So I listened to people on RIU about flushing....And this happens..

[mike91sr]

mike do you have a qualification in biology or botony?

Not aside from informal education(several hundred hours of reading FACTS, not forums), which is why i reference other people's work who DO have proper qualifications. I'm a physical therapy grad student with a bs in bio, so I took my botany, biology, chemistry, and physics courses to understand how things around me work though. How about you?

ps, you could at least spell botany right if youre gonna question someones credibility on it

 

[iblazetoomuch]

If i had a nickel for everytime another grower took a shit on the last guys advice, I'd be rich and wouldn't even have to attempt growing my own shit! >.>

 

[smokejoint]

answer the question with a yes or no plz

 

[mike91sr]

ALready did. You're up bud. And if you still doubt what I say, ask the people that ran the experiments I referenced what their qualifications are. Like I already said, you dont have to take my word for what I say. I provide references. Crazy concept.

 

[blacksun]

your 100% correct in your scientific method analisis, but the one thing he/she did intentionally change was the flush. Dont mean to sound rude but..well i just wont say anything

True that... I can admit it's definitely possible if he did do a true side - by - side it would have still tasted differently. Some people who do side - by - sides say there is a difference, so who really knows. The times that I've done side - by - sides flushing has not made a difference.

The real research and development would hopefully come when the big companies start mass growing in legal states. Imagine packs of camel and marlboro joints. Then again, they throw thousands of extra chemicals into cigarettes so there goes that idea lol.

Okay, how about this...what do the bigger growers (in mmj states and co and wa) that supply dispensaries do?

 

[Sunbiz1]

No, which is why i reference other people's work who DO have proper qualifications. I'm a physical therapy grad student with a bs in bio, so I took my botany, biology, chemistry, and physics sources to understand how things around me work though. How about you?

ps, you could at least spell botany right if youre gonna question someones credibility on it

First off, your educational background means nothing without practical experience. This is the case with everyone in life. I don't have a degree in PT, but I'll bet I could show you a few things on rehabbing ACL reconstructs. And the only reason I could do so is personal experience, such is the case with horticulture.

 

[Nizza]

instead of a flush i like to let all my salts build up and the last 2 weeks (hydro) i use just this in my resevoir http://www.superorganicstimulator.com/ it uses microbes to break down the excess salt in there, which become available nutrients . a week after i do it again with a fresh dose, and the last day before harvest i do straight water. water is kept 70-75degrees always and at a ph of approx 5.8. i always clean the meters and it always comes out clean

 

[mike91sr]

First off, your educational background means nothing without practical experience. This is the case with everyone in life. I don't have a degree in PT, but I'll bet I could show you a few things on rehabbing ACL reconstructs. And the only reason I could do so is personal experience, such is the case with horticulture.

Couldnt agree more in principle, however you can't experience your way into researching and discovering microscopic processes that HAVE to be measured. It doesn't just take knowledge, education, or experience. It takes the logistical means to measure what's happening, and the proper procedure and controls to determine the outcome. Basic scientific method. Which is why earlier I said I dont care about anyone's personal experience on this forum, I care about the processes that allow or disallow the theory everyone's debating. It always seems to be "well my bud was good flushed" vs "mine was worse flushed". And nobody seems to ever address what the plant actually does when you flush it.

 

[smokejoint]

I think your full of it to be honest.Your no more qualified to talk about this than anyone else ,your not a scientist ,a botanist or a biogist.So you cant really "talk science" with anyone.Just because you read x or y .You havent been taught properly and as far as we know you don't have the grasp on things you say or think you have.If you said yes ,then i hold my hands up ..
If you excuse me i'm going to go read some articles on nuclear fision and then join the harvard phd physics students forum and discuss my views on the advancement of the hydrogen bomb

 

[mike91sr]

I think your full of it to be honest.

Good to know, thanks. I'll completely change my life path because you don't like when people use information to validate their arguments instead of quarreling like a schoolgirl.

And I actually do think I AM plenty qualified, moreso than half the people here obviously since theyre too busy arguing to learn what a xylem is.

 

[racerboy71]

Couldnt agree more in principle, however you can't experience your way into researching and discovering microscopic processes that HAVE to be measured. It doesn't just take knowledge, education, or experience. It takes the logistical means to measure what's happening, and the proper procedure and controls to determine the outcome. Basic scientific method. Which is why earlier I said I dont care about anyone's personal experience on this forum, I care about the processes that allow or disallow the theory everyone's debating. It always seems to be "well my bud was good flushed" vs "mine was worse flushed". And nobody seems to ever address what the plant actually does when you flush it.

i've liked about 20 of mikes posts in this thread, which would lead me to believe i tend to agree with what he says...

no one has proven to me in any way what dumping tons of water through a medium like soil is going to do for the taste of buds you smoke as one has absolutely nothing to do with the other..
people say when you stop feeding plants, they start to use chem's in the leaves, and leave it at that.. no scientific proof of how a plant does this. and secondly, if this even were true, wtf does chemicals in leaves, you know, the things you cut off before you smoke the buds, have to do with the taste of the buds??

and lastly, i say this all the time.. if flushing really made one bit of difference, everyone would simply do so as unflushed bud would taste so bad, no body in their right mind wouldn't flush.. but this is simply not the case.

 

[mike91sr]

i've liked about 20 of mikes posts in this thread, which would lead me to believe i tend to agree with what he says...

no one has proven to me in any way what dumping tons of water through a medium like soil is going to do for the taste of buds you smoke as one has absolutely nothing to do with the other..
people say when you stop feeding plants, they start to use chem's in the leaves, and leave it at that.. no scientific prove of how a plant does this. and secondly, if this even were true, wtf does chemicals in leaves, you know, the things you cut off before you smoke the buds, have to do with the taste of the buds??

and lastly, i say this all the time.. if flushing really made one bit of difference, everyone would simply do so as unflushed bud would taste so bad, no body in their right mind wouldn't flush.. but this is simply not the case.

Thats all I ever really get at in these debates. The plant doesn't 'pull' nutrients from the calyx. Where would it need it more than its reproductive organ? The LAST thing to lose the nutrient/chlorophyll would be the calyx, and the plant would have nearly died before that happens. The reason plants fade out is because they're redirecting nutrients to the calyx INSTEAD of the leaves, not both like they do without deficiency. It's a simple self-preservation technique.

The equivalent of using energy stores when you're hungry: Works to reduce outer body fat, but you'll die before you get the fat from around your organs.

 

[Sunbiz1]

Couldnt agree more in principle, however you can't experience your way into researching and discovering microscopic processes that HAVE to be measured. It doesn't just take knowledge, education, or experience. It takes the logistical means to measure what's happening, and the proper procedure and controls to determine the outcome. Basic scientific method. Which is why earlier I said I dont care about anyone's personal experience on this forum, I care about the processes that allow or disallow the theory everyone's debating. It always seems to be "well my bud was good flushed" vs "mine was worse flushed". And nobody seems to ever address what the plant actually does when you flush it.

Yet even I am not going to read through pages of theory and data, that's why I made the joint and beer comment. It just isn't of enough use as opposed to medium or light spectrum discussion.

This topic debate has been going on here for years, and not one thread has ever resulted in agreement on flushing.

And yet, not one person here has simply compared 2 of the same strain...one flushed and one not.

Peace

 

[Ninjabowler]

Jeez ninja, you too now? I was just about to complement you on that basil plant and continue the discussion with you, but now youre gonna try to attack a post that wasnt even directed at you because you dont understand what you believe is my??! "socalled botany" but want me to dumb it down? You wouldn't believe me if I explained it anyway, but luckily the information/reading is there for you just like it is for me. So nobody here has to take my word. If you can understand even the abstract from these, I honestly fail to believe you will still think flushing has any affect on metal content of flowers at harvest after a bit of logical reasoning, of course aside from extreme toxicity or deficiency, i.e. severe enough to seriously affect every physiological process. None of these suggests that reducing late production mineral content will have any affect on fruit content at harvest since the plant doesn't just pull nutrients from the MOST important part of itself, only hinder every other physiological process necessary for proper maturation.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1360138502022951
http://www.eolss.net/Sample-Chapters/C10/E5-24-04-05.pdf
http://hortsci.ashspublications.org/content/35/4/627.short
http://www.publish.csiro.au/?paper=BI9600441
https://www.crops.org/publications/sssaj/abstracts/21/6/SS0210060621
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1004263304657?LI=true
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jf8036374
http://hortsci.ashspublications.org/content/39/3/512.short
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10705-005-3367-8?LI=true

When either of you wants to discuss science, I'll be here. If you want to talk about the how the plants YOU are growing demonstrate this or that instead, go ahead. Just don't complain when people tell you that you have no idea what you're talking about.

#1
Abstract


Some plants can hyperaccumulate metal ions that are toxic to virtually all other organisms at low dosages. This trait could be used to clean up metal-contaminated soils. Moreover, the accumulation of heavy metals by plants determines both the micronutrient content and the toxic metal content of our food. Complex interactions of transport and chelating activities control the rates of metal uptake and storage. In recent years, several key steps have been identified at the molecular level, enabling us to initiate transgenic approaches to engineer the transition metal content of plants.Some plants can accumulate extraordinarily high amounts of toxic heavy metals, offering possibilities for clean-up of contaminated soil and water.

this says that plants dangerous heavy metals and other stuff. True that some metals are non mobile in the plants system but others are. P.s. the mobility part i added for you, it doesnt say it. To me this seems like an argument for flushing not against. Yummy heavy metals!

#2 talks of transportation of plant fluids, no mention of flushing whatsoever, maybe it does if you buy the book for 27$

#3 talks of more dissolve salts in watering tomatoes was good for the fruit in the end product. There is no mention of flushing.

#4 mentions nothing of flushing or not and was a very annoying read since the writer used the letter O instead of C so many times. Maybe their c button wasnt working in the science writing departmen.

# 5 an article on blossom rot and black heart in tomatos and celery. Not one ioda on flushing....half way through it...evidence is coming soon right??

#6 potassium deficiency in veg stage - 100% theres no science on end flushing here...is this a smoke show your puting on here?? One more article and im done. Seems like your wasting my time here.

#7 lowering nitrogen levels throughout the life of entire life of a tomato plant gave a smaller yield?? Who cares, wait, it does say there were lower acid concentrations and an increase in soluable sugars.....who cares about this exactly on this thread??

#8 ok one more, why not? Damnit! Cal mag in tomatoes....smooooke on the water. Fire in the skyy.

#9 ....well i came this far...just for a laugh...residual phosphorus effects on corn...hahaha, maybe they should flush lol

What did you hope to prove with this all, that you ARE that guy that mentions the word BOTANY and people listen because they think you know more than all the guys writing books? So tell me i dont know what im talking about, while looking at yourself in the mirror.
There is no info on late stage nutrient elimination and increased water supply. Thanks for wasting an hour of my life though and proving your THAT guy

 

[Ninjabowler]

True that... I can admit it's definitely possible if he did do a true side - by - side it would have still tasted differently. Some people who do side - by - sides say there is a difference, so who really knows. The times that I've done side - by - sides flushing has not made a difference.

The real research and development would hopefully come when the big companies start mass growing in legal states. Imagine packs of camel and marlboro joints. Then again, they throw thousands of extra chemicals into cigarettes so there goes that idea lol.

Okay, how about this...what do the bigger growers (in mmj states and co and wa) that supply dispensaries do?

This discussion can only really end when two plants are done side by side and then scientificly tested in labs regarding composition of the final product. There isnt much funding for mj research these day but maybe one day.

 

[Samwell Seed Well]

hey kids, show me one, just 1 commercial grow operation where they grow food and show me where they flush these crops. please, show me 1

show me one, "just 1 commercial grow operation where they grow food" that smoke the final product

there are only studies in agriculture to increase yield not flavor or terp chemicals

yalls arguments are about a differnt concerns

we want flavor and smell, not plump , ripe for extra long time GMO goodness

id never grow my artisain bud like a cash cropper . . . my patients like quality not name and high profit margins

 

[Ninjabowler]

i've liked about 20 of mikes posts in this thread, which would lead me to believe i tend to agree with what he says...

no one has proven to me in any way what dumping tons of water through a medium like soil is going to do for the taste of buds you smoke as one has absolutely nothing to do with the other..
people say when you stop feeding plants, they start to use chem's in the leaves, and leave it at that.. no scientific proof of how a plant does this. and secondly, if this even were true, wtf does chemicals in leaves, you know, the things you cut off before you smoke the buds, have to do with the taste of the buds??

and lastly, i say this all the time.. if flushing really made one bit of difference, everyone would simply do so as unflushed bud would taste so bad, no body in their right mind wouldn't flush.. but this is simply not the case.

Lol, you agree with mikes posts because you dont flush racer. Person that started this thread was sayin that their unflushed bud did taste that bad. Do you reduce your nutes tward the end or is it just feed 100% today, chop tommorow? Just wondering, no disrespect intended.

 

[charface]

I`m going with dry and cure also,
Looks like it is back to the drawing board. lol

 

[Bakatare666]

And I genuinely hope you learn to read before you decide to teach. Kind of important to be able to read those pesky "werdzz" if you want to be able to prove somebody wrong instead of calling names and throwing a tantrum to try and deflect the conversation.

Some spelling improvement wouldn't hurt either.

 

[racerboy71]

Lol, you agree with mikes posts because you dont flush racer. Person that started this thread was sayin that their unflushed bud did taste that bad. Do you reduce your nutes tward the end or is it just feed 100% today, chop tommorow? Just wondering, no disrespect intended.

i've tried flushing and unflushing the same exact strain.. noticed not a bit of difference in taste or burn pattern or w/e it is they say that flushing does for buds..
there is nothing that flushing is going to do for the bud we smoke.. plants don't work that way.. it is like saying that dumping kool aid into the soil is going to give us grape tasting buds.. if you can't give flavor via the roots, why do people think that you can take flavor away by doing the same thing?? you can't.. you're not removing one thing from dumping tons of water through a medium like soil. nada. end of story really..

until someone can come up with some solid proof otherwise, i'll continue to only flush after i take a deuce, you can do what you like, but don't think it makes one bit of difference for the taste or the color of the ash.. who the fuck cares what color their ash is anyhoo's?? not me said the bee..