I agree, the difference between some strains of cannabis can seem as wide as the difference between alcohol and caffeine. I suspect none of it is doing me any favors in the long run, but I'm very productive with some strains but locked to a couch with others.

> It would be nice to see a cognitive performance study for all prescription drugs

I'll admit I'm wary of the potential neurotoxic damage I'm doing to myself through my Vyvanse prescription...

then stop taking it?

Giving unqualified medical advice is always risky. Giving drastic advice with little context could have severe consequences. Shame on you.

To be fair, you can safely go cold-turkey with Vyvanse - but withdrawal symptoms start after 2-3 days and can last up to a week. I'd describe my withdrawal experience as feeling utterly bored and being uninterested in doing anything, even passively watching the trashiest of shows on TV. I imagine that's what clinical depression (without actually feeling sad) is like.

Weaning-off it is far more preferable.

I haven't touched the stuff in 35 years, but is it markedly different today than in the past?

While potency has increase that doesn't directly correlate to everyone is getting higher. That's still a matter of intake and in this case users are likely smoking a lot less.

In the `70s most of what was available was crappy "dirt weed" (called so because it tasted like dirt when you smoked it) and it was full of seeds.

The strains they have now can tastes like all kinds of things, fruity, spicy, etc. I'm not an expert on that, but I've done a few "tastings" and the different flavors are really pretty amazing.

Yes:

> Overall, the potency of illicit cannabis plant material has consistently risen over time since 1995 from approximately 4% in 1995 to approximately 12% in 2014.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4987131/

Concentrates are regularly in the 60%-80% range, with some crystalized versions hitting above 90%.

No. Cannabis is largely the same stuff it was 35 years ago. Potency is mainly a function of light (cd/m^2) and so it comes down to grower ability.

Also, anyone who says pot used to be weaker back in the day is a cop.

> anyone who says pot used to be weaker back in the day is a cop.

In reference to spliffs (but not joints) then I can see them having more tobacco content in the past compared to today - and pre-ground baggies being cut with weed look-a-likes compared to buying a bag of pre-ground from a dispensary today.

And strains like "Alien Ass-hat" are definitely new - and they have really high THC/g.

Weed 25 years ago had a THC content of 5% or less, generally speaking. Now 20% is common, and >30% exists. More importantly, the ratio of THC to CBD is higher, meaning you get different effects even if you smoked an "equivalent" amount before.

If you see over 25% THC on flower is likely a bogus result, or a result of payola.

Or it's simply mixed product, e.g. kief + flower

No. What I'm talking about is bogus tests on flower. Those "caviar" joints test way over 30%.