Mirrordawn
Well-Known Member
I see what everyone is saying and I applaud the fact that we can have a civil discussion about this. Keep in mind my honest belief is that you can have a successful grow without flushing.
HOWEVER ... I strongly believe that you are overall diminishing the quality for a better quantity.
Another thing I have to state, The only study I could find was the one preformed by RX Green Technologies. In my conclusion, many variables weren't stated and the end results came down to random consumers. The study isn't as open as I would of hoped it would be. I wouldn't change my technique or tell new growers this is how you do it ... based from this one study.
Am I the only one here who believes there is some shady shit going on here? The fact they manufacture their own nutrients and use those nutrients for the study is just ringing all kinds of alarm bells. You would never believe a study by McDonalds of their own food! So what makes you think this company has the public's best interest at heart? The only reason I am saying this, because there isn't a whole lot of depth on the subject apart from who thinks what is better. Making this a REASONABLE topic of debate, not just "broscience" which easily dismiss's something without the confidence of looking deeply into the subject.
FROM MY EXPERIENCE(SO PLEASE DON'T HATE ME FOR THIS PART
)
Every single bad tasting bud I got, I can taste remnants of additives and the stuff never burned very well either. Of course I cant say this was from not flushing because that would be a lie. But I can say from my own point of view, that there is very distinct taste in the two. I prefer the weed that has been given clean water, cause it burns better and I don't have some fucked up headache or feel ripped off from buying someone's shitty unflushed weed.
In my conclusion, flushing has been primarily used by an older generation of growers, who myself have adopted some of their techniques. I would stand by them 100% of the way because they have been growing weed since I wasn't even born yet as compared to these people running these studies ...They don't have the same interest and I think that can interfere with finding accurate results. Some of these researchers have never smoked in their life. The science perspective and growers experience perspective alternate but they both produce results.
HOWEVER ... I strongly believe that you are overall diminishing the quality for a better quantity.
Another thing I have to state, The only study I could find was the one preformed by RX Green Technologies. In my conclusion, many variables weren't stated and the end results came down to random consumers. The study isn't as open as I would of hoped it would be. I wouldn't change my technique or tell new growers this is how you do it ... based from this one study.
Am I the only one here who believes there is some shady shit going on here? The fact they manufacture their own nutrients and use those nutrients for the study is just ringing all kinds of alarm bells. You would never believe a study by McDonalds of their own food! So what makes you think this company has the public's best interest at heart? The only reason I am saying this, because there isn't a whole lot of depth on the subject apart from who thinks what is better. Making this a REASONABLE topic of debate, not just "broscience" which easily dismiss's something without the confidence of looking deeply into the subject.
FROM MY EXPERIENCE(SO PLEASE DON'T HATE ME FOR THIS PART
)Every single bad tasting bud I got, I can taste remnants of additives and the stuff never burned very well either. Of course I cant say this was from not flushing because that would be a lie. But I can say from my own point of view, that there is very distinct taste in the two. I prefer the weed that has been given clean water, cause it burns better and I don't have some fucked up headache or feel ripped off from buying someone's shitty unflushed weed.
In my conclusion, flushing has been primarily used by an older generation of growers, who myself have adopted some of their techniques. I would stand by them 100% of the way because they have been growing weed since I wasn't even born yet as compared to these people running these studies ...They don't have the same interest and I think that can interfere with finding accurate results. Some of these researchers have never smoked in their life. The science perspective and growers experience perspective alternate but they both produce results.
Last edited:
