To flush or not to flush

[ChemPro]

I decided to figure this out for myself as opposed to just going with the conventional wisdom. That being said I still would like opinions. I want this experiment as controlled as possible.

INFORMATION

Strain: Original White Widow from Paradise seeds
# of Plants: 20 all cloned from the same mother
Light: 1000W HPS
Container 2 gallon Smart Pots
Medium: Coco Coir, prehydrated, sterilized and enriched with calcium by the manufacturer
Nutrients: Cocotek A+B with R0 water

But even their location in the tent, and their proximity to my light may account for differences that could skew the statistics so I am staggering my controls (not flushed) with my experimental (flushed) based on their location in the tent.

See the attached paint file. The circles are my plants. "C" stands for control (brown circles), "F" stands for flushed (blue circles). The thin red line is the projected footprint of my reflector hood.

I can't compare a control that is right under the light to a flushed plant that is in a corner so for each control exists a corresponding flushed plant in a similar location.

When I dry the plants I will hang them in my tent with my humidity controller enclosed. Still, there will be plants closer to my exhaust fan than other plants which may also skew the information. Therefore 1C will be hung close to 1F during drying, and so on for the remaining plants.

Now onto the questions

1. I am currently approaching my window. I will finish a full 8 weeks of flower by Friday. Perhaps in 3 or 4 days I could pull them with minimal (if any) amber. When would be the appropriate time to flush?

2. I have never flushed in coco before. Can you advise on the technique (if any) how much water, pH, should I add anything else to the water?

3. Aside from subjective methods of evaluation such as flavor, aroma, and potency, what other methods can I use to determine if a valid difference is experienced? I thought about taking equal weight portions of finished product and determine how much shatter can be extracted but I am ignorant of whether flushing would effect this attribute. What other attributes besides flavor, smell, and harshness does flushing allegedly contribute to.

4. Please advise on anything else I should be considering to make this experiment as valid as possible.

As always, polite pertinent comments are appreciated, and thank you in advance

 

[Shugglet]

It looks like you have a pretty solid methodology for conducting the grow, I think it will be equally if not more important in how you test the outcome though.

I would recommend taking a number of different samples from each plant (perhaps at various parts of the plant) to be tested and most importantly the test subjects must not know which is which to eliminate any possible bias.

Have them rate the qualitative attributes of the plants you listed on a standard scale or you could have them rank the samples relative to each other. Probably best to get a "random" sample of smokers to test this as well. Having all casual smokers or connoisseurs could skew the test results.

Quantitative analysis will be based on weight differences assuming you wont be lab testing the results.

 

[Morriston55]

No flush, no question

 

[Illinois Enema Bandit]

if u ever visited some soil farms or hydroponic tomatoes & lettuce grow op's you'd never think of flushing again,I don't feel like arguing with what will be the " my smoke is cleaner when I flush " gang so I'll leave you with this.

the entire concept of " flushing " was introduced to the mj community via clever advertising in high times magazine back before there was internet,the concept was pushed by fertilizer company's who just so happen to also sell just what you need to " properly " flush your plants,the articles used to say you " could " flush with plain clean water,but with the new handy dandy flush o matic 9,000 you'd be flushing " properly.

flush your shitter bro not your plants

 

[Shugglet]

This thread has already proven its need for existence

Sadly it also makes you question whether they read the op or not lol. I dont think the op was looking for a debate on the theory of the topic.

 

[arcalion]

if u ever visited some soil farms or hydroponic tomatoes & lettuce grow op's you'd never think of flushing again,I don't feel like arguing with what will be the " my smoke is cleaner when I flush " gang so I'll leave you with this.

the entire concept of " flushing " was introduced to the mj community via clever advertising in high times magazine back before there was internet,the concept was pushed by fertilizer company's who just so happen to also sell just what you need to " properly " flush your plants,the articles used to say you " could " flush with plain clean water,but with the new handy dandy flush o matic 9,000 you'd be flushing " properly.

flush your shitter bro not your plants

so your saying you dont need to flush your plants at all? wont it affect the taste if you dont flush it? especially if you use a lot of liquid nutrients?

 

[RM3]

so your saying you dont need to flush your plants at all? wont it affect the taste if you dont flush it? especially if you use a lot of liquid nutrients?

https://www.rollitup.org/t/the-truth-about-flushing.409622/

 

[Illinois Enema Bandit]

so your saying you dont need to flush your plants at all? wont it affect the taste if you dont flush it? especially if you use a lot of liquid nutrients?

no,not flushing will not make plants do anything,except bulk up,produce more resin & grow larger.

plants dont " eat" or uptake fertilizer weather its a liquid or dry granular,the root system converts what it needs from the nutes into complex sugars, carbs etc the plant can absorb,no fertilizer or nutrients we pour into the rez,or dump in the soil ever reach the plant itself so no need to " flush out " what isn't there to begin with,its all 1 big pseudo science pile of crap they dump on people .

best advice I can offer any new grower is this

less equals more when your just getting going,stick to the most basic NPK feeding schedules using low EC/PPM quantity's of nutes,no " flavor " sauces,no "bud swell" sauces,no magic sauce of any kind,just the basic " Macro Nutes " which are your NPK values & the full Monty of " Micro Nutes ",anything not macro or micro shouldn't be used because its just wasted $ down the pipe

 

[Victor B]

You're totally right @Illinois Enema Bandit , farms don't "flush" ANY of their crops! What they do do (I know I said dodo lol) is continuously lower the feed until they're feeding plain water for a few days to a few weeks. This is what I normally do, about a week or two before I'm going to chop I feed plain ph'd water...

Hope that helps
Victor

 

[arcalion]

no,not flushing will not make plants do anything,except bulk up,produce more resin & grow larger.

plants dont " eat" or uptake fertilizer weather its a liquid or dry granular,the root system converts what it needs from the nutes into complex sugars, carbs etc the plant can absorb,no fertilizer or nutrients we pour into the rez,or dump in the soil ever reach the plant itself so no need to " flush out " what isn't there to begin with,its all 1 big pseudo science pile of crap they dump on people .

best advice I can offer any new grower is this

less equals more when your just getting going,stick to the most basic NPK feeding schedules using low EC/PPM quantity's of Jutes,no " flavor " sauces,no "bud swell" sauces,no magic sauce of any kind,just the basic " Macro Nutes " which are your NPK values & the full Monty of " Micro Nutes ",anything not macro or micro shouldn't be used because its just wasted $ down the pipe

TBH i was honestly thinking about this earlier, it wouldn't make sense to flush since obviously the plant has to convert everything anyways to use it.. same with our bodies we convert food into energy etc. so i'll definitely not flush my plants as i can see it doesnt make all that much sense too.
atm mostly using sensi grow A+B and a few additives, but cool thanks!

 

[Illinois Enema Bandit]

This thread has already proven its need for existence

Sadly it also makes you question whether they read the op or not lol. I dont think the op was looking for a debate on the theory of the topic.

no,I read every last word this member wrote out of respect for his test,however I have zero " suggestions " to offer about a flushing test most giving advice here are years past.

I'm pretty certain people read the title & follow up inquiry,posting results of such a test is invalid because one of the test objectives is to get cleaner burning smoke,most humans will see results wherever they spend money,the whole test is invalid.

not busting your chops OP,just pointing out reasons why we answered the way we did

 

[Indacouch]

So I just took a huge dump am I flushing or not .....

 

[Illinois Enema Bandit]

You're totally right @Illinois Enema Bandit , farms don't "flush" ANY of their crops! What they do do (I know I said dodo lol) is continuously lower the feed until they're feeding plain water for a few days to a few weeks. This is what I normally do, about a week or two before I'm going to chop I feed plain ph'd water...

Hope that helps
Victor

yes they do exactly that but not for the reasons most read into it,nutrients are lowered as part of the soil management needed to keep a soil healthy,the soil that grows Lima beans this season will grow corn the following season,soil management not harvest manipulation is the reason nute loads are lowered

visit a hydroponic tomatoes farm & watch the grower pound those plants with 900 ppm's right until they chop

 

[Shugglet]

no,I read every last word this member wrote out of respect for his test,however I have zero " suggestions " to offer about a flushing test most giving advice here are years past.

I'm pretty certain people read the title & follow up inquiry,posting results of such a test is invalid because one of the test objectives is to get cleaner burning smoke,most humans will see results wherever they spend money,the whole test is invalid.

not busting your chops OP,just pointing out reasons why we answered the way we did

That is why I wrote what I wrote in my first response. So he can get some actually usable data and mitigate any placebo effect that may be present.

Im 100% with you when it comes down to theory, but I would never steer someone away from testing it. Id rather try to help him get the best, most accurate results he can.

 

[Gary Goodson]

This literally never ends

 

[ChemPro]

no,I read every last word this member wrote out of respect for his test,however I have zero " suggestions " to offer about a flushing test most giving advice here are years past.

I'm pretty certain people read the title & follow up inquiry,posting results of such a test is invalid because one of the test objectives is to get cleaner burning smoke,most humans will see results wherever they spend money,the whole test is invalid.

not busting your chops OP,just pointing out reasons why we answered the way we did

I understand that you feel such a test is invalid because a "harsh or clean" smoke is too subjective of an attribute to quantify. But I disagree that this is an invalid test and I will explain why if you will do me the kindness in reading and being objective. Then afterwards maybe approach this topic from a differing perspective.

The alleged benefit of a flush is a cleaner, smoother smoke. We all understand this but we don't all agree whether its true.

Therefore I would ask, what characteristics of the finished product correlates with smooth smoke, harshness etc...?

For example, if someone were to tell me that the presence of chlorophyll is what causes a harsh smoke then I would leech the chlorophyll from both finished products using a solvent and run the solution in a spectrophotometer to measure the solution's optical density which would correlate with the original amount of chlorophyll in the finished product. In more simple terms, I could know whether a flushed product has more or less chlorophyll than an unflushed product. That in itself makes it a valid test. I could thus conclude that flushes either reduce or have no effect on the final amount of chlorophyll in the finished product.

If there exists another chemical or chemical byproduct that exacerbates a smoke's harshness then I would also ask that the people of this forum elaborate on such a chemical so I know exactly what it is I am trying to quantify to prove or disprove the effectiveness of a flush.

In short, I am looking for objective methods of evaluating the effectiveness of flushing. I'm not looking for an answer such as "it works" or "it doesn't work." That is what I am currently trying to figure out. If someone needs to broadcast their opinion I only ask that they provide at least a credible source that goes into detail. And I am very sorry but I would need a little more than a toilet anecdote or a suggestion to visit a tomato farm. No offense intended.

And I agree with you about the magic sauces, bud enhancers etc...I've done enough side by side comparisons for my own information to be confident that they are unnecessary.

 

[ChemPro]

This literally never ends

I'm honored you choose to be apart of it.

 

[Illinois Enema Bandit]

I understand that you feel such a test is invalid because a "harsh or clean" smoke is too subjective of an attribute to quantify. But I disagree that this is an invalid test and I will explain why if you will do me the kindness in reading and being objective. Then afterwards maybe approach this topic from a differing perspective.

The alleged benefit of a flush is a cleaner, smoother smoke. We all understand this but we don't all agree whether its true.

Therefore I would ask, what characteristics of the finished product correlates with smooth smoke, harshness etc...?

For example, if someone were to tell me that the presence of chlorophyll is what causes a harsh smoke then I would leech the chlorophyll from both finished products using a solvent and run the solution in a spectrophotometer to measure the solution's optical density which would correlate with the original amount of chlorophyll in the finished product. In more simple terms, I could know whether a flushed product has more or less chlorophyll than an unflushed product. That in itself makes it a valid test. I could thus conclude that flushes either reduce or have no effect on the final amount of chlorophyll in the finished product.

If there exists another chemical or chemical byproduct that exacerbates a smoke's harshness then I would also ask that the people of this forum elaborate on such a chemical so I know exactly what it is I am trying to quantify to prove or disprove the effectiveness of a flush.

In short, I am looking for objective methods of evaluating the effectiveness of flushing. I'm not looking for an answer such as "it works" or "it doesn't work." That is what I am currently trying to figure out. If someone needs to broadcast their opinion I only ask that they provide at least a credible source that goes into detail. And I am very sorry but I would need a little more than a toilet anecdote or a suggestion to visit a tomato farm. No offense intended.

And I agree with you about the magic sauces, bud enhancers etc...I've done enough side by side comparisons for my own information to be confident that they are unnecessary.

well fuck me silly if your able to measure exact levels of chemicals in the finished product then you my good sir are on a whole different level than me,I'm stuck with the age old DBT that's never worked.

this will be very interesting & educational,I'm subbed for this ride with foot firmly implanted in my mouth

 

[ChemPro]

well fuck me silly if your able to measure exact levels of chemicals in the finished product then you my good sir are on a whole different level than me,I'm stuck with the age old DBT that's never worked.

this will be very interesting & educational,I'm subbed for this ride with foot firmly implanted in my mouth

I'm actually hoping it works. Saving on 2 weeks of nutrients is appealing. But even if it has less chlorophyll the trade-off may be a reduced yield. Who knows

 

[Illinois Enema Bandit]

So I just took a huge dump am I flushing or not .....

that depends on how spectacular of a brown trout you laid!

if its a prize winning log with colors,and a few peanuts & corn for artistic texture then its a " no flush " situation until you have the kids take a gander at it

when mine were little I took a dump in their shared bathroom & left it in the bowl for both boys to see,each kid blamed the other one for being a savage