Gorilla Glue and Cataract Kush: caryophyllene vs myrcene, two sources against one

• Profile. Gorilla Glue leads with caryophyllene, Cataract Kush leads with myrcene.
• Availability. No producer supplies both, so the availability of each depends on a different delivery.
• Origin. The lineage of both is established.
• What this table does not say. It does not include the declared content as a single number or price. Which strain is suitable for whom is determined by the attending physician, not by the feature comparison.

What do these two strains really differ in?

Three things at once. The leading terpene: caryophyllene leads in Gorilla Glue, myrcene leads in Cataract Kush. The lineage: the pedigree chart does not provide a common parent for them. The producer: none of the four companies supplying the first to Polish pharmacies supplies the second. THC content is a fourth difference, not the first.

Behind the indication of the leading terpene lies something different on each side. The profile base describes five registry items for Gorilla Glue, and in each of them, caryophyllene is at the forefront, even when the rest of the list looks completely different. For Cataract Kush, there are four items, but the description of shares repeats in them regarding the number, so myrcene leads there in one description used four times, not in four independent readings. This asymmetry returns below when asking about sources.

The producers diverge completely. Gorilla Glue reaches Polish pharmacies from CanPoland, Four 20 Pharma, PhytoPur Bio, and Suprobion, while Cataract Kush comes from S-LAB, Synoptis Pharma, and Tilray. There is not a single common one, although both strains have four items in their inventory; for the second, one producer is responsible for two.

The declared content separates this pair the least of all four features, as the ranges of both strains overlap over a larger part of their length. Therefore, the first sentence of this page talks about the terpene, not the potency. A separate page about the Gorilla Glue strain collects its lineage and pharmacy versions, and a separate page about the Cataract Kush strain does the same for the second side of the pair.

What connects them?

A set of terpenes, not kinship. The six names listed in the Cataract Kush profile are exactly the same names that stand in the Gorilla Glue profile, and the latter has bisabolol on the list as well. Both leading terpenes occur on both sides of the pair, so the difference concerns the order, not presence.

There is no common parent, and the graph of this cluster reaches only one generation back, so further relatives are simply not checked. Three names from the Gorilla Glue lineage, namely chem’s sister, sour dubb, and chocolate diesel, do not return in the graph under any other strain from Polish pharmacies. The lineage of Cataract Kush leads to la confidential and og kush, and the latter name returns in the lineages of three more cultivars in this comparison and is itself a strain of unknown origin.

The sibling field is empty for both strains, each for a different reason. For Gorilla Glue, none of the three parents has a second offspring in this comparison, so there is no one to compare it with. For Cataract Kush, og kush acts like a broad family style, not like a single, identified strain, so sharing such a parent does not make the two cultivars siblings. The empty list is a design decision, not a gap to fill.

Besides that, they are connected by the mode of issuance and the way the content is described: both have four registry items in their inventory, and the content range was created for both by combining the declarations of several separate items, not from the ranges of one. Both sides of the pair are also described by the same profile base; what differs is whether someone verified this description with a second voice.

How do we know what the terpene profile of each of them looks like?

With varying certainty on both sides. The composition of Gorilla Glue is provided by two Polish databases, and these sources differ from each other: bisabolol and humulene appear only in one. For Cataract Kush, there is only one source left, as the second database does not have this strain at all, so there is nothing to compare with.

The discrepancy for Gorilla Glue goes further than two additional names. For the same registry item from the same producer, one database opens the list with caryophyllene, and the other with myrcene, so both sources do not agree either on the composition or on what is at the forefront of that composition. The dispute cannot be resolved from the outside: in the data on which this cluster stands, there is neither a method of determination nor a batch number for any of the profiles.

For Cataract Kush, the lack is the opposite. One source describes all four items of this strain with the same set of shares, so repetition here is not confirmation, but duplication of one description. There is no second voice at all, as the database that served for comparison with Gorilla Glue does not describe this strain. Therefore, neither of the two profiles is confirmed, only for two different reasons: one has two voices that conflict, the other has one voice that has not been verified by anyone.

This is where the prohibition on providing shares in percentages comes from. Five items of Gorilla Glue give in one database five different sums if you add all the reported shares: 64, 67, 78, 83, and 98. Four items of Cataract Kush give 94 every time because the description is one. None of these sums closes to one hundred, and since the sum can be different for each item of the same strain, the denominator is unknown. A number without a denominator looks in the text about pharmacy raw material like a measurement result, and it is not.

How do the THC ranges of both strains compare to other strains?

Widely, both. Gorilla Glue has a range of 18.0-26.4%, the widest among sixty-nine ranges collected for strains from Polish pharmacies. Cataract Kush has 16.2-24.2%, and the same range is shared by fourteen other strains, so it does not say anything particular about it by itself.

Both are composed of several separate registry items, not from the ranges of one declaration. The manufacturer’s tolerance reaches one-tenth of the declared value, so the Cataract Kush item with a declaration of eighteen percent gives 16.2-19.8%, and the item with a declaration of twenty-two percent gives 19.8-24.2%; only combining both segments gives 16.2-24.2%.

For Gorilla Glue, such declarations take four different values, from twenty to twenty-four percent, and these determine four overlapping segments: 18.0-22.0%, 19.8-24.2%, 20.7-25.3%, and 21.6-26.4%. Combining four separate registry items gives 18.0-26.4%, a range that has no equivalent in this comparison. The width here speaks of the number of reports on the market, not that one batch is sometimes weaker and sometimes stronger.

The common part of both ranges is 18.0-24.2%, which is about three-quarters of the length of each. The patient does not receive a strain at the pharmacy, but a specific registry item with its own declaration, so comparing strains by their mere width says more about how many manufacturers reported them than about how they differ. The availability of individual items also changes over time, as permits expire and manufacturers withdraw series; the current state collects a list of available strains.

What has been shown for caryophyllene, the leading terpene of Gorilla Glue?

Two studies, both on rodents, both about pain and inflammation, none about sleep or mood. The first showed that the effect disappears in animals lacking the CB2 receptor, the second that with chronic administration, tolerance does not develop. None of them reaches a human inhaling vapor from the herb.

The Gertsch team published a study in 2008 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) with the identifier PMID:18574142. The study model is a mouse (in vivo) and a test tube (receptor binding, human cells). (E)-caryophyllene selectively bound to the CB2 receptor (Ki = 155 nM) and inhibited paw swelling induced by carrageenan in wild-type mice, but not in mice lacking the CB2 receptor (Cnr2-/-), indicating a CB2-dependent mechanism; the study did not include any anxiety tests.

The second study, PMID:24210682, appeared in 2014 in European Neuropsychopharmacology, and its model is a rodent (mouse). Oral caryophyllene reduced late inflammatory pain in mice in the formalin test in a CB2-dependent manner, with no effect on the early phase; in a neuropathic pain model, it alleviated thermal hyperalgesia and mechanical allodynia without developing tolerance with chronic administration.

The boundary of both studies is stated directly. In neither of the two studies was caryophyllene tested on humans or in inhaled form from the herb; both studies concern oral or systemic administration in mice in pain and inflammation models, not sleep or mood. Everything else said about the effects of this strain comes from patient reports or manufacturer materials and does not have the status of a study result. More broadly about caryophyllene, a separate page of this comparison discusses it here.

What is known about myrcene, the leading terpene of Cataract Kush?

Three studies, all on mice, and the result depends on the route of administration. Intraperitoneal injection gave a slightly anxiogenic effect in 2002, inhaled vapor in 2024 gave an anxiolytic effect in females, and a 1990 study described the abolition of pain reactions after naloxone. Insomnia in humans was not studied in any of them.

The 2002 study, PMID:12587690, was published in Phytomedicine, and its model is a rodent (mouse, intraperitoneal administration). Myrcene administered intraperitoneally (100-200 mg/kg) reduced the locomotor activity of mice in the open field test, prolonged sleep time induced by pentobarbital (at 200 mg/kg about 2.6 times), and reduced the number of entries into the open arms of the elevated plus maze, which the authors described as a weak anxiogenic effect, not anxiolytic.

The year 1990 brought a study PMID:1983154 in the Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, conducted on a model described in the database as a rodent (mouse). Myrcene (10-40 mg/kg) reduced pain reactions in mice in hot plate and writhing tests induced by acetic acid; the effect was abolished by naloxone and yohimbine, indicating the involvement of alpha2-adrenergic receptors and the release of endogenous opioids.

The latest of the three, PMID:39728677 from 2024 in NeuroSci, used a model closer to inhalation, namely mice exposed to vapors. With short puffs of vapor, mimicking inhaled administration in humans, beta-myrcene acted anxiolytically in the elevated plus maze in female mice, and in males only with a single puff.

The boundary of these studies stands in one sentence. In humans, it has not been shown that myrcene alone alleviates insomnia at doses typical for inhalation of the herb. The direction of the effect in rodents depends on the route of administration and gender: after intraperitoneal injection in 2002, a slightly anxiogenic effect was described, and after inhalation in 2024, an anxiolytic effect in females. These two results do not cancel each other out, but show that the conclusion depends on conditions that no popular strain database provides. More broadly about myrcene, a separate page of this comparison discusses it here.

How long does it take for the herb from each of these strains to start working?

Identically, and that is the whole answer here. The onset speed and duration of the episode result from the method of intake, and the name of the cultivar does not shift anything in this calculation. For neither of these two strains has anyone announced a measurement of concentrations over time, so the difference in the profile remains without translation to the clock.

The route of administration determines the course more than the strain itself. After vaporization, the substance passes from the lungs to the blood almost immediately, so the first sensations appear after a few minutes, the intensity increases for another ten to thirty minutes, and the whole effect passes within two to four hours. After ingestion, the raw material first passes through the intestine and liver, so the first sensations are waited for from half an hour to two, and the episode lasts six, sometimes eight hours. This is where the most common mistake in oral administration comes from: those who think after thirty minutes that nothing is happening and take another dose will receive both doses at once. The above ranges describe the route of administration, not this strain; pharmacokinetic studies for a single cultivar have not been published.

For the same reason, it cannot be said that one of these two strains works longer than the other. Such a statement would require measurement on humans for each cultivar separately, and such measurement does not exist for either of them; the difference in the terpene profile does not replace it, although it is often used that way in commercial descriptions.

What side effects have been reported for each of these two strains?

For neither individually. The register of side effects links the report to the medicinal product packaging, marked with a batch number, not to the name of the cultivar, so separating reports between these two strains is unfeasible. If one had more, it would speak about the volume of sales, not the safety of the raw material.

Reports of side effects are collected for the medicinal product with a batch number, not for the strain name, so the following concerns hemp herb as a group of raw materials. The most commonly reported are dry mouth, red eyes, and increased heart rate. Less frequently described are dizziness upon rapid standing, daytime drowsiness, and temporary worsening of short-term memory, as well as anxiety increasing with the dose. A separate issue is medications taken concurrently, especially sedatives and those affecting coagulation: their assessment requires knowledge of the entire list of preparations, not just the description of the plant. We do not provide the frequency of these symptoms numerically, as public compilations for hemp herb in Poland do not separate them by individual products.

Additionally, there is a calculation that cannot be performed: both strains have four registry items, but the number of releases in pharmacies is not published, so the denominator is missing here just like with the shares in the profile. Without a denominator, comparing two strains by the number of reports is arithmetic without a basis.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Gorilla Glue stronger than Cataract Kush?

The declared ranges of both strains overlap over a larger part of their length, and the pharmacy issues a specific registry item, not a strain, so comparing by name does not resolve anything. The choice of raw material is determined by the attending physician.

Are these two strains related?

The pedigree graph of this comparison does not provide a common parent for them, and the sibling field is empty for both. The lineage of Gorilla Glue leads to chem’s sister, sour dubb, and chocolate diesel, while the lineage of Cataract Kush leads to la confidential and og kush.

Why are there no percentage shares next to the names of the terpenes?

Because the denominator is unknown. The sum of shares reported for the five items of Gorilla Glue comes out to 64 once, 98 another time, and for Cataract Kush it is always 94, because the database duplicates the same description for all four items.

Where does the width of the THC content range for one strain come from?

From combining the declarations of several separate registry items. For Gorilla Glue, there are four nominal declarations, and each has its own manufacturer’s tolerance, so the range of the strain 18.0-26.4% is the sum of four narrower segments, not the ranges of one batch.

Does either of them work better for sleep?

There is no data to resolve that. Studies on myrcene were conducted on mice, and their result changes with the route of administration; studies on caryophyllene concern pain and inflammation, not sleep. Neither of them studied humans inhaling vapor from the herb.

Can these strains be purchased without a prescription?

No. Hemp herb is a pharmaceutical raw material issued by a doctor’s prescription in the Rpw category, and both cultivars are available in Poland only as registry items issued in pharmacies on prescription.

Hemp herb is a pharmaceutical raw material issued by a doctor’s prescription in the Rpw category. The material is for informational purposes and does not replace the advice of the attending physician.

The editorial text was prepared by the editorial team of ubucha.pl.