72 hours of darkness at harvest

B

boneheadbob

Well-Known Member
Its probaly been argued here many time so one more wont hurt.
I am a newbie and from what little I have read some people say yes, some say no, kinda like lots of stuff here and in life.
 
Alex Kelly

Alex Kelly

Active Member
Look up the other threads there are hundreds of pages on this and have been some recently so i doubt people will want to start all over and go way into this subject again. IMO, after much much research on the subject, I would not reccommend a full 72 hours of darkness, but somewhere between 12-48 hrs of darkness before harvest IMO will increase THC and resin concentration. I have seen evidence that points to the "recycling" of THC daily, in turn meaning that each strain will be different, but after 12-24 hrs the THC may begin to recycle itsself and break down, lowering your THC concentration. As i said a lot of info on here tho, get to some research. Good Luck.
 
MrDank007

MrDank007

Well-Known Member
Bricktop pretty much settled this for me.

"The Stichting Institute of Medical marijuana (SIMM), the first company to sell marijuana through the pharmacies of Holland, has been investigating the medical possibilities of cannabis, together with TNO laboratories and the University of Leiden.

One of their discoveries has been that to keep the ripe plants in the dark before harvesting could increase their potency.SIMM’s growers separated a crop of mature plants, harvested half of them and kept the other half in absolute darkness for 72 hours before cutting and drying. Analysis of the resulting dried buds showed that some varieties had seen an increase of THC of up to 30%, while CBD and CBN remained the same."

 
homebrewer

homebrewer

Well-Known Member
MrDank007 said:
Bricktop pretty much settled this for me.

"The Stichting Institute of Medical marijuana (SIMM), the first company to sell marijuana through the pharmacies of Holland, has been investigating the medical possibilities of cannabis, together with TNO laboratories and the University of Leiden.

One of their discoveries has been that to keep the ripe plants in the dark before harvesting could increase their potency.SIMM’s growers separated a crop of mature plants, harvested half of them and kept the other half in absolute darkness for 72 hours before cutting and drying. Analysis of the resulting dried buds showed that some varieties had seen an increase of THC of up to 30%, while CBD and CBN remained the same."
Click to expand...
This study does not exist. If it does, by all means, post a link....
 
Alex Kelly

Alex Kelly

Active Member
Yes please do. If it does work, 30% seems way too high, I was thinkig maybe 5%. I have seen the SIMM quoted on here before, is it real?
 
HighLowGrow

HighLowGrow

Well-Known Member
I think if THC increased 30% by 72 hrs of dark, it would be well known by now and be standard practice. At least it wound be MY standard practice.

-HLG
 
MrEDuck

MrEDuck

Well-Known Member
I think they meant the concentration was 30% higher so 19.5% compared to 15%. Still seems like an amazing increase. Wish I had access to the standards I'd need to check this.
 
Jack Larson

Jack Larson

Active Member
Why would anyone argue about something that takes little time and no $ to find out for yourself if it works or not? Try it if it works great! if not ohwell. If you can't tell the diference than why do it ? If you can tell the diference than why not do it? You don't need a study ! All you need is a little effort,your senses and EYES. Its really not that hard (out of 8 strains I had 1 that showed + effects, The Purps B.C )BTW the SIMM study is unavailable do to an unrelated law suit.Nothing else .Yes it works ,but it seems to be strain spacific and diferent lengths of darkness for diferent strians. Do not believe all that you read .Experiment and find out for yourself. good luck . :peace:
 
MasterS

MasterS

Well-Known Member
Is this SIMM shit still being posted? It's like the urban legend of cannabis scholarly articles haha
 
Jack Larson

Jack Larson

Active Member
homebrewer said:
That makes zero sense and do you have a link supporting your statement?
Click to expand...
This is the person that responded to my original request for the study. J
[email protected] as in James Burton Pres/ower SIMM his responce to me read "
"Hallo,
Due to a law suit...it's off the web."

this just made me curious so I started looking for more info on the law suit .I found many regurgitated quotes from this statement
http://www.medicalmarijuana.org/html/legal_action.html Sorry you'll have to type it in, for some reason my comp. wont let me cut\paste the link ...:peace:...J.L.

 
homebrewer

homebrewer

Well-Known Member
Jack Larson said:
This is the person that responded to my original request for the study. J
[email protected] as in James Burton Pres/ower SIMM his responce to me read "
"Hallo,
Due to a law suit...it's off the web."

this just made me curious so I started looking for more info on the law suit .I found many regurgitated quotes from this statement
http://www.medicalmarijuana.org/html/legal_action.html Sorry you'll have to type it in, for some reason my comp. wont let me cut\paste the link ...:peace:...J.L.
Click to expand...
It's off the web? Is it really that easy to completely erase something from the web? I'm calling shenanigans.

I've been hearing about this '72 hours of dark' for over 10 years now and regardless of some contractual disagreement between SIMM and their distributor, this info about their dark period test should be on the net somewhere and it's not. In fact, their current status as a medical supplier has literally nothing to do with the availability of this information from sites other than their own.
 
Jack Larson

Jack Larson

Active Member
homebrewer said:
It's off the web? Is it really that easy to completely erase something from the web? I'm calling shenanigans.

I've been hearing about this '72 hours of dark' for over 10 years now and regardless of some contractual disagreement between SIMM and their distributor, this info about their dark period test should be on the net somewhere and it's not. In fact, their current status as a medical supplier has literally nothing to do with the availability of this information from sites other than their own.
Click to expand...
I agree.I can't believe no one has this study on disc or even paper. This subject kinda got under my skin, I have spent way more time on this than I'm willing to admit, and my results add up to NOTTA. Does that mean the method doesn't work? NO, it just means the results of this study are not available. I can't believe that with all the studies on marijuana no one else has done a simular study with published results. I would love nothing more than to find the results of a scientific study and break down of when, where, how, and why it does or doesn't work, strains, conditions, etc. I know you have tried it on like ten strains with no decernable change. I have tried it on eight strains with only one showing an increase of gland size IMO. I just got a new digital camera so in about six weeks. I'll post some side by sides pics. Like I said, people should experiment. It is my opinion that it does work on some strains and figuring out what strains and legth of dark period produce the best results is fun and it doesn't cost anything, so why not try it? PLEASE post any Scientific findings you come across....:peace:...J.L.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top