Talk:Hashish
|
|
It is not certain that the Hashishiyin were named after the hashish they smoked(although it certainly is very likely). See the Wiki for "assasin" for more information.
Black hash, which is generally produced in Nepal, Afghanistan, and India, generally produces a more relaxing, mellow effect. Blonde hash, often from Morocco and the Netherlands, tends to produce more active and cerebral highs.
"Wonderful Country" eh? Heh. That's not NPOV, but i love it. ^_^
...THC is THC. This sounds like stoner lore. -- 24.57.37.145 17:38, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- chaged assertation that soap bar is called so because it is cut with soap. sorry, no. its the far more simple explanation that it comes in soap shaped blocks :)
--Edzillion 14:36, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
THC is THC, however, cannabis contains a number of psychoactive constituents. While THC is the most plentiful and undoubtedly most active, it is not at all the only factor in determining the experienced effects. The ratio of cannabinoids is affected both by genetics and by variations in the growing, harvesting, and processing of the cannabis. These variations translate into variations in the effects.
Exerpted from the Cannabis article:
- "More scientific study is necessary to gain a complete understanding of the cannabinoid system. We do know that high relative concentrations of these chemicals significantly modifies the effects of the plant. THC is associated with an energetic, cerebral high, while CBD is associated with a relaxed, more drowsy high. CBN is not fully understood at this point, but high concentrations usually have hallucinogenic effects."
However, it is my understanding that landrace cannabis is more or less a thing of the past, and that the region specific information is no longer acurate (if it ever was, I don't know), and should probably be re-written.
It is not certain that the Hashishiyin were named after the hashish they smoked(although it certainly is very likely). See the Wiki for "assasin" for more information.
Black hash, which is generally produced in Nepal, Afghanistan, and India, generally produces a more relaxing, mellow effect. Blonde hash, often from Morocco and the Netherlands, tends to produce more active and cerebral highs.
"Wonderful Country" eh? Heh. That's not NPOV, but i love it. ^_^
...THC is THC. This sounds like stoner lore. -- 24.57.37.145 17:38, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- chaged assertation that soap bar is called so because it is cut with soap. sorry, no. its the far more simple explanation that it comes in soap shaped blocks :)
--Edzillion 14:36, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
THC is THC, however, cannabis contains a number of psychoactive constituents. While THC is the most plentiful and undoubtedly most active, it is not at all the only factor in determining the experienced effects. The ratio of cannabinoids is affected both by genetics and by variations in the growing, harvesting, and processing of the cannabis. These variations translate into variations in the effects.
Exerpted from the Cannabis article:
- "More scientific study is necessary to gain a complete understanding of the cannabinoid system. We do know that high relative concentrations of these chemicals significantly modifies the effects of the plant. THC is associated with an energetic, cerebral high, while CBD is associated with a relaxed, more drowsy high. CBN is not fully understood at this point, but high concentrations usually have hallucinogenic effects."
However, it is my understanding that landrace cannabis is more or less a thing of the past, and that the region specific information is no longer acurate (if it ever was, I don't know), and should probably be re-written.
| Contents |
Opening paragraph
Have removed non NPOV and unsourced material from the first paragraph. Where is the source for hashish being mildly physically addictive? Squiquifox 19:52, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Have put back the information you removed. This is the only place that mentions the effects of hash, and it seems important to me. Why would it not be NPOV? --Fred chessplayer 02:39, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
It seems to me to be verging on gibberish, and with the POV that hash gives great ideas that cannot be grounded in reality. It may not give great ideas, and if it does they may be put into reality. Can you source what you have written? I will leave up to mind-altering affects, and delete the rest, which may be your POV but that doesn't make it true. Mellow is doper slang so I changed it to relax.--SqueakBox 21:58, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
Sentence proposal
- I request to have the sentence "Hash gives the user many great ideas which unfortunately can not be realized because of the limits of the physical universe" reinserted. Even if you don't agree, doesn't mean it is untrue. --Fred chessplayer 05:45, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I think chessplayer should source his claims before coming here with his proposal, as I asked him to already. Where does it state that hashish gives great ideas? Preferably quotes that aren't just user anecdotes. Where does it state these ideas cannot be realised because of the limits of the physical universe? What exactly does chessplayer mean by this statement. There are serious problems with the limits of the physical universe bit. What does he mean by limitations of the physical universe? Can he prove that hashish smokers have ideas that are inherently impossible due to the physical nature of the universe? as he claims. Can he give an example of one. Is he sure Hash smokers fail to get there dreams together because of the nature of the universe or are there other reasons. Like laziness? Or poverty? Can he prove his claim that hashish users cannot realise there dreams? No. He cannot prove they don't realise their dreams, let alone that they can't. When he explains what he means by the limits of the physical universe he may be able to compose a better sentence. Until then he should leave things be. we are not here to debate the truth, and even less what chessplayer thinks is the truth. We are here to write a factual and balanced encyclopedia article about hashish. I strongly do not want some speculative, vague and unsourced statement in this article..--SqueakBox 20:31, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)
- I think you should know that wikipedia is also a space for explaining common believes. This means writing what a large group of people believe, feel or think hash is or does. If people smoke hash because they feel it gives them great ideas, this should be mentioned. And if it is hold in belief (as I've heard expressed by former hash smokers) that the only good idea hash gives actually is to light another pipe, this is of enough interest to mention.
- And concerning Limits of the physical universe, it is a very fine poetical phrase. :)
- If it is common in some places that people inhale hash smoke on heated blades, this should be mentioned. Do you know that this does not occur?
- Furthermore, if many people belive something concerning the addictivity, this should be mentioned. Sure hashish may not be physically addictive -- after looking several hours on the net, the only source I could find that could give vague support for this was the quote below. But since people are likely curious about this, it should be mentioned.
- So these are my reasons for why the material you have removed should infact be reinserted. --Fred chessplayer 10:40, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I am sure people do smoke it with hot knives, and I have re placed that in, but after the pipes and joints bit. The lack of the word joints was glaring. The sentence looked as if people only smoke hashish in pipes and hot knives (as they are called in the UK).
I strongly question your statement that a lot of people believe that hashish (a) gives great ideas, and (b) those ideas are then unachievable. I agree about the statement being very poetic, but an encyclopedia is not the place for that (at least when we are not dealing with poets. I would like you to source that at least a substantial minority of people believe your statement (doper anecdotes will do, but not just people you know; ie something I can read) I too have known lots of hash smokers, in the UK, and none of them believed what you say. I think there is strong evidence that hashish is not physically addictive. Having been physically addicted to a drug (tobacco) I think I can safely say that hashish is not physically addictive, though I am sure it is psychologically addictive. Even the much more psychologically addictive cocaine and crack are not considered psychologically. Anyway, please do try to both source your sentence and re-write the sentence here. I appreciate the efforts you are making, and I hope we can find a compromise we both like; I will try and do a little work myself to resolve this. --SqueakBox 15:46, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)
Have added Many people claim that using it gives them great insights. I much prefer the word insights. part of the problem with your statement is that the insights many claim to get from hash are not not ideas that would either be or not be manifestable in physical reality anyway; e.g. insights into the way things are. --SqueakBox 16:12, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)
- As you can see by my quietness, I have no objections about how it is now. I have found two printed works in this subject. The books are Baudelair's Artifical Paradise (first printed 1860) and the autobiography of "Mezz" Mezzrow, Really the blues (1950's?). I may edit this post later to check the exact names and dates. They are somewhat older, pre the mescalin and LSD time. My guess is that once those substances became more popular, the use of Hash for getting "insight" (or "mind opening effects") decreased.
- It may also be that Hash is still used to get insights in some (juvenile) groups in Europe and USA (and perhaps more so during the 70's) because they are not, like LSD and others drugs, considered heavy drugs. --Fred chessplayer 12:59, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Abuse & Dependence
- Even heavy marijuana users do not become physically dependent; there does not appear to be significant craving associated with marijuana (Kuhn, 1998).
- There have been reports of psychological dependence.
- The DSM-IV (1994) does include the diagnoses of cannabis abuse and cannabis dependence. Dependence is characterized by compulsive use (generally without physiological dependence); use is continued despite knowledge of physical problems or psychological problems associated with that use. Cannabis abuse refers to difficulties with performance at work or school, legal or marital problems associated with cannabis use.
http://www.toad.net/~arcturus/dd/marijuan.htm Drug Module: Marijuana/Cannabis --Fred chessplayer 21:51, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Unencyclopedic
- In the last sentence of the last paragraph in History:
"People there say that the land where hash has been planted will lose all its minerals and can then only be used for hash or wheat."
If the lands will lose its minerals after hash has been planted there, why can it only be used for hash? This sentence makes no sense. - About the process described for making kif and hash, it should be noted that this method is mainly used in industrial manifacturing and that there are several other methods for extracting the trichomes and making hash.
- In the Manifacturing chapter:
"This is done using a big knife and a wooden table."
I would describe this as a POV as a wooden table is not a requirement for trimming the plants. Any kind of table should do.
Opiax 15:14, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The article is a mess because it has not been written in wiki style. I have done something to remedy this, --SqueakBox 15:47, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)
Popcorn?
What is the point of comparing a piece of hash with popcorn? To indicate its size? But hash is a substance, which can have any shape or form. Maybe the editor had had a few too many joints when he placed this (which might explain the small size of the piece of hash) :) . DirkvdM 11:55, 2005 May 3 (UTC)
- There once was this image. Which do you prefer? Fred chessplayerMissing image
Db72.jpg
Why do we need to compare it's size with anything? Neither pic really helps. Fred's lump is much larger and will last longer but that doesn't really come across in the pic. I would like to see a pic not comparing it with anything in size; just a piece of hash on it's own, so we can get a good idea what it looks like. So I am not really keen on either photo. It would be great to get photos of different types of hash, eg black and pollen, --SqueakBox 19:09, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
disambiguation link
I disagree with the edit by Rebrane, who linked cannabis to cannabis sativa, thus bypassing the disambiguation page. Usually, a disambiguation page is meant just for disambiguation, but in this case it is more than that, it is also a clarification of what the plant can be, other than just a source for a drug, and the reference in the text is to the plant. Another solution would be to leave this change as it is and add a link to the disambiguation page. But see also my Proposal to rearrange the Cannabis articles in the talk page of the hemp article (below the line - not a logical place, but it started there). DirkvdM 09:22, 2005 May 13 (UTC)
I noted the removal of some material
I did a check while adding a new image, and noted that on May 6 these two paragraphs were removed by an anonymous user from the bottom of section "manufacturing":
- [start]
There are two products that come from kif. First kif is a tiny green powder that is sometimes mixed with tobacco and smoked in Sibsi pipes. After the cannabis is harvested, it is grouped into stacks of 20 to 30 plants and is left to dry for a month in a dry environment, typically an underground room covered with plastic. To make kif, the plants are cleaned of all dirt and only the white little crystals holding at the edge of each leaf are kept using a knife. This cleaning process takes time and requires precision, as the kif crystals are very small.
To make hash, the stacks of kif are placed within two very thin tissues on top of a container. The tissues are hit so that the pollen falls into the container. What falls in is put into a plastic bag and warmed with friction against a jean (most of the time) until the powder becomes solid. It is in this process of hitting that quality of hash is determined. The more the kif is hit, the more pollen falls in the container, the more quantity the producer gets, the less quality the consumer smokes, so the producer decides on how much he wants to get from his stacks. There are different qualities from the same initial stacks. The ZeroZero (or Tbissla as Moroccan call it), the very best quality of hash, is made with one single hit on every stack, so the producer will pass all the stacks, hit once, drop them on the other side, collect the first quality choice, then repeat the process to get the second quality, etc.
- [end]
Even if I don't really understand the text, they seem to be notable enough to include.
--Fred-Chess 05:45, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
It should probably go in kief though arguably as it is how-to-do it shouldn't go anywhere, SqueakBox 16:02, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)
Hash picture
Should we use the closeup from http://www.dea.gov/pubs/abuse/7-pot.htm ? Percolator 20:20, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)