Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by YesMichigan

  1. http://www.syracuse.com/us-news/index.ssf/2015/03/police_michigan_dad_eats_daughters_pot_brownies_thought_he_had_stroke.html Update on the story. A distraught Michigan father called 911 after he accidentally consumed several of his daughter's marijuana-laced brownies. Oakland County Undersheriff Mike McCabe tells ClickOnDetroit that the man thought he was having a stroke. After a brief time in the hospital, the man was released. McCabe continues to tell ClickOnDetroit that the girl acquired the marijuana from a friend and then baked it in the brownies. The Huffington Post reports that the daughter left the brownies out because she thought no one would touch them. Authorities did not release the names of the father or daughter. The remaining brownies were brought to a lab for analysis, Time says. It has not yet been determined whether the teenager would be charged with possession of marijuana. Medical marijuana is legal in Michigan. However, residents who don't own a medical marijuana card can be facing a misdemeanor. McCabe tells ClickOnDetroit that the girl may be charged. "If it comes back as marijuana or something else, it's going to the prosecutor. She's 17 and an adult in the eyes of the law," McCabe says. "She's not going to get it light, no. This will be a lesson for her and everybody else." The link is from Syracuse.com. Read the comments from the locals. You will see a very different crowd than those who posted on the article from Mlive.com. Some very anti-mj people in Syracuse it appears. A good study of the opponents to reasonable legislation.
  2. The True Labs of late has been very thick and not working well with the medi-slim style cartridges. Mitten Meds are vaping as smooth as ever in the same unit still. A second preparation of the True Labs I used in old school atomizer (Green Lantern) and enjoyed it quite well I'll admit. On the cartridge angle (as it applies to the medi-slim "disposables") I think I identified a point of failure when the element slowly works its way through the insulating base. It eventually creates a break where the vapor tube runs up the side. Not the end of the world but it blocks the ability to get a vape until it warms up. I will also empirically state that I have not had an element die as long as I have been using the supplied battery. The only failure has been the element burning through and my caution to not put oil in a unit that may not allow total consumption. I'll also say the O2 Vape battery that I have lasts 1/2 as long and doesn't generate the power of my meddi-slim though they look like they came from the same factory. Could be a one-off thing but the O2 for $15 more seems to have less battery power and is the same cartridge as the meddi-slim. Thanks for the personal experience and knowledge.
  3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoAqElgR8Do
  4. Is there a noticeable difference in the 16 to the 22 (I round off the numbers)? Great question since there is a $10 per gram price difference. Having sampled both I found the 22 (not the one listed) had a very quick and light headed effect that made me stupid quickly but lasted not so long. The 16 had no punch but lasted quite a while at a consistent tone. That gives me something to think about as I ponder and reflect upon strains I've used in the past for relief and strains I would like to use in the future. If people want less information or discount all information presented to them that is a personal choice and one I support. If people want the best data that can be generated given "State of the Practice" techniques and technology then I support that choice of an option. This discussion asked about "free testing" and if reasonable people would find benefit. Now it would appear "rationale" thought is to eschew all testing because there is no positive result possible. I don't subscribe to that theory but plenty obviously do and that is their right as humans.
  5. This is exactly the type of wording they want. They had to obfuscate "any" so they could "simplify" it with "gaseous infused products" because hell if I don't say that every day.
  6. Hey wow, thanks for all the cool pictures and information. Beyond awesome and informational.
  7. Since there are so many brilliant scientific minds here, I figured I would post this and see the skepticism on these findings and the inevitable back and forth for the latest discovery. Chance to argue something not so emotionally charged, perhaps...
  8. http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-31705875 Physicists who detected a version of the Higgs Boson in a superconductor say their discovery closes a "historical circuit". They also stressed that the low-energy work was “completely separate" from the famous evidence gathered by the Large Hadron Collider. Superconductivity was the field of study where the idea for the Higgs originated in the 1960s. But the particle proved impossible to witness because it decays so fast. This new signature was glimpsed as very thin, chilled layers of metal compounds were pushed very close to the boundary of their superconducting state. This process creates a "mode" in the material that is analogous to the Higgs Boson but lasts much longer. Rather than the study of particles, it belongs in the field known condensed matter physics; it also uses much less energy than experiments at the LHC, where protons are smashed together at just under the speed of light. It was at the LHC in 2012 that the Higgs Boson, believed to give all the other subatomic particles their mass, was detected for the very first time. The new superconductor discovery was presented amid much discussion at this week’s March Meeting of the American Physical Society in San Antonio, Texas. It also appeared in the journal Nature Physics in January. Speaking at the meeting, Prof Aviad Frydman from Bar Ilan University in Israel responded in no uncertain terms to the suggestion that his work could substitute for the LHC. "That’s complete nonsense," he told the BBC. "In fact it’s kind of embarrassing." Prof Frydman said the convergence of results from "two extremes of physics" was the most striking aspect of his findings, which were the fruit of a collaboration spanning Israel, Germany, Russia, India and the USA. "You take the high energy physics, which works in gigaelectronvolts. And then you take superconductivity, which is low energy, low temperature, one millivolt. "You have 10 to the 15 (one quadrillion) orders of magnitude between them, and the same physics governs both! That is the nice thing." "It's not that our experiment can replace the LHC. It’s completely separate." Superconductors are materials that, when under critical conditions including temperatures near absolute zero (-273C), allow electrons to move with complete freedom. It was attempts to understand this property that ultimately led to Peter Higgs and others proposing the now-famous boson. “In the 1960s there were two distinct, basic problems. One was superconductivity and one was the mass of particles,” Prof Frydman explained. “People like Phil Anderson developed this mechanism for understanding superconductivity. And the guys from high energy saw this kind of solution, and applied it to high energy physics. “That’s where the Higgs actually came from.” So the detection of a superconducting Higgs, he added, is “closing a historical circuit”. This closure was a long time coming. Detecting the Higgs in a superconductor had seemed almost impossible. This was because the energy required to excite (and detect) the Higgs mode - even though vastly less than that needed to generate its analogous particle inside the LHC - would destroy the very property of superconductivity. The Higgs mode would vanish almost before it arose. But when Prof Frydman and his colleagues held their thin films in conditions very close to the “critical transition” between being a superconductor and an insulator, they created a longer-lived, lower-energy Higgs mode. Other claims of a superconducting Higgs have been made in the past, including one in 2014. They have all faced criticism. Indeed, Prof Frydman’s conference presentation was also greeted with intense questions from others in the field. "Like any physical finding, there are different interpretations,” he said. “The Cern experiment is also being contested."
  9. Some of the best times I've ever had were by getting in to trouble then...
  10. Our interpretation also does not preclude the medical use of marijuana by ingestion of edible products; 9 to the contrary, that use is authorized by the MMMA, within the statutory limitations, provided that the edible product is a “mixture or preparation” of “the dried leaves and flowers of the marihuana plant,” rather than of the more potent THC that is extracted from marijuana resin. MCL 333.26423(k). Again, we find that judgment of the drafters of the MMMA, in so defining “usable marihuana,” to be an appropriate exercise of their duty to define the parameters of the legal use of marijuana for medical purposes. http://publicdocs.courts.mi.gov:81/opinions/final/coa/20130711_c309987%2837%29_rptr_105o-309987-final.pdfFrom Carruthers What forms can a preparation take from the dried flowers and not be construed as "extracted"? Is that an impossibility given the desire for the narrowest interpretation possible? Grinding up 1.5 ounces of flower in to .5 ounces of chocolate would yield a 2 ounce "mixture" we could reasonably say. What is a sanctioned method to create a "preparation" given their high praise for the logical judgement of the drafter's intent? Obviously they meant to allow ANY of something that is a preparation. Carruthers does not apply because the defendant in this case has never stated his "concentrate" was created from "extracted resin" but is instead a preparation of the dried leaves or flowers. One common-sense question needs to be answered: Would a reasonable person consider Frozen Concentrated Orange Juice to be a mixture or preparation of oranges? Interesting that mixture and preparation are synonyms. Doesn't that just open up zero options for expanding defense of an argument?
  11. You have it perfectly here. Yes, the person would test both and see if there was a discernible difference. If you receive the relief you need from the 16% and it is cheaper then this might be good information. If the 20% is the one that works best now you know. It is a chance for a comparative analysis based on a quantifiable metric other than smell and sight test. Nothing more and nothing less.
  12. All good but when you cut and paste a section of the law and tell me I need to learn it because I am possibly subjecting myself to $1,000 fine you are doing more than merely giving an opinion.
  13. I feel like this thread is building the "Legalize for everyone so they can decide" platform harder than the medical marijuana one. Without full legalization people aren't free to choose their path of relief. The Government will regulate anything that helps people. They leave lots of things that harm alone, but anything that helps must be regulated. If you know a shot of vodka at 3:30 in the afternoon will help your headache then you can self-prescribe that and the product you use will be fully tested to an exacting standard. Or you can distill your own...no you can't.... If a beer at 3:30 in the afternoon will do the same thing then you get one fully tested to an exacting standard. Or you can distill your own and use that without it being tested.
  14. In the example that started all of this it was free and I envisioned a c.g. to patient scenario and not a dispensary just based on costs. Competition amongst dispensaries will create its own demand for testing I predict. You disagree and time will tell. Medium Shield's pizza with two toppings for whoever is more correct in two years. This is us communicating. This is us agreeing completely. This really doesn't have anything to do with an honest lab assistant doing his/her best to get an honest result with the equipment he/she has to work with and providing me with that data so I can use it to make an "informed" decision. Am I less or more informed than a person who reads a magazine's ratings on which dishwasher lasts the longest?
  15. Not in the slightest. I don't think you are paying proper homage to the consumer, Zapatosunidos. Connoisseurs love this type of information and I've heard it referenced often to bud tenders in my brief time at a Center. Just as beer drinkers love knowing they are drinking 10% beer the cannabis consumer market desires the same information. At least I think so because it is human nature to know if one is quantifiable as "better" than something else. Video from lab owner is awful and I'll tell you you're right every time you say the HB is dirty dirty dirty.
  16. I see too many "bad" reports though to think it is a sales tool. The reports have had the opposite effect for me in that I have now deteremined the 24% strains often do less than a 16% depending on relief need. The underlined, to me is akin to the hyperbole as those who insist everything must be tested. Pragmatism is the middle ground of pessimism and optimism.
  17. The dispensary report that I propose can be used to compare strains before going to the Center.
  18. Name Test Date Δ9-THC Δ8-THC CBC CBD CBG CBN Total OG Kush 2015-01-07 22.37 % 0.05 % 0.37 % 0.28 % 1.53 % 0.10 % 24.70 % Bubba OG 2015-02-26 16.29 % 0.00 % 0.19 % 0.07 % 0.21 % 0.00 % 16.76 % The above is a fairly typical example available from a few provisioning centers as an example of their test results. This result came from Iron Labs and a Center that shall remain unnamed. Posted here in case people haven't seen before.
  19. Funny, for the first time ever I feel like we're communicating. Why do you think the report is suspect on its face? Because of testing inadequacies and variances?
  20. What knowledge does a lab get about a strain before testing and is there contact regarding if it is "high-end" or not prior to analysis?
  21. What incentive is there for Iron Labs to fudge a report?
  22. I don't go to the places with no lab reports. I only speak for me though, I represent no "we". I use lab reports before I go to get an idea of what I'd like to inspect further. 56 jars is like searching for a needle in a stack of needles.
  23. You illustrate my point. So you are advocating don't use testing labs for the same reason nobody should ever use a mechanic because nothing can ever be fully validated unless you (the super smartest ever) is doing it and have complete knowledge of it.
  • Create New...