Talk:Tetrahydrocannabivarin

message: Too lazy to edit but there is some contradictory evidence published in a recent NAture paper, I quote "The propyl side-chain homologs of CBD and THC are also of chemotaxonomic significance. Elevated levels of CBDV and/or THCV were much more common in plants of C. indica than in plants of C. sativa. Plants with elevated levels of THCV, sometimes exceeding THC, were detected in all four biotypes of C. indica, but not in all accessions. Segregation ratios in F2 populations from controlled crosses between low and high THCV individuals indicate that at least two loci con- trol this trait (de Meijer et al., 2003; K. Hillig, unpublished data). The gene(s) controlling the enhanced biosynthesis of propyl cannabinoids appear to have originated in C. indica and not to have spread appreciably into C. sativa."
from a chemotaxonomic analysis of....  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.165.95.66 (talk) 22:43, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Hey I'm not sure how to edit the chemistry information but here are some key chemical characteristics for Tetrahydrocannabivarin. Boiling Point: 360.6˚C Flash Point: 137.6˚C Source: http://www.chemnet.com/cas/en/28172-17-0/6,6,9-trimethyl-3-propyl-6a,7,8,10a-tetrahydro-6H-benzo%5Bc%5Dchromen-1-ol.html  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 420scientist (talk • contribs) 16:33, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Don't know how to edit the chemistry information 

message: SC Labs posts a lot of intriguing claims, but as often as not, I have been unable to find support from refereed sources for their claims. The fact that they never post any references gives me the heebie-jeebies. I object to using them for the very first reference in this article. Furthermore, their claim that some other phytocannabinoid produces a "very different" effect than THC is duh-inspiring at best.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Page Notes (talk • contribs) 16:47, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Heebie jeebies is racist 2603:8080:B400:5D2B:EC5A:3345:3968:3DF2 (talk) 05:08, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  SC Labs 

message: This should be listed as "Marijuana" instead of Cannabis. THCV is not scheduled at the federal level so long as it is not derived from the cannabis plant in the United States.[8] Cannabis is not a legal definition, Marijuana, Marihuana and Hemp are.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:6010:7C40:1177:B8B6:E7EB:A005:37DC (talk) 18:11, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed it 2603:8080:B400:5D2B:EC5A:3345:3968:3DF2 (talk) 05:08, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect Wording 

message: It has been shown to exhibit neuroprotective activity, appetite suppression, glycemic control and reduced side effects compared to THC, making it a potential treatment for management of obesity and diabetes.
The citation is the Abioye et al paper in J Cannabis Res, which does mention neuroprotection in the abstract. However, it's nowhere supported in the text of the article, with the discussion being mainly about diabetes, weight loss, mechanism and how safe THCV is. I think the neuroprotection claim should be removed or have a citation needed annotation added. The other effects mentioned are supported by the text of the paper. This paper seems to be a better citation for neuroprotection: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3165958/
Intractilicious (talk) 18:47, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neuroprotection?