Hemp vs Marijuana: The Same Plant Split in Two by Politics

One lab number can decide whether a field is “hemp” or “marijuana,” even when the plants are genetically identical. We pull apart the strangest part of modern cannabis law: the 0.3% delta-9 THC threshold, how it came from a decades-old research category, and how it turned into a life-changing line for farmers, consumers, and businesses across the United States. If you have ever wondered why something that looks and smells like weed can be sold as “legal hemp,” this will finally make the mess make sense. 

The map you need to start making great edibles in easy, digestible lessons. Sign up for Free.

Transcript

Copy Transcript Copied

Why Hemp And Marijuana Confuse Us

Margaret 1:19

Welcome friends to episode 366. And today we're talking about hemp versus marijuana, or hemp versus cannabis. The same plant split in two by politics. I'm your host, Margaret, a certified gangier and TCI certified cannabis educator, and I believe your kitchen is the best dispensary that you'll ever have. Welcome to Bite Me, the show about edibles. Grab a snack or a drink, and let's dive in to today's really important topic. And if you are joining us for the first time today, welcome. This one's going to be a little heavier than it typically is. And if you've been here for a while, I appreciate you. Thanks for the support. Thank you for being here. And also, I didn't get any replies to the error that I made in last week's episode. But nobody seemed to catch it. I did just put a note about that in the show notes. So I mean, maybe you didn't actually read the show notes, but it was to encourage people to send me a message when they heard the little boo-boo that I made in last week's episode. I remember I s I heard it while I was editing and I decided to leave it because it didn't seem worth it to fix it. And I thought I'd just do something fun with it. Let's get into today's episode. And a fact that blows my mind that the plant sitting legally in a hemp field two miles from a farmer's house, and the plant that could still get someone arrested on the other side of the same county line can be genetically identical. Same species, sometimes the same seed stock. And what separates federally legal crop from controlled substance isn't the plant. It's a lab report. A number on a piece of paper that says whether the THC content came in under or over three-tenths of one percent. Yep. Three-tenths of one percent, that's the whole ball game. So today we're getting into how that happened, why the number is nowhere near as scientific as it sounds, what it means for anything you're making in your own kitchen, and how Canada, of all places, ended up drawing the line differently. So let's get into it, friends.

One Plant, One Species, Two Labels

Speaker 3:47

Let's start with the botany, because this is where most of the confusion begins, and it takes about 90 seconds to clear up. And I have to admit, before I sat down to write out this episode, I had a lot of confusion about it myself, even though I know a lot of Americans. There's many US residents that are part of my cannabis club that listen to this show, you know, that I hear from all the time. And even with that access to people who live in the States, none of it seems very clear to me. And so I'm hoping this will help clear things up for you today, like it did for me. So hemp and marijuana are not two different plants. They're not even two different subspecies in any way that holds up botanically. Both are cannabis sativa L. Full stop. The distinction you've heard your whole life, the idea that hemp is one kind of plant and marijuana is a different kind of plant is a legal fiction dressed up to sound like science. What actually separates them is chemistry. Specifically, the percentage of delta-9 THC in the plant material measured on a dry weight basis. Below the threshold, it's hemp. Above it, it's marijuana. Same plant, same species, sometimes literally seeds from the same breeding program, just tested at different points in the plant's THC development. And where did that threshold come from? Not from a toxicologist, not from anyone studying what dose of THC actually produces a psychoactive effect. It came from a 1976 taxonomy paper by a Canadian botanist named Ernest Small, who was trying to sort fiber type cannabis from drug type cannabis for classification purposes. And if you've ever seen fiber type cannabis, it does look quite different than the drug type cannabis. He picked 0.3 as a reasonably clean dividing line for his own research categories. And that's it. I will mention that Ernest Small did receive the Order of Canada for a lot of his work in the agricultural botany sector. That's the whole origin story of the number that now determines whether a farmer goes to prison or gets a USDA subsidy, which is kind of messed up. It's akin to picking a number out of a hat and then building an entire federal enforcement apparatus around it 50 years later, which, as it turns out, is basically what happened.

The Farm Bill And The Delta-9 Rule

Speaker 6:18

So here's the timeline. And I'm gonna try and keep it tight because the details could end up taking a lot more time than I would like to dedicate to this episode. But before 2018 in the US, none of this mattered. Hemp and marijuana were both fully illegal under the Controlled Substances Act. Cannabis sativa was Schedule One, no exceptions, no distinction between the plant that gets you high and the plant that makes rope. The 1937 Marijuana Tax Act had already lumped them together decades earlier, and the 1970 CSA just kept that lumping in place. And I do believe I did a history of cannabis episode a little while ago. I can link to as well, that we'll go into more detail around this. Then came the Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018, and you know it as the Farm Bill. It carved hemp, defined as cannabis, with no more than 0.3 delta 9 THC on a dry weight basis, out of the legal definition of marijuana entirely. Overnight, hemp became an agricultural commodity regulated by the USDA. No DEA registration required to grow it. Marijuana stayed exactly where it was, same plant. One side of a THC line became a farm crop. The other side stayed a felony in most of the country. Nobody in Congress was voting on pharmacology here. They were voting on whether hemp could be a legal fiber and CBD crop. And the 0.3 number was already sitting there for decades of prior hemp legislation, so it got adopted without anyone revisiting whether it made any sense. And here's the part that turned it from a bureaucratic footnote into an entire parallel industry. The farm bill's definition only capped Delta 9 THC. It didn't touch Delta 8 THC or THCA or any other cannabinoids that can also get you high. So the industry did exactly what you'd expect an industry to do when handed a loophole that had that much daylight in it. Companies started producing hemp-derived Delta VIII products and later hemp-derived THC flour that could be every bit as intoxicating as dispensary cannabis while staying technically compliant on paper. You can walk into a gas station in a state where cannabis is fully illegal and walk out with something that'll get you as high as what's sitting in a locked case at a dispensary three states over. One is a felony, the other is checkout aisle convenient. Same plant, same effect, often, wildly different legal universe. There's also a farming reality tucked inside this that doesn't get talked about often enough because that threshold isn't a hard wall. It's a testing outcome. Hemp farmers are one hot summer or one late harvest away from their crop testing over 0.3% and legally becoming marijuana. In the industry, this is called going hot. Under the current federal rule, a crop that tests between 0.3% and 1% THC gets treated as a negligent violation rather than a straight-up felony, which was a real improvement over the earlier version of the rule. It still means a farmer can do everything right and lose a season because the plant did what plants do in a warm year. That's not a hypothetical. That's a real risk sitting on real farms. And it's exactly the kind of thing I wanted a grower's actual voice on because I can explain the regulation, but I've never had a season's income riding on a THC test, personally. We're gonna hear from a grower later on in this episode. And just an update because all this is changing pretty quickly. The loophole that I just described is scheduled to close on November 12th of this year when a new federal standard swaps the old Delta 9 only threshold for a total THC measurement, one that sweeps the THCA and Delta 8 and caps finished hemp products at 0.4 milligrams of total THC per container. That would wipe out most of the hemp-derived THC products currently on the shelves. As of the day I'm recording this, the Senate bill has since passed a bill to push that deadline to December 11th for naturally derived hemp products, but it still needs to clear the house and get signed before it's actually law. Synthetic cannabinoids like converted Delta VI aren't included in that delay at all. They're still cut off November 12th, no matter what happens to the rest of the bill. By the time you're hearing this, who knows? Maybe that timeline will have moved again. But I'll try and keep the show notes updated if it does.

Canada’s One Regulator Approach

Speaker 11:04

Now let's cross the border because Canada has handled this whole situation differently, and it's worth understanding why. Canada legalized cannabis nationally in October 2018 under the Cannabis Act, and hemp was folded into that same framework from day one rather than being carved out through a separate agricultural bill. The industrial hemp regulations under the Cannabis Act define industrial hemp the same way the U.S. does on paper, 0.3% THC or less in the flowering heads and leaves. But the entire plant, hemp, and marijuana both sit under one regulator, and that's Health Canada. That single detail changes everything downstream. There's no equivalent of the farm bill loophole because there was never a moment where hemp got separated out from the same enforcement and testing regime that governs higher THC cannabis. CBD derived from hemp and CBD derived from any other cannabis variety are treated identically under Canadian law. There's no gas station THC flour market because the regulatory gap that made that possible in the US just doesn't exist north of the border. Is the Canadian system more restrictive in some ways? Honestly, yes. There's no equivalent of the sprawling, loosely regulated hemp drive THC beverage and gummy market you're seeing explode in the US right now. But it's also a lot more coherent. One plant, one regulator, one set of rules, whether you're growing for fiber or for a dispensary shelf. And I'll be honest with you, as a Canadian who's watched the U.S. hemp market from outside, there's almost something admirable about how clean the framework is, and something almost exhausting about how much simpler it would be to have that same clarity if I were building a business on either side of the border that draws the line so differently. Now, this isn't to say that legalization, recreational legalization in Canada is perfect by any means. I also did an interview a while back, maybe a year ago, a little bit longer, with a Mike De Villiers who wrote a book about the corporatization of cannabis in Canada, which I found very eye-opening, and I'll link to that in the show notes as well. The simplicity does make things much easier to follow.

What This Means For Edible Dosing

Speaker 13:15

So why does any of this matter if you're just trying to make a batch of gummies on a Tuesday night? Because that THC source matters more than people realize when they're thinking about dose. A hemp-derived product relying on that dry weight percentage loophole can have wildly inconsistent actual milligram content from batch to batch, especially from smaller or less rigorously tested brands, because the whole compliance framework is built around a percentage, not a fixed dose. That gummy from the gas station and that gummy from a licensed dispensary might list similar THC numbers on the label and behave completely differently in your body because one of them was tested and formulated under a much tighter regulatory net than the other. This is exactly the kind of thing we we're going to be talking about in the certificate of analysis episode that I have coming up. Reading where your THC actually came from, hemp derived under a dry weight loophole versus marijuana derived under a licensed testing regime is a dosing literacy skill now. It didn't used to have to be, but now it does. So the more of this that you make yourself from cannabis you grew or sourced and tested with intention, the less any of this legal maze actually touches your life. You're not relying on a THC percentage calculated on a dry weight basis by someone trying to stay on the right side of a farm bill loophole. You know exactly what's going into your fusion, you know your kitchen is the best dispensary you'll ever have, and it's also the one place that none of this classification nonsense can follow you.

A Grower’s Risk Of Going Hot

Speaker 14:48

So I asked a hemp cultivator to walk me through what that 0.3% line actually looks like from inside a field because I can explain the regulation, but I've never had my income riding on a THC test. So here's how she described it. In Canada, industrial hemp is grown under the industrial hemp regulations, and we hold a license from Health Canada to cultivate it. While some of the regulations overlap with or refer to the Cannabis Act, industrial hemp is its own regulated category. We are required to choose our seed from an approved list of cultivars that have been tested and verified as capable of meeting the 0.3% THC limit. That said, an approved cultivator is not a guarantee that every crop will come in under the limit. Growing conditions can affect the plant, so managing that risk is part of farming hemp for flour. We grow the plant much like cannabis plants and we watch the crop closely as it approaches maturity. In practice, we tend to harvest a little earlier, looking at the trichomes as well as things like flower density and signs that the plant is beginning to shut down or finish. Testing is another important part of the process. When the crop is approaching harvest, we take a representative sample from across the field and have the biomass tested to demonstrate compliance with the THC limit. The financial risk of going over the limit is significant. If a crop tests above the allowable THC level, it may no longer be marketable for its intended purpose. For a cultivator, that can mean losing the value of an entire crop after a season of putting land, labor, and money into producing it. So cultivar selection, watching the crop closely, harvest timing, and testing are all part of managing that risk. And I think that's an important distinction when people talk about hemp versus cannabis. Botanically, we're growing cannabis. The difference is the regulatory classification and the THC threshold we have to meet. That quote comes from Marianne, a hemp cultivator and producer, proudly and gratefully growing for whole hemp and abide brand products, and executive director of EducA Nation. At Educanation, cannabis education is treated as part of harm reduction, including helping people understand how cannabis is grown and why knowing and trusting your grower matters for quality, consistency, and what you're actually putting into your body. Big ups to Marianne for sharing this with me. Obviously, she is growing in the Canadian legal market, but the same risks that they're taking on obviously applies in the US side as well. So that's the Canadian side of this. One regulator, one clear threshold, real financial stakes if the crop tests over. On the US side, though, the story is messier because the threshold didn't hold the line the same way.

The Loophole’s Human Cost

Speaker 17:36

And I want to bring in Max Johnson here, founder of the cannabis consultancy, Cannabis Wise Guys, who's written some of the sharpest analysis I've read on how this actually played out on the ground, which says a lot. And so Jackson has argued that the entire mess comes down to a miss uh missing definition. As he put it, quote, the real disease is a lack of definition. Smoke shops selling high THC flour and high dose edibles can point to the 0.3% Delta 9 threshold and call themselves compliant, even when what's actually being sold functionally is marijuana. Jackson's proposed fix is splitting the plant cap from the product cap so raw crops get more breathing room while finished consumer products get capped at a fixed milligram dose. And that's aimed at closing that exact gap. He's also been blunt about who let the gap get this wide. In a follow-up piece, Jackson didn't put the blame on regulators. He says, no outside force killed the hemp industry. His argument, in short, is that retailers selling jars with hundreds of milligrams of THC under a technically compliant CBD to THC ratio didn't get caught in a regulatory crackdown so much as invite one. And the legitimate wellness side of the hemp market is getting swept up in the fallout. Jackson has also written about the human cost sitting underneath all of this. And this is the piece that made me want him in this episode in the first place. He described walking into an operation that looked exactly like a licensed dispensary: glass cases, bud tenders, jars lined up like a legal shop, all of it selling hemp. Someone buys pre-rolls there, gets pulled over, and the officer smells cannabis and sees cannabis because that's what it is. Jackson's own conclusion about this scenario is blunt. He says, and what if I told you the cop was right? It is weed. He's also lived, this one personally, pulled over by federal agents in California while transporting properly labeled USDA compliant hemp from Pennsylvania. The paperwork was in order. He was charged anyway and had to fight it to get the charges dropped. His point isn't that hemp compliance is meaningless, is that the gap between what's legally compliant on paper and what a cop, a prosecutor, or a jury can actually tell apart in the field is where people are absorbing the risk that corporations created.

The Takeaway And Your Turn

Speaker 20:03

So here's what keeps coming up when it comes to this topic. The plant didn't split itself in two. Politics did that. A botanist picked a number for his own paper in 1976. Lawmakers adopted it decades later without asking whether it made pharmacological sense. And now that number decides whether someone's crop is a felony or a federal farm subsidy. Same plant the whole time. And I don't know whether the answer is picking a side of that number and getting mad about it. I think the answer is understanding it well enough that it stops having power over how you think about this plant. Hemp and cannabis were never actually two different things. There were always one plant that got legislated into two. And that, my friends, is worth thinking about. I'm going to link to Max's articles that he shared with me in the show notes so you can check those out, and also the relevant episodes that I've done in the past around these topics. And I would love to hear from you. What do you think? Because this has got to be on a lot of people's minds, obviously, coming up later this year, because there are going to be many businesses who will not survive the closing of this loophole as it stands right now. Would lawmakers consider a simpler system like the Canadian one? I mean, that's worth an ask. So I'll leave that with you this week, my friends. I'm your host, Margaret. Till next time, stay curious and stay high.