is an anti-bacterial in mouthwash and limonene is an antioxidant. BUT, there is little evidence of the effects of smoking terpenes or the associative (synergistic) effect of cannabinoids and terpenes. It is purely hopeful supposition that terpenes are a ‘value added’ medicinal property of cannabis. Any associative effect is non-quantifiable and thus only hypothetical. Aside from the natural terpenes that you smell and taste in cannabis flower (bud). The terpenes that are used in extracts, distillates, vapes, carts, etc. are all added post-processing, are synthetically made (it’s way to costly and inefficient to extract and isolate usable terpenes from flower) and are used mostly as a viscosity constituent and ‘flavoring’ in vaping. Live rosin is an exception. This is probably the best way to experience natural terpenes in smoking. Unfortunately, in short path distillation and SCE extraction, most of the natural terpenes are stripped out. Want some more controversy? Terpene profiles are part of the genetic disposition of the cannabis strain (cultivar, soon to be replaced by the term chemovar). There is nothing a grower can do to change this profile other than providing controlled stress events, as stated previously, to increase the terpene response within the plant. We can not add different terpenes that did not originally exist in the strains DNA. To make it even more controversial, no two plants (of the same strain) will produce the same exact terpene profile. In fact, no two parts of the same plant will produce the same profile. Differences in lighting zones, irrigation, micro-climates and nutrition uptake will affect this as well. The good part. Outdoor, soil grows show higher, more consistent terpene regularity than indoor CEA (controlled environment agriculture) plants. So, there it is - a primer on terpenes. What say you?

The irony is palpable considering the legislature created the problem. How does one stuff the genie back in the bottle? “No Illegal Imports!” But the legal import of cannabis by those holding ‘legal import licenses’, well those are OK. ???? Beyond the pale!

The term “hemp” means cannabis (Sativa/Indica) in Thailand.

So, I need to prove something to you? I need better evidence? And, you’re going to lecture to me about the “official stance”? Here is the legislation that was NEVER RESCINDED…… On January 29, 2021, Thailand will begin processing applications for licenses to produce, import, export, distribute, and possess hemp (Cannabis sativa). The specific requirements for this significant step in Thailand’s ongoing development of a regulatory regime for hemp are contained in the Ministerial Regulation Re: Application and License for Production, Importation, Exportation, Selling or Possession of Hemp, which was published in the Government Gazette I was part of that process, possessing 4 distinct licenses (what to see them too?) So, please keep insisting it isn’t so. You’re not in the business and anyone can site letter and verse of a simple Google search. If you are in the business and you navigate growers, processors, and distributors you know what’s really going on. There is no question the “stance” is not to allow importation of flower but the reality is there are many, many license holders, grandfathered if you may, that are importing, legally, along with the black market, illegal imports. Hope you’re satisfied but somehow I think that will elude you and many others who are not in the business and just like to repeat what the azzes of the masses are preaching.

Coffee money. ????

The current market rate is NOT 40K baht/kilo it’s US $1500/lb. That’s 112,700 baht/kilo. If you are buying a kilo (from me) of indoor, controlled environment flower, grown from imported seeds, you can pay 100,000 baht. AND, yes that’s here in Thailand. How would I know? I’m in the THC/CBD a business. This is exhausting. Please be informed when making flippant comments about a business you are only the end user of. You think you know what the tourists want? Weed from imported seeds? The discerning clientele are the farengs that live here, those that bloviate in forums like this. All else, the tourists, are in it for the high, believing the preposterous descriptions and THC percentages of the grams they are paying 500 to 1000 baht for.

As other posters have mentioned, the ‘medical loophole’ laws and imports to fill the nascent market still exist, have never been ended, and are widely exploited. Don’t know why you are soooo surprised! It’s the least of what’s concerning. But please, feel free to keep insisting it’s just not so.

So wrong.

No, I can’t. Asking a business to copy their license and post it so you can see it? Slim to none. If you don’t believe there is a huge influx of USA/Canadian flower flooding the Thai market, don’t leave it to me to convince you, canvass the suppliers or better yet, enter the business. Clearly, ALL are welcome (by some) ????????????. I am in the business. A commercial grow that sells cannabis and CBD (flower/extract) on a wholesale basis to dispensaries and wellness centers. They have shown us their import licenses and commercially imported flower and those are the prices that have established the AMR (average market rate) to which we compete against. Our company has a full time “admin”, well versed in licenses, permits and filling out countless forms. We are a straight up-and-down company that has multiple licenses (a CBD export license is just one). A Ganja/Ganjo import license is just a matter of filing and paying. As stated in previous posts, this business is a race to the bottom, complete with Darwinism - survival of the fittest. Prices will plummet, regulation will abound, and small players will evaporate. The weed business in Thailand is replete with the good, the bad and the really bad. It astounds me that it still operates on the least common denominator: “The Gram”. More weed spoils or its integrity diminished by oversupply than what is sold. Before anyone asks for proof of that, relax, it’s MY speculation from involvement in this business. I see a lot of “brown, everything looks a like, UV and humidity spoiled flower”. FYI for all you looking in from the outside - you can’t freeze it, refrigerate it, inert atmosphere package it and expect it to last until that last gram is sold, before it goes bad. Sad.

Doubt that! And, where is that statistic? Dubious supposition at best. Dispensaries in Samui are all too proud to tell you about their ‘Cali’ imports. If this wasn’t so, they would be importing from Bangkok, Pattaya and Chiangmai. “And it is illegal to IMPORT cannabis into Thailand. (yes, there is a loophole for "scientific research")” This is also NOT true. I have seen valid import licenses. Many. Yes, it is illegal export it out of the US and Canada. Trust me, that in and of itself will allow the US DEA to pressure And influence Thai legislation in the coming round of regulations, that you all know is coming.

All very, very valid points except for the “shipping heritage strains back home….” Not even close or valid. Do you really believe that? Hybrid crossing of “Thai Strains” were done in the infancy of sativa/indica genetics. And, selling back pure landrace strains? Where? This is pure fiction and lessens your zeal. All cannabis products sold in Thailand should be grown, produced and processed in Thailand. California and Canada importation is a flaw in the rushed legislation.

I owned a type I grow (1800 plants) and dispensary with two SCE extraction labs and a SPD distillation lab with ethanol extraction and rotary evap. Because of demand we would co-op buy harvests from other growers only to find after extraction the distillates failed microbial or pesticide analysis. We were always spot on with residual solvents though. There are a steady stream of articles in the media about incorrect Mg dosing for edibles, failed COA lab results, mislabeling of ingredients, microbial and pesticide failure. One doesn’t have to look very long to find any one of these to cite. I don’t want to be antagonistic but maybe you can cite an article, white paper or journal that uses “medical vaping” as a delivery system for young patients and older patients. Really? I’ll stand by my ‘never’ but wish to be enlightened and proven wrong. Unless you are referring to ‘inhalers’? Different story

Bam, thanks for the link. I was citing a statistic and no specific article, though just as many legal, licensed extractors are failing at that rate for the same reasons. We can liken the term “illicit” to any extractor operating within an unregulated market, like right here. I neglected to mention, the very nature of cannabis vape liquid is a distillate extraction, a lipophilic (oil loving/oil soluble) compound. If anyone has ever touched some, you know how hard it is to get off without alcohol or other solvent. Water does nothing. Imagine that aerosolized in your lungs, attached to the mucosa lining. Hard to imagine asking the question, “is this doing any harm?”

The truth of it is always inconvenient, especially when preaching to the choir. Nobody that smokes cannabis in any form should delude themselves into thinking the “medicinal” benefits of smoking, in any form, outweighs the risks of inhaling anything. Cannabis smoking is directly associated with increased risks of bronchitis, lung infections, chronic cough and increased mucus buildup. Sounds like pretty much all your symptoms. So the argument I see and read is, ‘no combustion, no tar, it’s cleaner, it’s purer….” All true, with the exception of dabbing (wax, shatter, sauce, sugar, rosin….). BUT, you are still inhaling an irritant, a hydrocarbon at that (in the case of dabs and all its form). There are abundant articles that mention the horrors of inhaling the diluents: PG, PEG, T. Acetate in vape carts but the actual constituents, I.e distillate or oil or flower is of equal concern. Vaping may be better than burning a joint (still the number mode of consumption) but how much better? I have discussed this with MDs: GP’s, cardiologists, pulmonologists and oncologists. Is anyone surprised that none of them advise their patients to smoke anything? Inhaling anything, especially a purified hydrocarbon diluted with terpenes for viscosity (The latest solvent less SOP is rosin+terpenes) can’t have any positive long term benefits. In 2022, 80% of the vape carts tested were contaminated with residual solvents and pesticides. I smoke cannabis (in all its forms) and will continue to smoke because I enjoy it. It’s not “my medicine”, it’s my enjoyment and my business. I don’t tell myself it’s good for me or the ‘positive effects’ outweigh the possible deleterious effects. As we all know, there are many delivery systems of cannabis. As a person of science I can tell you vaping or dabbing will never be the acceptable mode of delivery for any of the medicinal attributes of cannabinoids.

https://aseannow.com/topic/1279635-grow-cannabis-to-make-feco-full-extract-cannabis-oil-for-personal-use/ You might possibly find this post interesting as it directly speaks to cancer and cannabis, albeit the title might not be as suggestive.