Lemon Haze Gelato (Cannabis flos S-LAB): pedigree from two lines and one source of profile

• Who supplies. Exclusively S-LAB, so there is nothing to compare versions with, and a supply break means no availability of this strain, not another version of it.
• Profile. Dominated by caryophyllene, alongside humulene, limonene. We do not provide percentage shares because sources count them against different wholes.
• Origin. Established pedigree, parents are Lemon Haze and Gelato.
• What is missing. The profile describes one source, so there is nothing to compare it with.

Where does Lemon Haze Gelato come from?

From the cross of Lemon Haze with the Gelato strain. This is stated in the only material where the pedigree of this position appears at all, and on it, our entire record is based. The breeder has not published their own description of the cross, so there is simply no second, independent confirmation of the parent names.

Both parts of the name refer to lines with numerous offspring. Lemon Haze comes from the citrus branch of hazes, while Gelato is a family known mainly for numbered phenotypes, each of which is often described separately. The pedigree record indicates rather two families than two specific plants, and this difference comes back later when asking about siblings. None of the parents can be found in Polish pharmacies as a separate position, so the pedigree of this cross cannot be traced back even one generation in our comparison.

The genetics of this position are described as a hybrid with sativa dominance, and this description also comes from one entry, not from analysis. In the entire comparison, the pedigree has been established for sixty out of eighty-five strains, so Lemon Haze Gelato belongs to the better-documented part, although all documentation fits here in one paragraph of someone else’s text. If this source were to disappear, nothing would remain about the origin of this strain except the name itself.

Which producer has this strain in Polish pharmacies?

One: S-LAB. In the comparison we are working on, this strain corresponds to exactly one pharmacy position, so there are no parallel versions to place side by side. Comparisons between producers, which take up half the text for more popular strains, cannot arise for this position.

The registered name carries a number that we consciously omit. It is the same declared value, burdened with a deviation of about one-tenth, so quoted alone it would sound like a batch measurement result. Therefore, the THC content stands separately, in the range of 16.2-19.8%, and not in the name.

The presence of one position in the list does not mean it will be in the pharmacy tomorrow. The turnover of the raw material depends on permits, on the release of batches by the producer, and on what has just arrived at the wholesaler, which can cause the strain to disappear for several weeks and then return without warning. We keep the current state exclusively in one place, in the list of available strains, and do not replicate it in texts about individual positions.

S-LAB accounts for thirty-eight strains in this comparison, from names repeated by several producers to positions like this one, which no one else has. Its full list is discussed in a separate text about this producer.

What does this herb smell and taste like?

• humulene humulene
• caryophyllene caryophyllene (leading in the pharmacy list)
• limonene limonene

Citrusy and fruit, with a sweet accent and earthy background. These are the descriptions from the database, which is the only one that describes the profile of this strain. These are not results of sensory analysis or measurement, but catalog labels, so we read them as a hint about the direction of the smell, not as data.

The terpene composition comes from the same, single source and lists humulene, caryophyllene, and limonene. An interesting fact is the order: the profile base puts humulene at the forefront, while the catalog of pharmacy positions, from which we built the inventory, identifies this strain with caryophyllene. Both lists refer to the same position, and this alone shows how little the label of the leading terpene means.

We do not transcribe percentage shares because none of such compilations indicate what they refer to. Summed positions from one base give over four-fifths of the whole, from another less than half, and the rest is not named by anyone. A number without a denominator looks in a text about a drug like a measurement result, and it is not.

The name of the terpene is not, in fact, a description of the strain’s smell. In the extract from chemical records, on which we base data about temperatures, only limonene has a directly recorded lemon scent; with humulene and caryophyllene, there are only boiling temperatures. The smell of the herb is created from a mixture of several dozen compounds, not from three names listed in the catalog.

How long does it take for this herb to take effect and how long does it last?

It depends on the method of administration, not on the name on the jar. With vaporization, we talk about minutes, with ingestion about tens of minutes. For Lemon Haze Gelato itself, no one has measured this, so the ranges below describe the behavior of the raw material in the body, not the property of this cross.

The method of administration determines the course more than the strain itself, and the ranges below describe just that, not this cultivar, because pharmacokinetic studies for a single cultivar have not been published.

For this specific position, nothing more can be added. Neither the producer nor the profile-describing database provides any time value, and the only label regarding sensations speaks of stimulating effects, without reference to minutes or hours. From such a description, neither the beginning nor the end of an episode can be calculated.

What has been shown and what has not been shown in studies on this strain?

Nothing has been shown about the strain itself. There is no clinical or observational study conducted for Lemon Haze Gelato, and what can be honestly referenced here concerns one terpene from its profile and comes from animal studies and cell experiments.

The limits of both studies must be stated directly, as they determine what cannot be drawn from them. In neither of the two studies was caryophyllene tested on humans or in inhaled form from the herb; both works concern oral or systemic administration in mice in pain and inflammation models, not sleep or mood.

On the other side stands the catalog material: the database describing the profile assigns this strain a stimulating effect, and commercial descriptions add the rest. This is a relationship, not a measurement, and it cannot be substituted for an experimental result or vice versa. An honest state of knowledge about this position thus sounds like this: we know its declared composition, we know the works on a single component, and about the strain itself, we know nothing beyond what the producer has written about it. The caryophyllene itself and the limits of the studies conducted on it are discussed in a separate text.

What side effects have been reported after this strain?

None attributed to it by name. For this position, there is no public compilation of events that could be related to it, and reports circulating on forums describe the experiences of individual people, not observations conducted according to any protocol. The lack of such data must be stated directly, rather than replaced with a story.

Reports of side effects are collected for a medicinal product with a batch number, not for the strain name, so the following concerns cannabis 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 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 because public compilations for cannabis herb in Poland do not separate them by individual products.

For the reader, this results in a simple consequence. A symptom noticed after this position cannot be related to any statistics because there are no statistics for it, and the effect of the raw material itself cannot be separated from the dose, time of day, or equipment used. An event is worth describing to a doctor or pharmacist because only a report received this way goes into the register from which anything could ever be counted.

At what temperature do the terpenes of this strain evaporate?

There is no temperature specific to it. The producer does not provide the vaporizer setting, and tables circulating online assign boiling points to individual terpenes measured under conditions that have little in common with the interior of the device. Numbers from such a table describe the substance in a flask, not the herb in the chamber.

This is evident for the three compounds in the profile of this strain. For caryophyllene, the extract from records gives 257.5 °C at atmospheric pressure, but the same substance distills at 130 °C when the pressure drops to fourteen millimeters of mercury. Humulene has no measurements under normal pressure in this extract; it only has 99.5 °C at three millimeters. Limonene falls in the middle, around 177.8 °C.

A spread of several dozen degrees for one substance does not arise from measurement inaccuracy, but from the conditions under which it was performed, and that is why temperature compilations can contradict each other. We also separately describe that the value set on the vaporizer does not equal the temperature of the herb in the chamber.

We do not derive practical recommendations from these numbers because the choice of setting in therapy conducted on prescription belongs to the doctor, not to a boiling point table. We provide them to show where the conflicting values repeated in guides come from.

Which strains from Polish pharmacies are related to it?

None. In the pedigree graph built for this comparison, Lemon Haze Gelato does not share an established parent with any other position available in Polish pharmacies, so its sibling list remains empty and that is how it stays. This is the result of checking eighty-five pedigrees, not a gap in data to be filled later.

The name can be misleading here. Gelato 33 stands in the same comparison, but its pedigree leads through a completely different pair of plants, Sunset Sherbet crossed with Thin Mint GSC, and no established edge connects it with our strain. A common word in the trade name is not evidence of kinship in either direction.

The second part looks similar. In the pedigree of Lilac Diesel, Silver Lemon Haze is listed, recorded under its own name, and we do not connect records by a fragment of the name. If we did, connections would arise that after a year no one could distinguish from established ones, and the pedigree graph would lose its meaning.

Siblings appear in this comparison only when two positions have a common, identified parent, not a common broad family like haze. For Lemon Haze Gelato, this condition is not met for any other strain from the pharmacy, and that is how we record it instead of adding relatives by intuition.

Frequently asked questions

Is Lemon Haze Gelato available without a prescription?

No. This herb belongs to the Rpw category and the pharmacist will only dispense it with a prescription issued by a doctor, and outside the pharmacy, the same raw material does not occur in legal trade.

How many producers supply this strain to Polish pharmacies?

One, S-LAB. In the comparison we are working on, it corresponds to exactly one pharmacy position, so there are no parallel versions to compare side by side.

Why do you provide the THC content as a range?

Because the value from the product card has an allowable deviation of about one-tenth, and a single number would pretend to be precision that is not present in this record. For this position, the range is from 16.2 to 19.8 percent.

Is the terpene profile of this strain certain?

It is described by one source and lists humulene, caryophyllene, and limonene. We have not found a second, independent list for this position, so we provide the composition along with information about its source.

Have clinical studies been conducted on Lemon Haze Gelato?

No studies have been conducted. The works that can be referenced here concern a single terpene administered to mice and studied in cells, not humans taking this herb.

Does this strain have siblings in Polish pharmacies?

No. No other position from this comparison shares an established parent with it, and the similarity of names to strains with the Gelato or Lemon component does not determine anything.

Cannabis herb is a pharmaceutical raw material dispensed by a doctor’s prescription in the Rpw category. The material is informational in nature and does not replace a conversation with the doctor conducting the therapy. The current availability of strains is updated in the list of medical marijuana strains. Hemp herb, dispensed without a prescription, is a different raw material and falls under the category of cannabis herb.

Editorial text by the team at u Bucha.