GentleCaveman
Well-Known Member
I didn't say anything about its being worse or better.
crispy leaves late in flower, brown crispy spots on buds at harvest.
- Thread starter TheGreatSouthern
- Start date
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
GentleCaveman
Well-Known Member
What I ment to say is "why do so much labor for bad weed, before even considering if it's bad for you or not"
Whole post is about organic to hydro comparison.
Brock_Fawkin_Samson
Active Member
GentleCaveman
Well-Known Member
There is no nutrients that's gonna grow better plants than real food does. Same for pets, there is no pet food that's gonna grow healthier pets than real food. Same for us, people. There is no protein powder, carbohydrate powder or any supplemental food that's gonna grow healthier people than real food does. And this is completely normal, I have no idea what you guys think people are but we are still basically fucking monkeys. We are nowhere near being smart enough to create food that's gonna outperform thousands of years of evolution. Every living thing in world evolved to live in particular conditions. And eating lab-made food is not in to those conditions yet.
Last edited:
Brock_Fawkin_Samson
Active Member
Last edited:
GentleCaveman
Well-Known Member
Peeps need to wake the fuck up. lolWell thought out and very scientific
This is gold. I had to pause my Paul Harvey 8-track to write this comment. Going out and buying bananas as we speak.
Lol... To each his own..
Brock_Fawkin_Samson
Active Member
Lmao, I fackin love ya brother, I was trolling ya a bit but you're alright, I got no hate lol
GentleCaveman
Well-Known Member
I'm not telling people to start living in jungle bum ass naked and yell I love nature.. This is just reality, we can't outperform nature. It's a giant engine that's extremely complicated and we don't even know half of the parts yet. So we are not making it better anytime soon.Lmao, I fackin love ya brother, I was trolling ya a bit but you're alright, I got no hate lol
kisskiss brother, respect
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
The same as the state's. We have regulations regarding what can and cannot be used on Cannabis.
https://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/cannabis/cannot_use_pesticide.pdf
California specifically disallows paclobutrazol and chlormequat. While chlormequat isn't on the above list, it is not approved at the Federal level for any produce intended for human or animal consumption. I don't want to smoke that, awarely or not.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
What is the difference between a natural and an unnatural grow environment? Can you quantify how much better soil does than optimal hydro?
Brock_Fawkin_Samson
Active Member
But the argument you made was about transparency, no? If the client asks for it, as was the case?
The tobacco industry blocked legislation with lobbyist money, the excuse could have been any.
You kinda went at the guy here I thought after he explained he talked with the client and the client asked for it. To me that's pretty transparent.
Idk about either of the chemicals.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
The bolded strongly suggests to me that you are in error about his informing the wholesaler, let alone the end users.
Brock_Fawkin_Samson
Active Member
Lol
Well this has been fruitful lol
On another note...
What levels are toxic and what are the symptoms? Are we debating something with the same amount of health risk as breathing city air or country methane? Maybe more on the scale of a biggie order of fries a day? Possibly the same health risk as the microwaves produced when using cellphones?
Just link the studies so we can better understand your position. Maybe a phase diagram. Are they water soluble? When oxidized do they display different properties?
Last edited:
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
LOL that is an excellent phalanx of dishonest questions from the Big Tobacco playbook. But this isn't my first rodeo, and I chose not to work for Big Tobacco when given the chance. I ate garden-variety prevaricators like you for breakfast and shat grad students. You're letting the troll side down, son.
Brock_Fawkin_Samson
Active Member
Lol I applaud your extensive vocabulary. Your thesis defense must have been a joy to sit through.
I've never been insulted so intellectually lol I do think my method was a valid way to cut to the crux of the issue which is, no data. As someone as learned as yourself I'd think you'd respect data over speculation every time. I'm not debating the possibility of a chemical being toxic or not but this debate has morphed into that, from the original, which encompassed you going after the guy for not disclosing the use of PGRs when it was plain to see you just missed the post where he explained the client asked for it. If the chemicals are toxic then so be it, but you're defending this based on what studies? Are they translatable (remember, you're a post doc)? It seems more plausible to me that you've spent a little too much time in your ivory tower and your only conditioned impulse is to save face because you are used to being right and admitting you were wrong (even with a little thing like a missed post) would "just cripple" your academic ego. I asked legit questions and made legit points. All I got was insults and change of topic. Not impressed so far teach.
Last edited:
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Your so-called legit questions are anglerfish. You ask questions of epidemiology that are famously unanswerable. In order to get the data, one would have to do the studies, and someone would have to fund them. This is how Big Tobacco did it, and you're playing from their playbook with near perfect pitch.Lol I applaud your extensive vocabulary. Your thesis defense must have been a joy to sit through.
Thank you for the rest of the post which is personal insult (if not as elegant as I have come to expect), and that means you care. Just be sure to spell my name right.
Brock_Fawkin_Samson
Active Member
Just to run some numbers and get an idea...
200lb guy = ~91kg
91kg × (0.04mg/kg ADI)
=
3.64mg ADI chlormequat
91kg × (0.10mg/kg ADI)
=
9.1mg ADI paclobutrazol
If this guy smokes a gram a day he can't have more than .36% of his product be chlormequat and can't have more than .91% of his product be paclobutrazol or he'd be over his ADI.
I wonder what MJ tests at when these chemicals have been used. Is there test results by chance? The largest remnant of the chemical I found was 1.19mg/kg on mushrooms, but maybe I'm misinterpreting. If the most un-ideal food on here were to actually translate to MJ, that 200lb guy would have to eat/smoke 3+kg a day to hit the chlormequat ADI, correct (3.64mg ÷ 1.19mg/kg ~3.05kg)?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/15385216/
xtsho
Well-Known Member
I'm pretty sure that crap is banned here in Oregon as well for legal cannabis.
Regardless, that weed looks nasty. I wouldn't smoke it and if I was a customer I wouldn't buy it.
Brock_Fawkin_Samson
Active Member
I say the same to you. In order to defend a speculation one would have to do the studies. I'm being objective, you're being subjective. There is no data, that's the only reality. We can bitch at each other till we're blue in the face but neither stance can be progressed without the data (we both painstakenly know this). To be clear, I'm not saying that's it's not toxic after combusted, I'm saying there's no data to say one way or the other. That's my point. I'm not saying I'm right but I'm not saying anyone's right. I don't think it's sound to berate someone on a speculation when there is no data. And again this is a secondary argument you made up when I asked about how the OP wasn't being transparent.
Last edited: