Gorilla Glue and Master Kush: the same terpene, different lineage, different producers

How do these two strains really differ?

By origin and supplier. Gorilla Glue has three parents described in a public breeder's entry, while Master Kush has no established origin at all. Seven producers handle both names in Poland, and none of them offer both at the same time. The leading terpene, however, is the same in both, so the scent profile is not what distinguishes them.

The lineage of Gorilla Glue leads to three lines: chem's sister, sour dubb, and chocolate diesel. It was recorded by a public entry from breeders at GG Strains (Lone Watty and Joesy Whales) under the name Original Glue. The name changed after a settlement in 2017 with the glue manufacturer of the same trademark, so breeding catalogs today refer to it as Original Glue or GG4, while the Polish registered names remain as they were.

Master Kush stands on the other side of this boundary. The pedigree graph of this service records its parents as unspecified, and this is not a gap in data collection. Catalog descriptions circulate in at least two conflicting versions: one traces the strain to a cross of two unnamed landraces from the Hindu Kush mountains, while the other comes from a cross of Hindu Kush with Skunk number one. When named sources provide conflicting versions, the editorial team leaves the origin unspecified instead of choosing the more convenient option.

The pharmacy shelf also separates them. Gorilla Glue is supplied by CanPoland, Four 20 Pharma, PhytoPur Bio, and Suprobion, while Master Kush is supplied by S-LAB, Synoptis Pharma, and Tilray. These collections have no common element, even though both strains are available in pharmacies at the same time. They also differ in supplier scale: S-LAB offers 38 strains, Tilray 14, and Synoptis Pharma 13, while the four suppliers of Gorilla Glue together have 14 catalog entries, which is less than S-LAB alone.

The declared content of this difference does not reflect reality. The ranges of both strains overlap by more than three-quarters of their width, so choosing based on the registered name practically yields the same fork. They are described more broadly on separate pages: profile Gorilla Glue and profil Master Kusha.

What connects them?

The leading terpene and most of the composition are common, but there is no shared parent. Caryophyllene leads in both profiles, and seven compounds listed for Gorilla Glue are included in the eight listed for Master Kush. The pedigree graph does not connect these two names at any point.

The list of compounds for one strain is a subset of the other. For Gorilla Glue, there are seven names: bisabolol, humulene, caryophyllene, limonene, linalool, myrcene, and pinene. For Master Kush, the same seven plus nerolidol. The entire difference comes down to one compound, which originates from the record of one database. A common set of aromas is also shared, which descriptions attribute to both strains: earthy, spicy, and peppery.

However, the common leading terpene is not a sign of kinship here, as it leads most frequently among all. Caryophyllene is at the forefront of the profile of thirty out of eighty-five cultivars, which is over one-third. Among fifteen comparisons in this series, pairs with the same leading terpene on both sides are two, and this is one of them. The leading terpene thus separates thirteen other pairs, while this one does not separate at all.

In the pedigree graph, both names have an empty list of siblings, but for different reasons. Gorilla Glue has described parents and appears on the parent side with three names from this list: Mac Monkey (Blue Monkey), Balasa (Gorilla Girl), and Zookies. Master Kush does not appear on the parent side with any. Offspring are not siblings, and an empty list with a known pedigree can be a correct result, not a gap to be filled.

Finally, they are connected by their position in the pharmacy market. Both have four entries in this ranking with a median equal to one, so both belong to the best-stocked names in Polish pharmacies. Both are issued by prescription in the Rpw category.

How do the terpene profile records differ in sources?

By the number of sources and their consistency. For Gorilla Glue, two Polish databases differ in composition, so the profile of this strain is disputed. For Master Kush, the composition is provided by one source, budcare.pl, and there is nothing to compare it with. These are two separate types of uncertainty that should not be confused.

The discrepancy for Gorilla Glue can be precisely named. Bisabolol and humulene appear in the record of only one of the two databases, while the other is silent about them. The difference goes further: for the same entry, Four 20 Pharma has one database opening the list with myrcene, while the other places caryophyllene far ahead of it. This is not about two batches of raw material, but about two descriptions of the same registry entry.

For Master Kush, the problem is different. Four registry entries for this strain are described by the same database, while the other does not describe it at all, so there is no comparison of two independent records. The composition from one source is not false because of this, but it has not been confirmed by anything other than itself. Three of these four entries list exactly the same set of eight compounds, while the fourth, from Synoptis Pharma, lists three fewer. The same database also separates both strains by aroma: Gorilla Glue returns diesel and pine notes, while Master Kush has camphor.

We do not provide percentage shares for the names of compounds, and this pair shows why. Nine registry entries for both strains in the budcare.pl database yield share totals from 64 to 98 percent, with a median of 83 and a range of 34 points. None reach one hundred, so the rest of the profile has not been described, and the denominator remains unknown and different in each entry. The percentage itself, given without information on what it refers to, sounds like the result of a laboratory measurement, although it is just a share of an undisclosed whole.

Where do the declared ranges for both strains come from?

From several separate registry entries, not from the ranges of one producer. Each pharmacy entry carries its own declared value with an allowable deviation, and the range assigned to the strain is the sum of all such entries. The width of the range thus speaks of the number of suppliers, not the strength of the plant itself.

Gorilla Glue is currently listed in four positions with specified deviation, and only their sum gives a THC content range of 18.0-26.4%. The four different declared values come from four different manufacturers, so this variation cannot be explained by the tolerance of any one of them individually. The fifth position, from CanPoland, does not provide any deviation at all and does not fall within the range.

Master Kush has four positions and three manufacturers, but only two different declared values, so the range of 16.2-24.2% arises from combining two declarations, not from one stretched tolerance. Three positions declare a higher value, one a lower, and it is that one that pulls the lower end down.

In the context of the entire comparison, both ranges appear quite differently. Among sixty-nine strains with assigned ranges, none has a wider range than Gorilla Glue, and only this one exceeds eight points. The range of Master Kush has eight points evenly, but it is carried in this comparison by fifteen strains at once, so it does not indicate anything by itself.

The common part of both ranges covers more than three-quarters of each, so the number from the registration name weakly separates this pair. Availability changes from month to month, as individual positions enter and exit the market independently of each other. The current state of the pharmacy shelf leads a summary of available strains, updated separately from this text.

After how long do both strains start to take effect and how long does it last?

The same, because the route of administration determines the outcome, not the name of the cultivar. No separate pharmacokinetic study has been published for either of these two strains, so no difference in the course can be demonstrated between them. The numbers in the paragraph below pertain to the route of administration, not to Gorilla Glue or Master Kush.

The route of administration determines the course more than the variety 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 lasts for two to four hours. After ingestion, the raw material first passes through the intestine and liver, so the first sensations are awaited from half an hour to two hours, and the episode can last six, sometimes eight hours. Hence the most common mistake with oral administration: anyone who thinks nothing is happening after thirty minutes and takes another dose will receive both doses at once. The above ranges describe the route of administration, not this variety; pharmacokinetic studies for a single cultivar have not been published.

Thus, comparing the duration of effects between these two names has no basis: none of the available sources has measured them separately, and the difference between positions of the same cultivar can be greater than the difference between cultivars. Both strains are dispensed by prescription, and the method of administration is determined by the attending physician, not by the description of the strain or the supplier's material.

What is known, and what is not known about the effects of both strains?

Nothing is known from studies about either of them separately. There is no clinical work that has tested Gorilla Glue or Master Kush as a cultivar. What can be referenced pertains to a single compound present in both profiles, not to either of these two plants, let alone their dried flowers.

The evidence base of this service assigns the same set of two studies on caryophyllene to each side of the pair. This is not a coincidence: since the leading terpene is the same on both sides, the referenced studies do not separate either. The statement about the boundary of this evidence is recorded for both strains identically in terms of sign and applies to both sides of the pair equally:

Neither of the two studies tested caryophyllene on humans or in inhaled form from dried flower; both studies pertain to oral or systemic administration in mice in pain and inflammation models, not sleep or mood.

The difference between the sides of the pair therefore does not lie in the evidence, but in how certain the premise is. With Master Kush, even within a single source, four positions of the same strain do not agree on the leading compound: in three it is caryophyllene, in the fourth it is myrcene. With Gorilla Glue, two bases diverge. In both cases, transferring the conclusion from a study on a pure compound to dried flower would be a leap over two gaps at once.

Separately, one must keep what comes from commercial descriptions and patient reports. Catalogs assign both strains a relaxing effect, and Gorilla Glue also a balanced one, but these are descriptive labels of the base, not measurement results. None of them indicates what the strain will do to a specific patient.

What exactly was demonstrated in the two studies on caryophyllene?

Binding to the CB2 receptor in mice and pain relief in a rodent model. Both studies worked on animals or cells, both administered a pure compound, and neither studied dried flower. Below is what each of them demonstrated, along with the study model and identifier.

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

Second work: Klauke et al., European Neuropsychopharmacology, 2014 (PMID:24210682). Oral caryophyllene reduced the late inflammatory phase of pain in mice in a formalin test in a CB2 receptor-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 study model is a rodent (mouse).

The distance between these results and the pharmacy shelf should be stated clearly. Mice received an isolated compound at a dose determined by the researcher, while the patient inhales a mixture in which the same compound constitutes an unknown part. The work on the receptor does not indicate which of the two compared strains the attending physician should choose.

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

Separately, nothing has been reported for either of them that could be quantified. Adverse event registries are maintained for products with a batch number, not for the cultivar name, so there is no and will not be a breakdown of events into Gorilla Glue and Master Kush.

Reports of adverse effects are collected for medicinal products with a batch number, not for the strain name, so the following pertains to hemp dried flower as a group of raw materials. The most frequently reported symptoms are dry mouth, red eyes, and increased heart rate. Dizziness upon rapid standing, daytime drowsiness, and temporary worsening of short-term memory are less frequently described, as well as anxiety that increases with dosage. 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 dried flower in Poland do not separate them by individual products.

This pair also encounters a statistical trap. Gorilla Glue has four entries from four suppliers on the shelf, Master Kush four from three, and the sales volume of each is unknown. Therefore, if reports were counted separately for both names, their number would primarily reflect the number of packages issued. The difference in the number of reports does not indicate a difference in safety until the denominator is known.

Frequently Asked Questions

Are Gorilla Glue and Master Kush related?

No. Gorilla Glue has three parents in its pedigree graph, while Master Kush has no established origin, so a common ancestor cannot be identified or excluded. Both have an empty list of siblings.

Which of these two strains is stronger?

The upper limit of the declared range is higher for Gorilla Glue, but both ranges were created by combining several registration entries from different manufacturers and overlap by more than three-quarters in width. Comparing potency on this basis is misleading.

Why don't you provide percentage shares of the profile components?

Because the denominator is unknown. Nine registration entries for this pair yield share sums from 64 to 98 percent, so numbers from different descriptions are not comparable with each other or with anything else.

Does the term Kush in the name indicate anything about the strain's origin?

No. In this comparison, the term Kush includes ten cultivars: five with established pedigree and five without. Master Kush belongs to the latter group, so the name is not a genetic indicator here.

Do studies on caryophyllene pertain to these two strains?

No. Both cited works administered a pure compound to animals, not dried flower to patients, and neither tested Gorilla Glue nor Master Kush.

How do we know that the profile of Gorilla Glue is disputed?

From a comparison of two Polish databases. One lists bisabolol and humulene for this strain, while the other is silent about them, and for the same entry, Four 20 Pharma, both place a different compound at the top of the list.

Dried flower is a pharmaceutical raw material dispensed by prescription in the Rpw category. The material is informational in nature and does not replace medical advice or the decisions of the attending physician. The editorial text was prepared by redakcja ubucha.pl.