New penalties for hydroponic cannabis in NSW

[Torsten]

Can someone please post about this. It's not my scene and I am sure others have a better insight into the details.

I am articularly interested in what the definition of 'hydroponic' is. I mean, do they just cover hydroponic techniques, or is a soil grown INDOOR plant also covered under the definition. Some of the best hydro I've ever seen was grown in soil (100% wormcastings derived from pure cow pats!), so I wonder if that might be an option for those who are worried.

[simon_marklar]

from http://www.theadvertiser.news.com.au/commo...55E1702,00.html

NSW claims 'toughest' cannabis laws

03feb06

NEW South Wales will have the toughest laws in the country for the commercial cultivation of hydroponically grown cannabis, Premier Morris Iemma has said.

But the penalties for growing less than five plants of hydroponic cannabis will not increase.

He said the new laws were drafted in response to growing concerns of the drug's link to mental illness.

The cannabis legislation – the first of its kind in Australia – will create new offences for the cultivation of indoor crops and significantly decrease the number of plants required to attract serious penalties up to a maximum of 20 years.

Previously 1,000 cannabis plants was considered a large commercial quantity.

But under the changes to be introduced into parliament when it resumes, only 200 hydroponically grown cannabis plants will constitute a large commercial quantity qualifying for the maximum 20-year jail penalty.

"Hydroponic cannabis can be up to five to seven times stronger in its levels of THC – the active ingredient in other cannabis – which makes it more attractive to some cannabis users.

"These are the toughest laws in the country," Mr Iemma said.

"There is growing and credible evidence linking cannabis use to mental illness – it is not a harmless drug."

NSW Opposition Leader Peter Debnam said he supported the government's plan to tighten cannabis laws.

"I will always support moves to tighten Labor's lax drug laws," Mr Debnam said in a statement.

never mind the fact that the british research used to justify this law says that cannabis only increases the likelyhood of going schitzophrenic by 1%...

linky

But the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs said that on current evidence smoking cannabis was likely to increase the chances of developing schizophrenia by just one per cent.

[Amulte]

I am articularly interested in what the definition of 'hydroponic' is. I mean, do they just cover hydroponic techniques, or is a soil grown INDOOR plant also covered under the definition. Some of the best hydro I've ever seen was grown in soil (100% wormcastings derived from pure cow pats!), so I wonder if that might be an option for those who are worried.

If its indoors and under lights then its hydro in the man's eye. methods dont mean anything to them.

[Rev]

what about outdoors and in a recirculating system?

ive seen that and the growth is almost as good (initiation and finishing can be harder) and much cheaper

IME plants of many kinds like artificial light but they never look as good as they do under sunlight

[mescalito]

Hydroponics by definition is growing in a benign medium with nutrients supplied via watering only. HID lights only help to give control of the crop duration, increase yield and make it easier to be covert because of the LAW.

And when will they pull their heads out of their arse and realise that THC isn't the only psychoactive responsible for the plants actions on the brain/psyche and that the STRAIN is more important for this very reason!

Some strains actually help people cope better with mental illness' whereas others are no more medicinal than crystal meth.

[folias]

this is obviously pretty gormless leglislation...

"There is growing and credible evidence linking cannabis use to mental illness – it is not a harmless drug."

I actually agree... that habitual usage of hydroponic marijuana may be obviously detrimental to one's mental, emotional and even physical health! In this case, it seems the "science" is lagging behind in what people actually find in themselvs and others day to day!

BUT, creating leglislation putting hydro growers into jail... is only possibly going to put more people in jail, people who smoke and become "mentally ill" are not going to stop smoking because of this leglislation, or are going to find availability changes... at best, cost of hydro could go up... ... ... ...

Putting growers in jail is not "tougher"...its retrogressive when the global trend is actually a more tolerant and intelligent approach, rather than trying to be all tough and "hardline" as something of a publicity stunt, when this approach actually costs more money and work for the government and provides no real return whatsoever for the community.

Julian.

[Tripitaka]

Hmmm! Not sure how I feel about this topic.

One one hand I think that furthering the criminalisation of such a benign and often beneficial plant is ludicrous, however......I do not necessarily have the opinion that hydroponically grown Cannibas is that benign!

I have seen a number of good friends develop "mental issues" from the chronic consumption of hydroponic cannibas and it certainly and without doubt a key factor in amplifying latent mental issues or simply projecting them into a space of induced paranoia, inability to function and general disruption of healthy thought process. I do say chronic consumption has led to this but are these strains that enjoyable?

Having grown up on "naturally" grown plant material and comparing this to Hydroponic strains, there is certainly a radically different approach to growing, consumption and "the scene" in which it is found.

There have been cases in the US whether fictitous or documented where due to growth hormones in the plants puberty is delayed or altered significantly to include breast fromation on adolescent boys. Scary shit! I have certainly seen first hand the frightening dependence and loss of personal empowerment that these strains can illicit!

I know Psychiatrists who are in the front line of assessing such cases and it certainly, according to them, a major factor in contributing or exacerbating mental health issues!

Sure there will be those who proclaim it to be no more dangerous than any other strain, however I think there is a real issue here being that this is certainly one of, if not the main source of attention and celebration in terms of illicit and readily available substances with in the youth and drug culture.

I guess this also raises the question as to whether or not this would even be an issue if there was legislation against growing the plants in the first place, which has driven the growth of Cannibas underground and initiated and supported elaborate and highly sophistacated setups.

I am not convinced that the new penalties are inline with a healthy awareness of the issues here, however I do feel that as with all growers/suppliers/proponents of consciousness altering substances that there is a certain onus on what happens after the dollar and fame is made or won!

Where do the social and moral obligations lay in regard to this?? I dont know the answers but feel that more needs to be done in view that this is an ever escalating trend. I would like to see a graph in domestic and international growth of the hydroponic industry and think this would yield an indication of what may occur if even a small percentage of users develop mental health issues as a result from pre-adolescent/longterm use.

[AndyAmine.]

I wouldn't be surprised about the power of hormones that are being used in hydro supplements/nutrients, I remember Dutch Master's "Superbud" got pulled off the market about 12 months back because of this and other health related issues.

I for one smoked super strong highly cultivated designer strains from about 12yrs through to 22yrs and for those that know me, I definitely dont look as old as I should. My puberty was stunted for sure (even though my height wasn't) be it from hydro or amphetamines I dont know but at almost 27yrs old I still haven't grown next to any dark facial hair even though I shave every 2 days however my brother has had it since he was about 21yrs plus after the age of about 12 he has always looked more mature than me at the same age.

I noticed this phenomenon amongst a lot of my Melbournian friends that were heavy hydro/drug users as well.

I have to say I haven't seen any man-boobs though, not on me or anyone else.

[Eikel]

The Definition of Hydroponics doesn't matter, to the LEO's "Hydroponic = Indoor with lights".

Grow outdoors in an aquaponic setup - it's not hydro, but might still get considered "commercial".

If you want more information as to "strengths" of hydroponic cannibis, visit OSA, (www.ozstoners.com), you'll get factual information.

The "strength" or "potency" of cannabis isn't affected by the growth method, the reason the strains are getting stronger is selective-breeding, in any case the whole "strength" thing is considered a myth by the majority of the MJ-using (not abusing) community.

MJ is far more benign substance than Alcohol, even if grown hydroponically, if weed is illegal and Class-C (or is it D?), Alcohol should be a Class-B scheduled substance.

The DM Superbud was pulled due to use of Patrubutcazol (spelling?) they had carcionagetic (again spelling?), levels of the stuff in that product.

[Rev]

Now i dont smoke i find a peculiar difference between what i used to do and what i see

I pretty much stopped smoking when hydro appeared

the first hydro bud i saw i couldnt believe it was bud, all white crystaline calyx and no 'hairs'

it was a rock! and i was used to sticky loose bud full of golden or red pistils with oily clear to amber glands, the smells varied so much. floral and pungent , sweet and spicy

the first time i had that shit i was soooo fucked. i mean delerious. Like when you have way too much booze or tropanes even. I didnt enjoy it at all. it fucked me over

even the taste was metallic. And it smelt rank.

In the end i gave up mostly cos i didnt like my head being full of cotton wool all the time and beause it exacerabted any ache or pain, any negative though and any negative personality trait i had. But is was also in part because the bud wasnt the same, it was more inebriating and less trippy

The peculiarity i have witnessed is that even tho teh weed is allegedly so much stronger now, it must be less satisfying. Because all over i see users smoking copious quantities constantly, and hardly being affected

The greenhouse grown and imported shit i used to get would be 1 or 2 cones and leave me tripping and fucked - but energetic for 2 to 3 hours. But i see people chewing through the hydro at a rate of knots with minimal effects visble

I id that on occassions we have Oz's but it would fuck me over for days even weeks with short term memory and concentration

its also funny to me how casually people smoke it, like its nothing major.

but then i know my chemistry is strange cos i can handle a decent dose of any hallucinogen ive tried - but i cant handle the smallest amount of weed anymore. The last time i did have it and enjoyed it was after following T s theory and smoking immature bud from a pure african sativa - no anxiety, no sedation just the trippiness and euphoria. But still the cotton wool thing was there the next day...

Edited February 8, 2006 by Rev

[Torsten]

The "strength" or "potency" of cannabis isn't affected by the growth method, the reason the strains are getting stronger is selective-breeding, in any case the whole "strength" thing is considered a myth by the majority of the MJ-using (not abusing) community.

I agree with most things you said, but not this. It simply doesn't make sense. The plant continuously produces crystals and in outside conditions these are removed by wind, water and maybe even sun (UV). Any outdoor grower knows not to harvest after heavy rain as the pot will be weak.

Sure, a clone grown under indoor lights and another grown in a shed with skylights might be of similar potency as there is no physical removal of crystals, but 'outdoor' growing usually does not imply 'shed'.

Thus, outdoor pot will usually only have the crystals from the las few days or maybe weeks on it, but very little of the older stuff. This dramatically changes the constituent profile.

Before indoor strain breeding became popular people used to grow the same strains indoors as outdoors. The indoor was always MUCH stronger. I do not understand why anyone would want to challenge these facts.

[Endrogen]

I for one smoked super strong highly cultivated designer strains from about 12yrs through to 22yrs and for those that know me, I definitely dont look as old as I should. My puberty was stunted for sure

Me too, but i suspect it doesn't stunt puberty it just promotes oestrogenic characteuristics. It's uncanny how many early male smokers i know who look alot younger than they should, I've noticed early female smokers tend to be shorter than average though.

Or it could be the more feminine "non-aggresive" males who are attracted at an early age.

[mescalito]

I guess I was lucky in retrospect that I grew up in a town where the hooch scene was albeight unknown except stories about old hippies and most of us weren't the slightest bit interested.We were into Torana's B&S's and BEER

My first encounter was at age 21 and this was a conscious choice as I already knew that immature brains can be so delicate so I waited until I was ready.This to me seems to be the biggest factor in cannabis induced psychosis and dependance...the age one starts to use mind altering substances..though ironically no-one thought twice about getting paralletic on piss every friday and saturday night the day they turned 18

Hydro was very rarely encountered here at the time so there was always a drought between winter and Xmas time and all the gear was regenerated stock from seedy deals anyway so the strains were relatively stable and constant in their chemistry.When the hydro started arriving from Canberra I saw a massive increase in chronic use as opposed to the couple of times a month most of my friends were used to.This I attribute to the mass produced Skunk varieties that ripped your head open at first, then a tollerance was built and then it was a case of "know where I can get on?" every couple of days

My first real experience with a known variety was when I moved to the then pot friendly ACT.She was a NL#5 X Silver Haze and came courtesy of our friend Mr.Emery.She was grown and cloned many times over and fed a plain nutrient-only mix....just the same profile as a top grade potting mix.The buds were always picked slightly immature one-by-one as they ripened and cured and dried slowly.

At this point in my life I'd already worked out that I had been suffering from depression and anxiety for quite a while but hadn't been formally diagnosed.This stuff never let me down in any way whatsoever.In fact it did everything I needed...it lifted anxiety and depression without interfering with cognition and memory and more importantly supplied me with a much needed appetite and helped me get off to sleep...two things I still battle with as they are indicators of high level depressive disorder.

I'm not game these days to buy shit for the simple fact that I don't know what I'm getting and can't afford to sit around paranoid with my inner voice amplified and no appetite.

I'd love to grow my own variety but then the prospect of going before the courts for self-medicating makes me more paranoid than smoking pot???

Go figure

I say if everyone could grow it and smoke it then not only would the black market take a dive but the hype would die very a quick death and most users would just get over it and go on with their lives.Besides if you could grow a years supply outdoors in your own backyard then who would bother with expensive HID/Hydro systems?

Prohibition doesn't work!!

...then again we gotta keep the chemical companies in business and society needs to be separated by class doesn't it?

[Moses]

hydro obviously increases the strength but I still believe strain has a huge impact on the end product.

Sativa is known for its cerebral high, Indica for its body stone

so you could say sativa is more enlightning and indica more medicating

the aim of hydro(in the weed world that is) is to produce the most you can in the smallest area

therefore you end up growing a strain with predominantly idica genes as sativa are hard to keep under 3 to 4 feet tall so your just constantly medicating yourself looking for enlightenment.

if the damn plant was legal you could get pure strains easier and all this confusion would go away cos we would all grow 20 foot tall plants in the front yard and be a very happy lot

well thats what i think but then i could just be messed up in the head from toooo many highs and their right

[elzar]

I agree in the fact that prohibition does not work as a whole however what it does do is stop quite a few people. It all fits under the governments legality scare tactics. Them thinking that by making somthing illegal will stop people (similar to the rta and speeding). ironically targeted at the paranoid stoner yet still they fail.

this will never work but what will is education and helping people understand the difference between a problem and responsible use. one important factor is the lung damage more so than mental ilness, also the fact that some chemicals do not agree with certain people. ie, the alcoholic who likes to drive or become violent. there is still a problem with alcohol and tobacco yet they deem this acceptable perhaps due to taxes. perhaps it is somthing to keep the masses under control without them feeling that they are completely free.

it is more difficult to find hydro i would assume thus them deciding to crack down on penalties and the reason why 5 plants or less attract a large fine is that it is closer to personal use.

is it possible to recieve hormones simply by somking a plant which contains certain growth hormones?

"I believe with the advent of acid, we discovered new ways to think and it has to do with piecing together new thoughts of mind. Why is it that people are so afraid of it ? What is it about it that scares people so deeply ? Because they are afraid that there is more to reality than they have ever confronted. That there are doors that they are afraid to go in and they don't want us to go in there either because if we go in, there we might learn something that they don't know. And that makes us a little out of their control"

just a thought

[Torsten]

I agree in the fact that prohibition does not work as a whole however what it does do is stop quite a few people. It all fits under the governments legality scare tactics. Them thinking that by making somthing illegal will stop people (similar to the rta and speeding). ironically targeted at the paranoid stoner yet still they fail.

Statistics and studies on the issue do not support your claim, which is a common misconception and really the only reason why the WoD still exists. In nations where pot smoking is fully decriminalised the use usually goes up for a few years after decriminalisation, but then declines and in the case of holland and Switzerland was consistently lower than the rest of prohibitionist europe. If anything, it seems that prohibition makes drug consumption more interesting to especially younger kids, while tolerance fosters a climate of open discussion and education.

is it possible to recieve hormones simply by somking a plant which contains certain growth hormones?

I doubt that plant hormones have any hormonal effect on humans and smoking would most certainly destroy them. However, many substances in fertilisers and pesticides are estrogenic and these could easily be inhaled. Chances are that the culprit is in the accumulated resins and has nothing to do with external factors.

[Benzito]

it is more difficult to find hydro i would assume

Do you mean it is hard to find people selling hydro, or it is hard for police to locate plantations?

Because I live in Sydney and the only time I can get 'bush bud', or naturally grown, outdoor weed, is when a friend grows it.

No one sells anything other than Hydro around Sydney.

Cause stoners don't want to buy anything other than Hydro.

Now, all this talk of how current day smokers seem to smoke more matter, and more regularly;

Rev, did you used to 'spin' your weed, ie. mix it with tobacco?

Most smokers do these days, and I think that is why it has become such a regularly used thing.

Generally, being stoned first thing in the morning is an uncomfortable situation. But, for some reason stoners(myself in the past too) love to 'wake and bake'.

But, cigarette smokers love a smoke first thing in the morning too!

I think the pattern of usage has changed due to the advent of mixing tobacco into weed?

Only being 22, I've only been exposed to weed smokers for about 8-10 years of my life. And for that whole time people have been mixing it with tobacco. But I get the impression that didn't happen as much, say, 20 years ago?

Anyone got any thoughts on the MJ/Tobacco synergy?

[Rev]

Rev, did you used to 'spin' your weed, ie. mix it with tobacco?

no. When i smoked we all used to smoke pipes

we didnt need to 'chop up' either for a pipe

u dont need to with greenhouse or good bush bud, just pinch and pack

but with the hard nuggets in hydro i see the need

then we went to bongs, then to buckets

when we had heaps wed roll fat J's but not with tobacco just all weed

this is in SA

Buckets seem to be rather popular in WA amongst the young crew too i noticed

hardly ever saw a joint or pipe. bongs n buckets

chopping up was standard

I didnt see spun weed much till i came east a few years ago

it seems a dominant habit here (Vic to qld)

it might be different now but in SA and WA at the parties i went to spanning 10 years or more i rarely recall spun weed

I say if everyone could grow it and smoke it then not only would the black market take a dive

maybe. I doubt it. All i think is that there are 2 forms of black market , one being tax friendly and socially unfriendly - organised crime- who run big networks, use threats of /violence and launder money (hence pay tax albeit untraceably)

the other is tax unfriendly and socially beneign - that being the cottage industry

the same thing you see at any farmers or car boot market - people making a few tax free bob on the side supplying local networks

Even if it were legal i still think thered be a division of labour between those with $ and those with growing skills who can make good weed

its the same as food networks - anyone can grow their own tomatoes but few do, preferring to leave production in the hands of market gardeners and supermarket chains

unfortunately increasing illegality will prob discourage the cottage industrialists first - those who actually give a shit about their ciustomers as they are prob their mates. Thes epeople have 9 to 5 jobs, prob kids and a mortgage. The risk isnt worth it for them

thats a shame cos the money theyd have made prob goes further in underwriting civil society than the same $ in the hand of career criminils

Edited February 10, 2006 by Rev

[Benzito]

Actually Rev now you mention it, I think SA is one state where 'spinning' weed with tobacco is still not common.

I'm a big lover of Aussie hip-hop, and I can actually think of a few interstate MC 'battles' I've seen where rappers from Adelaide make fun of Sydney siders for their tobacco mixing obsession.

As pretty much everyone in hip-hop smokes weed, it all just comes down to how you smoke it, that makes the difference. lol

[simon_marklar]

Do you mean it is hard to find people selling hydro, or it is hard for police to locate plantations?

Because I live in Sydney and the only time I can get 'bush bud', or naturally grown, outdoor weed, is when a friend grows it.

No one sells anything other than Hydro around Sydney.

Cause stoners don't want to buy anything other than Hydro.

not true! the vast majority of my friends who smoke want natural, very few people i know really like hydro, most think its too strong or brain fucking, but its all they can get. i can get it easily tho, its just who you know. i spent a while looking for it, but i ended up finding it next door to me when i lived in sydney(hows that for convienience!!!)

Now, all this talk of how current day smokers seem to smoke more matter, and more regularly;

Rev, did you used to 'spin' your weed, ie. mix it with tobacco?

Most smokers do these days, and I think that is why it has become such a regularly used thing.

Generally, being stoned first thing in the morning is an uncomfortable situation. But, for some reason stoners(myself in the past too) love to 'wake and bake'.

But, cigarette smokers love a smoke first thing in the morning too!

I think the pattern of usage has changed due to the advent of mixing tobacco into weed?

Only being 22, I've only been exposed to weed smokers for about 8-10 years of my life. And for that whole time people have been mixing it with tobacco. But I get the impression that didn't happen as much, say, 20 years ago?

Anyone got any thoughts on the MJ/Tobacco synergy?

i think that mj/tobacco totally changes the high. i hate that i was introduced to mj this way because its damn hard for me to appreciate a straight smoke. weed truely becomes "the green smack" when spun with tobacco.

i dont really want to smoke in the morning, but i do. most of the time if i have a ciggie that initial 'i must have a bong' dissapears. problem is i never used to smoke ciggies till one day after a desperate time i succomed...

%simon

[AndyAmine.]

I also find that the stronger the pot the faster the tollerance builds up, usualy after only 2 days or less, however with good outdoor onbe can keep getting stoned for a week or two without having to change strains.

A heavy hydro smoker can easily keep getting stoned as long as he/she changes thier strain every couple of days.

[incognito]

one of my friends in orange smoked hydropinically grown mj throughout her pregnancy , much to my and others condemnation. Her child was born with a cleft pallet. At the cleft pallet surgery ward at the royal childrens hospital in Sydney, 4 of the 5 mothers of the other babies in for cleft surgery had smoked hydro on a daily basis as well throughout the pregnancy. Is this coincidence? or does hydro grown pot reallyhave this effect on the unborn foetus??

[Rev]

thats an interetsing occurence

unfortunately its not rigorous enough to hold up

(im sure current affair would run with it tho!)

If 4 out of 5 mothers smoked hydro you could draw a few conclusions

if you are sensationalist then you say hydro MJ causes cleft

but thats not true as 1 in 5 dont smoke hydro

the sample is too small to know but as is thats 20% against you

the far better conclusion from those numbers is that the incidence of pregnant women smoking must be way under reported - and it is - and that hydro as a weed choice is way overrepresented

u need more data. it could be a coincidence or it could be that 4 out of 5 also come from the bad side of town and were exposed to industrial chems where they all worked

to test the hypothesis would require a lot of work and numbers

youd need to assess the weed smoking incidence in the whole new mother population

and frequency of usage

and hydro vs bush

then establish a mean with adjustmnets for socioeconomic condition ( affects mothers nutrition and healthcare )

THEN you could test if smoking weed or specifically hydro affected the mean in a statistically significantly way. If hydro could be blamed then youd see the mothers way overrepresented against their incidence in the hospital new mother population

till then anecdotes are pretty worthless as in anything

of course you need t be trained in the manipulation of data in order to see its weaknesses and so 4 mothers convincing each other that hydro msut be the cause and scapegoat of their calamity is natural but has long term conswequences as they may well become campaigners against a shadow enemy and influence opinion for decades - with no real evidence - but with antidrug allies who dont ask for evidnece - just hysteria

Ive seen the findings on the few studies ever done with cannabis and prgenancy and there were NO statistically significant effects over cannababies and non cannababies

In contrast Fetal alcohol syndrome is grossly underreported and smoking and drinking often go hand in hand. That one drink at the wrong time in development is s so many more times likly to be the cause than all the weed smoking combined.

In fact 2 seconds on google with teh keywords " fetal alcohol syndrome cleft palate'

will give you more than you need to know

FAS and facial abnormalities

Background: Adverse neonatal and pediatric effects occur with maternal alcohol consumption during pregnancy. Fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS) is contingent on findings in the following 3 areas: (1) dysmorphology (particularly midfacial anomalies), (2) growth retardation (intrauterine growth rate and failure to experience catch-up growth), and (3) CNS involvement (cognitive impairment, learning disabilities, impulsiveness).

http://www.emedicine.com/ped/topic767.htm

if you can get word to these women. We need their energies but directed at real causes not phantoms

Edited February 10, 2006 by Rev

[Benzito]

not true! the vast majority of my friends who smoke want natural, very few people i know really like hydro, most think its too strong or brain fucking, but its all they can get. i can get it easily tho, its just who you know.

In my experience it is only 'experienced' or seasoned smokers who want bush. But these same people are generally the kind of people who limit their usage in other ways aswell, ie. frequency. It's normally the ex-stoners, who continue to smoke, but don't want to be hopeless addicts, that prefer bush. I am one of these people, I would prefer bush personally aswell.

But most 'stoners', people who just want to be baked, and out of it, 24/7, prefer hydro IME.

People who smoke for enlightenment, relaxation, or just for the love of it (read: most peeps on this forum) are the people who seek bush. The people who are looking to get 'whacked' want Hydro. And unfortunately most drug users fit into the 'get whacked' category in Sydney.

[SikkimRex]

To weigh into the debate, I would say that grass is like most other things - it has its time, and over life, can return and dissapear. Sometimes it helps you work, sometimes it makes you sleep, sometimes paranoid, sometimes cruisey. In short, we, as individuals, have stages, and if grass is part of them, we have stages with it too. For me, clearly the responsibility is ours to be responsive and active in relation to our bodies. I think that once- the juvenile, but ever present desire in people to kick back against authority is taken out of the equation, one can make choices much more clearly. Thus anything but decriminalisation is not exceptable, and actual legalisation and regulation desirable.

However, personally, I do beleive there is a link between grass and depression, mental illness, or even just emotional sensitivity. I think that even a cursory review of posts on these forums reveal a lot of people who clearly have these sensitivities. This sensitivity makes us much more receptive to psychedelics and to things that emphasise the emotional. I think a lot of us self-medicate for sure. Coming from the Cure generation, I have always though that this sensitivity was a gift, but at many times in our society, it is a curse. I think that ignoring the link between mental health and grass, either positive or negative is missing the point that grass is at the very least an empathogen (?).

I also think that the culture of grass use is as much to blame, and I myself was caught by it as a teenager. And mostly (again, a personal thing), I think the bing has a lot to do with it (and the bong and hydro is a lethal connection). I think that the solitary hero and his instrument of intensity can become an addiction no different to needles. For me, when I heard the study about grass in your teens and potential brain modification, it made sense to me. But one will never know, because that threshold was crossed years ago.

Considering that empaths and sensatives gravitate to grass, I think that there is no doubt that by taking grass they are attempting to deal with or potentiate their emotional centres. Considering that this means that the reason they are doing it is precisely the argument against it. So effectively I agree, but see a positive side too. And if we agree on a scale of potency, and that physical limits (how much one can physically ingest) reduce real access to teh active constituent. then controlling hydro would reduce the scale of the potential impact on mental health. However, of course, legalisation and regulation would do this a thousand times better, and allow the constant over view of the scientific community, which would deal with many of the issues anyway.

I wont be sad to see hydro go, but I dont like what this new legislation suggests about a potential escalation of the local arm of the War on Drugs...