Tom, this argument leaves out some critical science about whatโs actually being measured.
What people call โTHC potencyโ today is not directly comparable to older data. For decades, testing methods only measured delta-9 THC that had already decarboxylated on the plant. They did not account for THCA, the compound cannabis actually produces naturally. THCA only converts into THC through heat, light, or aging. So the โlow THCโ numbers from the past were incomplete by definition.
A Practical and Natural Taxonomy for Cannabis
hemp.ucdavis.edu/sites/g/filโฆ
Scientists like Raphael Mechoulam identified THC in the 1960s, but full understanding of cannabinoid acids and proper testing methods came much later. That means the baseline youโre comparing todayโs cannabis to was never accurate in the first place.
Keynote: The Chemistry Behind Cannabinoid Acids - Raphael Mechoulam
youtube.com/watch?v=B76d3mGYโฆ
Cannabis is cannabis. The plant has not fundamentally changed. What has changed is our ability to measure it correctly.
Also, people have had access to legal cannabis in the U.S. since 1996, starting with California Proposition 215. If potency alone were driving widespread psychosis and societal breakdown, we would have seen clear, consistent population-level evidence over nearly 30 years. That hasnโt happened.
No one is saying there are zero risks, but overstating potency based on flawed historical data doesnโt help create good policy. It just repeats misinformation that keeps us from regulating cannabis in a rational, science-based way.