PanamaRed63
Active Member
I know of one Breeder that suggest to Flush the last 2 weeks...
Must be accurate then, like their flower finishing times.I know of one Breeder that suggest to Flush the last 2 weeks...
I wouldn't unless you believe the way they look is due to lockout from salt buildups and you want to keep them going a couple more weeks. Imo.What if your plants looked like shit, we've seen and done plants with burnt leafs that look like like shit at the end of flowering
Do you flush that?
@bk78...good to see your back.
Thanks. If I over do a pk boost I still do not flush. Then again I’ll only pk boost in weeks 6 and 7What if your plants looked like shit, we've seen and done plants with burnt leafs that look like like shit at the end of flowering
Do you flush that?
@bk78...good to see your back.
Yeah. Non-flushed tasted better. But again they’re big deal was weight loss.That's inaccurate. Part of the study was aimed at taste and smoke characteristics..
View attachment 4820357
I've mentioned it's a joke but it appears to be set in stone now, that link gets banded about the forum like it's the word of God.TLDR the rx grene 'study' does not have a correct experimental setup
Hey guys!
IMO this study does not give any information to help the debate on flushing VS not flushing.
For those that want actual useful info check Jeremy from buildasoil address this topic in his YouTube series.
For those of you that refer to claims in the rx green 'study' :
I invite you to please read the study with a critical mind.
I'm ready to criticize every aspect of this 'study', if you think they did anything in an acceptable way (with respect to research or even just trying to find out the impact of flushing) they please post that claim and I will explain to you why it is incorrect.
To be very clear: in this post I am not pro or a it flushing, I just want to bring to everyone's attention that this rx green 'study' is badly conducted and the results are meaningless (literally they can't be used) and I am shocked that no one Iin this thread mentions this - it even seems like some of you read it and back it up which makes me pretty confused.
Asides from the lack of info about their experimental setup, the first big red flag is apparent when looking at the results:
- for flower samples in a single group the reviews on quality, smoothness while smoking and taste are literally all over the place. Just imagine for a single sample that some judges say it is 'bad' and others say it is 'great', then what is going on? Are the judges very bad at judging? Or were they not taught how to use the rubric? Also just simply the fact that every sample had at least 1 judge saying it was 'bad' makes you question if they even know how to grow (which should be something they document in the experimental setup, I can't find any info at all).
Research on flushing can't be done yet because there are so many thing that need to be researched first
No shit. Too many closed minds. Copernicus, Tesla, and even Einstein to name a few were mocked back in the days. I try to keep an open mind even when I think I know the answer.I've mentioned it's a joke but it appears to be set in stone now, that link gets banded about the forum like it's the word of God.
If you’re looking for a real scientific study that proves flushing works then check this link out!TLDR the rx grene 'study' does not have a correct experimental setup
Hey guys!
IMO this study does not give any information to help the debate on flushing VS not flushing.
For those that want actual useful info check Jeremy from buildasoil address this topic in his YouTube series.
For those of you that refer to claims in the rx green 'study' :
I invite you to please read the study with a critical mind.
I'm ready to criticize every aspect of this 'study', if you think they did anything in an acceptable way (with respect to research or even just trying to find out the impact of flushing) then please post that claim and I will explain to you why it is incorrect.
To be very clear: in this post I am not pro or anti flushing, I just want to bring to everyone's attention that this rx green 'study' is badly conducted and the results are meaningless (literally they can't be used) and I am shocked that no one in this thread mentions this - it even seems like some of you read it and back it up which makes me pretty confused.
Asides from the lack of info about their experimental setup, the first big red flag is apparent when looking at the results:
- for flower samples in a single group the reviews on quality, smoothness while smoking and taste are literally all over the place. Just imagine for a single sample that some judges say it is 'bad' and others say it is 'great', then what is going on? Are the judges very bad at judging? Or were they not taught how to use the rubric? Also just simply the fact that every sample had at least 1 judge saying it was 'bad' makes you question if they even know how to grow (which should be something they document in the experimental setup, I can't find any info at all).
Research on flushing can't be done yet because there are so many thing that need to be researched first
That's why you wait to until it's ready to chop before giving it water.So you start flushing two weeks in advance of harvest only to discover you need a third week before it's ripe. After that third week, you realize it could go a fourth.
If it's ready to chop why are you still giving it water? Wouldn't you just chop it if it was ready?That's why you wait to until it's ready to chop before giving it water.
If it's ready to chop why are you still giving it water? Wouldn't you just chop it if it was ready?
Do you check your sap to know when it’s ready? Think I’ll give it a whirl next time come harvest.Ur a daft plank