Posted on 11/10/2017 6:36:48 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
As marijuana legalization continues across the country, weed is becoming increasingly mainstream. However, as much as the stoner stereotype has evolved into a broader label that also encompasses CEOs, educated millennials, and the Spicolis of the world, it still has a negative connotation. Industry leaders have quickly learned that destigmatizing marijuana use begins with educating the public, but Adrian Sedlin of Canndescent has figured out that, as with anything, it's really all about branding.
Sedlin's luxury cannabis company offers premium flower alongside sophisticated packaging that no other company in the current market rivals. One look and I can almost guarantee that you'll be more inclined to spark one than ever before. What Sedlin and his team did first was identify the pain points of the consumer experience and make everything from the strain names to the aesthetic more approachable.
"I would describe most of the historical imagery associated with cannabis as being very countercultural," Sedlin told POPSUGAR. "It's a lot of bad imagery, bad design. Yeah, that appeals to a certain segment, but there are tons of users who are uncomfortable with the purchase experience. It's confusing and an intimidating space, so another problem to think about is do you really want to go in and buy a strain called Alaskan Thunder F**k?"
Instead of traditional strain names like OG Kush and Green Crack, Canndescent simplified the classification system to five categories: Calm, Cruise, Create, Connect, and Charge. Each one is designed with proprietary genetics to perform exactly how it's labeled and is organically grown, cured, trimmed, and packaged in-house into childproof glass jars that include humidity packs to preserve quality. Sedlin said that half of its strains are genetically developed from scratch, making them completely unique to Canndescent, while others are comparable to more popular varieties.
While the rebrand is indeed friendlier, my biggest concern was whether the five categories were too broad for accuracy. For example, what's calm for me, may not be so calm for somebody else, especially the novice consumer who Canndescent is targeting. Sedlin and his team did take this into careful consideration when developing the product. Each bottle is labeled with the effects to expect, along with suggested activities, to give you an idea of the type of experience it may be more suited to. But in no way is Canndescent claiming that its strains are one size fits all.
"It's imperfect because you have a unique biochemistry, but it's a hell of an improvement," Sedlin told us. "Anything I can do to simplify it and make that user experience clearer and clearer for more users is something we'll adopt. When you're dealing with someone who has no category experience, all that type of thinking is fair. And at the end of the day, each person at some level has to figure out how cannabis hits them."
To evaluate whether or not the actual effects of each strain were in the ballpark, I tested them all. I smoked each of the five categories on five separate days and paired them with the experience it was intended for. Spoiler: I'm f***ing sold.
Calm
Intended use: "For a restful sleep or relief from aches and pains, soothe yourself with Canndescent Calm." When to consume: Before bed. Verdict: One hit of Calm and the results were instant. I experienced immediate sleepiness and full-body relaxation. It felt heavy yet comforting and not at all anxiety-inducing.
Cruise
Intended use: "Keep up the pace, relax your mind, and sail through the day with Canndescent Cruise." When to consume: Before running errands or starting your day. Verdict: Cruise is a fantastic daytime weed. I did feel a little tired, but not enough to knock me out. I smoked this one before tackling a day full of errands, and I was able to breeze through on cruise control without burning out.
Create
Intended use: "When it's time to paint, jam, code, blog, or game, find your muse in Canndescent Create." When to consume: Before tackling a project. Verdict: If you need to crack down on some work, feel inspired, or simply focus, this one's for you. I smoked a couple hits of Create before catching up on some work at home, and I was pleasantly surprised how functional I was. Not only did I do laundry with laser focus, but I also didn't find myself struggling to think while writing a post. Weed typically makes my mind hazy and slow-thinking, but Create offered clarity and focus.
Connect
Intended use: "When it's time to laugh, go out with friends, or get intimate, invite Canndescent Connect." When to consume: For social situations. Verdict: I figured that a dinner party would be the perfect scenario to test out a couple joints of Connect. I had five experienced smokers, including myself, to note any differences in sociability and energy, and some of us reported being more present and alert than we typically are when smoking other brands. I personally found Connect to be the least distinct of all five strains, but it was a nice choice for this type of setting nonetheless.
Charge
Intended use: "To get off the couch, take a run, or go out for the night, power up with Canndescent Charge." When to consume: Before going out. Verdict: Charge was hands down my favorite strain of all. Ten minutes in, I was noticeably more alert and energized, which is rarely the case for me, even with sativas. I definitely didn't feel glued to the couch, and I'm glad I smoked Charge before heading out to a weeknight concert because I was surprised to find myself so awake the entire night.
Overall, I was very satisfied with Canndescent's products. At $60 for an eighth, this is one top-shelf brand I can justify splurging on. Its descriptions were true to the label, based on my experience, and it reminded me how drastically different quality weed is to the more affordable varieties I've been using. The stunning, limited-edition gift box I received from Canndescent (pictured above) is available for purchase at California dispensaries for $250 and comes with an eighth of all five strains, matches, rolling papers, and hemp wicks for each. They're also sold individually for $50 to $60 an eighth (depending on the dispensary). If you purchase the prepackaged version, you'll receive a glass jar along with a box of matches, a packet of premium rolling papers, and a roll of hemp wicks, as shown below.
At the end of unpackaging my gift box on Instagram Stories, I polled my followers and asked whether or not they'd be more likely to smoke weed if it was presented in this way. Ninety-three percent responded yes. The sample size was too small to actually yield significant results, but it does say something about branding. Sedlin describes Canndescent as "sexy, sophisticated, and simple." Based on the overwhelmingly positive reactions from friends and coworkers — including those who aren't regular cannabis users — and my own firsthand experience with Canndescent's product, I can absolutely see this company revolutionizing the industry and changing the way we approach weed.
Thanks for all the non-sequiturs. They were truly entertaining :)
A dope smoking politician!
Slick change of subject...
I'd bet money on the fact that more than pot was involved.
What? Are you high right now?
At what level of use? And for which demographic groups?
I'd be ok with any of these, mostly because it's none of my (or your) business what anyone, regardless of occupation, does in their off time. There are many booze hounds doing these same jobs. I don't pretend to have some authority over them, either.
In my 22 years in the tech sector, I've never worked for a drug testing employer (not that they'd have found anything in me if they had).
The big problem with that is that none of us live in a vacuum. If addiction only affected the addict and no one else, I'd be all for letting people do whatever. But the problem is that our society will not stand by idly while people become more and more dysfunctional through their addictions. We'll keep on feeding and sometimes housing them long past the time their brains no longer function. We'll keep sending them to ineffective rehabs and spending all kinds of money on them. We'll repeatedly revive them after overdoses and will not let them die. Since this is the case, we cannot talk about addicts' personal liberties as if that is the only consideration--we are talking about the taxpayer's liberty to go where they want without being confronted by drug addicts, about their liberty to keep as much of their own money as they can and choose to spend it the way they want, etc. Although I lean more libertarian than anything else, I also recognize the fact that our society is not based on each person for himself, acting in a vacuum, and that such a society may not be possible in the real world.
Table strawberries require a specific climate. Hot housing them leaves them tasteless. Name a climate other than in California where strawberries can be grown
The bigger concern for all is that farming is not the honorable profession it used to be. We would rather have roads and high rises and cities
Mores the shame
They are grown commercially in Washington, Florida, Oregon in large amounts, to name a few places. Certainly can be expanded there and elsewhere.
“The big problem with that is that none of us live in a vacuum. If addiction only affected the addict and no one else, I’d be all for letting people do whatever. But the problem is that our society will not stand by idly while people become more and more dysfunctional through their addictions. We’ll keep on feeding and sometimes housing them long past the time their brains no longer function. We’ll keep sending them to ineffective rehabs and spending all kinds of money on them. We’ll repeatedly revive them after overdoses and will not let them die. Since this is the case, we cannot talk about addicts’ personal liberties as if that is the only consideration—we are talking about the taxpayer’s liberty to go where they want without being confronted by drug addicts, about their liberty to keep as much of their own money as they can and choose to spend it the way they want, etc. Although I lean more libertarian than anything else, I also recognize the fact that our society is not based on each person for himself, acting in a vacuum, and that such a society may not be possible in the real world.”
So if I understand your diatribe correctly, the nanny state is ok with you except when you decide it shouldn’t be. “mostly libertarian “? Puleeze :)
Let's be honest here, shall we? I gave you the website for the largest catalog of medical research in the world. It contains abstracts and links to articles produced by researchers all over the world. I informed you that you are free to search the database using any search terms you want.
The reason I took this approach, rather than directly link any of the thousands of research articles published in medical journals is because if I link articles, you can then turn around and dismiss them as being cherry-picked or otherwise filtered somehow. You cannot accuse me of cherry-picking if you search for the articles yourself. Of course, you are free to cherry-pick however you want, and I have no control over that.
Another fallacy. If you took the time to actually research my posting history, you’d see I’m a HUGE advocate of pure research into cannabis. Non-govermental, 3rd party research is a must!
Every legitimate researcher has similar education and credentials, regardless of their employer. *If* you would take the time to actually look at the medical research about the effects of marijuana research, you would see that researchers work for all kinds of entities. And, if you happened to find an article published by a government researcher, you would find a disclaimer that the information presented in the article is the opinion of the authors and does not necessarily reflect any opinion or official policy of the US government.
With all of the above said, I am not surprised that you are uninterested in examining the research for yourself. It has been my experience that people who hold anti-scientific positions rarely have any desire to find out what the science actually shows.
Typical of the GOP. We don't like big government, unless it's OUR big government. Then it's perfectly ok!
Lol. Wait til “medical research” discovers a ‘gay gene’ or similar. Suddenly, we’ll see a concerted effort against medical research. Wait for it!
Link some articles; I won't discuss in any way how you selected them, but will simply discuss them on their merits.
Or don't link articles, and be no better than the person who responds to challenges of their claims with "Google it."
Your call.
Almost everything you do "affects" someone else in some way - if that's the low bar for government regulation, kiss liberty goodbye.
But the problem is that our society will not stand by idly while people become more and more dysfunctional through their addictions.
Government spends on the dysfunctions of the obese - but that's insufficient justification for government banning fattening foods. (Or do you disgaree?)
I’d estimate 3 of 4 posters have smoked pot...at least
Prolly 25-30 percent still do on occasion
The reefer madness crowd is really loud here
Problem with pot is blue state culture where in urban areas younger folks and life long hippies are progressive stoned nutz
In flyoverland it’s simply not that way
I’m a green frog righty all the way which means cultural hot button I’m more right than 95% here
I’m 60
Everyone I know in tennesseee smokes or did smoke pot st some point
I only know 2-3 liberals that I have to deal with in business
Same in Mississippi where I come from and white liberals are rare as mare balls
And if you look at serious pot areas like cave junction Oregon or most of rural colorado or most of NorCal
See how they voted in the election
The fact this country has improsoned non violent offenders for 25-30 years for pot smuggling in the late 80s is criminal and reeks or totalitarianism
We should be ashamed and one day people will look back saying we lost our minds temporarily
That depends on which studies you read, and which aspects of marijuana use they are reporting.
Some of the effects, notably the precipitation of psychotic disorder (related to schizophrenia), act on a developing brain but not a mature brain. Thus, this effect is a danger for users under the age of 25 years old. I believe that this effect follows a classic dose-response pattern, in that higher levels of use equate to greater risk.
Other effects, such as the loss of initiative and motivation, seem to affect older people as well as younger people. This is because some of the components of marijuana cause the death of certain cell types which are crucial for these functions. I think that this effect was observed even in what the researchers in one study called "low use" groups--those who used marijuana about once a week. The deficits in motivation and initiative were observed three months after the last use of marijuana. Thus, the effect can have a long duration, but this study did not establish whether the effect eventually dissipates and if so, after how long.
Other researchers are looking at other demographics and other patterns of marijuana use. I've seen several studies described that looked at the effects in pregnant women, but have not read them that closely to know what the effects on the developing baby are.
“Let’s be honest here, shall we? “
It would be a nice change from your fallacy this & fallacy that nonsense.
“The reason I took this approach, rather than directly link any of the thousands of research articles published in medical journals is because if I link articles, you can then turn around and dismiss them as being cherry-picked or otherwise filtered somehow.”
Truly hilarious. You claim to have valid data to prove your claims but if you share the data it will be used against you. Too funny. Reads like something a Pelosi would say.
“Every legitimate researcher has similar education and credentials, regardless of their employer. “
Bullshite! We see “research” on a variety of things that turns out to be pure crap after you look at the actual data. We also know about bias in research (global warming, etc) that generates a desired result.
“With all of the above said, I am not surprised that you are uninterested in examining the research for yourself.”
100% fallacy. You presume to know what I have or have not researched when you have no way to know what research I may or may not have read.
You are so right as the right reverend Red Ingle said when I was a child of tender years...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqk3osxS4wQ
Seriously, as one who was once a slave to tobacco and alcohol and smoked quite a lot of the wildwood weed I consider both alcohol and tobacco to be far worse than marijuana, in its natural state, could ever be.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.