Curing, a myth perpetuated by bad growers

Thecouchlock

Thecouchlock

Well-Known Member
a mongo frog said:
yes makes total sense thanks. i did however thought collectives test for those harmful products you mentioned. after all this is a medical industry. so if one has 3 1k lamps and harvests 3 plus units and vends his/her medicine to a dispensary, is that considered a commercial grow? and amount of lamps have nothing to do with it. I'm sorry I'm still a little confused.
Click to expand...
They test for THCA- THC + Delta 9

They also test for mold, mildew and pesticide on very rare occasions to continue saying they test for those things. In reality the collectives don't send samples out every single time to test for these things. Especially after a vender has been there for a while.

Out of my time in the scene I saw about 8 tests ... maybe a few more but the number is so low I don't even know if its funny.

Now concentrates a collective either tests them for solvents or doesn't and that would be up to their own rules. I know we tested every single batch of wax that came in due to backlash from people who have used it. When one person complains it is an apology, when 100 people complain and ask for refunds it helps implement policy change.
 
Ace Yonder

Ace Yonder

Well-Known Member
Thecouchlock said:
They test for THCA- THC + Delta 9

They also test for mold, mildew and pesticide on very rare occasions to continue saying they test for those things. In reality the collectives don't send samples out every single time to test for these things. Especially after a vender has been there for a while.

Out of my time in the scene I saw about 8 tests ... maybe a few more but the number is so low I don't even know if its funny.

Now concentrates a collective either tests them for solvents or doesn't and that would be up to their own rules. I know we tested every single batch of wax that came in due to backlash from people who have used it. When one person complains it is an apology, when 100 people complain and ask for refunds it helps implement policy change.
Click to expand...
Depends on the lab too, not all testing labs are equal. There are different ways to test weed (i.e. Gas Chromatography[bad] vs Liquid Chromatography[good]), and in addition to mold/pathogens and solvent residue tests, some labs can test for Terpenes, which is useful info since cannabinoids aren't 100% of the mechanism of action. SCLabs (Maybe others as well, but this lab I am familiar with) also has a process to do genomic testing on leaf material to determine sex early and predict thc/cbd ratios, but I'm not sure that service is available quite yet I think they're still fine tuning it.
 
Thecouchlock

Thecouchlock

Well-Known Member
Ace Yonder said:
Depends on the lab too, not all testing labs are equal. There are different ways to test weed (i.e. Gas Chromatography[bad] vs Liquid Chromatography[good]), and in addition to mold/pathogens and solvent residue tests, some labs can test for Terpenes, which is useful info since cannabinoids aren't 100% of the mechanism of action. SCLabs (Maybe others as well, but this lab I am familiar with) also has a process to do genomic testing on leaf material to determine sex early and predict thc/cbd ratios, but I'm not sure that service is available quite yet I think they're still fine tuning it.
Click to expand...
Yup that is true, but most places go the cheaper way and use the quantacann.
 
Ace Yonder

Ace Yonder

Well-Known Member
Thecouchlock said:
Yup that is true, but most places go the cheaper way and use the quantacann.
Click to expand...
I am ashamed to say I had never heard of quantacann until just now when I googled it. Seems like an interesting idea, but I have a hard time believing that NIR spectroscopy can give as accurate a reading as HPLC does, especially when it's only using comparative data from a sample of tests. Guess I'm lucky that it hasn't made it to my area, pretty much every dispensary here uses the SCLabs place I mentioned, which is nice because they catalog their tested samples online so you can double check and make sure no one's fudging the numbers. It's also very telling to see which places are ordering terpene and solvent residue tests and which aren't.
 
Thecouchlock

Thecouchlock

Well-Known Member
Ace Yonder said:
I am ashamed to say I had never heard of quantacann until just now when I googled it. Seems like an interesting idea, but I have a hard time believing that NIR spectroscopy can give as accurate a reading as HPLC does, especially when it's only using comparative data from a sample of tests. Guess I'm lucky that it hasn't made it to my area, pretty much every dispensary here uses the SCLabs place I mentioned, which is nice because they catalog their tested samples online so you can double check and make sure no one's fudging the numbers. It's also very telling to see which places are ordering terpene and solvent residue tests and which aren't.
Click to expand...
When SCLabs came out people would test there because the percentages were always coming out higher than steep hills. Now I think they are about even on the spectrum.
 
Ace Yonder

Ace Yonder

Well-Known Member
Thecouchlock said:
When SCLabs came out people would test there because the percentages were always coming out higher than steep hills. Now I think they are about even on the spectrum.
Click to expand...
I could see that, I've seen SCLabs return some ridiculously high numbers, I've seen Gorilla Glue #4 and Chiquita Banana routinely testing in the mid 30%'s. I don't think there's any shady business going on though, I just think that they started doing liquid chromatography when everyone else was still doing gas which is a lot less accurate (and doesn't measure difference between THC-A and THC because it is converted in the process of turning it to gas for the gas chromatography), and now that liquid has caught on more the numbers are getting a little bit more evened out. I'd love to see how accurate the quantacann is in comparison, there is a part of me that loves the idea of on the spot, non destruction based, 30 second testing, even if my brain refuses to believe it could be accurate to the same degree as the HPLC. I think people here test at SCLabs mainly because it's local, so it's nice to be able to visit the lab where your gear is being tested in person.
 
Thecouchlock

Thecouchlock

Well-Known Member
Ace Yonder said:
I could see that, I've seen SCLabs return some ridiculously high numbers, I've seen Gorilla Glue #4 and Chiquita Banana routinely testing in the mid 30%'s. I don't think there's any shady business going on though, I just think that they started doing liquid chromatography when everyone else was still doing gas which is a lot less accurate (and doesn't measure difference between THC-A and THC because it is converted in the process of turning it to gas for the gas chromatography), and now that liquid has caught on more the numbers are getting a little bit more evened out. I'd love to see how accurate the quantacann is in comparison, there is a part of me that loves the idea of on the spot, non destruction based, 30 second testing, even if my brain refuses to believe it could be accurate to the same degree as the HPLC. I think people here test at SCLabs mainly because it's local, so it's nice to be able to visit the lab where your gear is being tested in person.
Click to expand...
Surprisingly after thousands of tests I have seen myself at the office between both sc and quantacann I can tell you its pretty damn accurate. I am surprised at how accurate that thing has become over the years. It took a little while to calibrate but it is within .5% usually.
 
Clown Baby

Clown Baby

Well-Known Member
panhead said:
People love to use wine as an exame twords mj growing & they think its a good example proving their point when infact its the worst possible comparison.

Using wine as an example brings up the subject of how all the worlds most accomplished wine tasters were all put to shame by a lowely california based small time wine maker,the california wine industry blew all the long standing myths about wine out of the industry.

Its been proven that you do not need to age a fine red wine for it to taste as good as its aged counterpart & the results are easy to find on the web.
Click to expand...
I think you're referring to the 1976 judgement in Paris. this had nothing to do with an un-aged wine. So I don't know why you'd throw this out there after accusing me of "the worst possible comparison."

It's a fact that a ton of polymerization goes on in a red wine after fermentation that change all of the sensory characteristics. Dont believe me? Go to a local winery and ask to taste a 2014 red. You cant. Because no 2014 reds are bottled yet. Even though they're technically "wine" already, any bottle worth over five dollars wont be released before late 2015. You claim that there's no difference between a young wine and it's aged counterpart. Yet winemakers across the board seem to sit on their inventory for at least 1-2 years before their release. That comes at a huge expense. Maybe you're right while all of them are wrong?

Chemistry continues long after the fruits removed from the plant. I get that wine had more going on than cannabis after harvest, but the fact is that compounds continue to change and affect the flavor profile.

You might be able to argue the extent of the change. if you've ever taken a biochem class you'd be ignorant to say that nothings changing post-harvest.

I'm not arguing that you need to cure your pot for a year. But to say that "if your pot smells like hay you fucked up" seems wrong. Personally, I know a month in the jar makes a world of difference for my harvests.
 
Last edited:
Midwest Weedist

Midwest Weedist

Well-Known Member
Clown Baby said:
I think you're referring to the 1976 judgement in Paris. this had nothing to do with an un-aged wine. So I don't know why you'd throw this out there after accusing me of "the worst possible comparison."

It's a fact that a ton of polymerization goes on in a red wine after fermentation that change all of the sensory characteristics. Dont believe me? Go to a local winery and ask to taste a 2014 red. You cant. Because no 2014 reds are bottled yet. Even though they're technically "wine" already, any bottle worth over five dollars wont be released before late 2015. You claim that there's no difference between a young wine and it's aged counterpart. Yet winemakers across the board seem to sit on their inventory for at least 1-2 years before their release. That comes at a huge expense. Maybe you're right while all of them are wrong?

Chemistry continues long after the fruits removed from the plant. I get that wine had more going on than cannabis after harvest, but the fact is that compounds continue to change and affect the flavor profile.

You might be able to argue the extent of the change. if you've ever taken a biochem class you'd be ignorant to say that nothings changing post-harvest.

I'm not arguing that you need to cure your pot for a year. But to say that "if your pot smells like hay you fucked up" seems wrong. Personally, I know a month in the jar makes a world of difference for my harvests.
Click to expand...
I'm glad some people can still remain civil in a debate.
 
blackforest

blackforest

Well-Known Member
Wow, what a long thread about curing! Curing and drying are the same thing. Curing is just drying slower, over a longer period of time. All tobacco growers 'cure' their product for smoothness and taste. From my experience, especially here in CO, if you 'dry' to quickly you loose all smell and taste. If anything, 'curing' would simply preserve the taste and smell over a longer period of time. I dry until i can put into jars and the humidity will stay at or below 62% by itself then add a boveda 62 pack. 2 months later still smells like the day it was jarred, taste is smoother though. I guess it's how you define 'drying' and 'curing'. I think of curing as more of a preservation state because essentially I'm drying (in a tent or open space) until i can jar and maintain a certain rh (55-60) then adding a boveda pack to preserve that state. The product will always continue to dry while jarred, just at a much slower rate, even w/ boveda packs.
 
Last edited:
C

churchhaze

Well-Known Member
I think the main point of this thread is that people overcomplicate drying and curing.

I'm smoking some "uncured" weed now (dry for 1 week) and it's some of the smoothest smoke I've had in a while. I dry in cardboard boxes (papers separating layers of buds), and move to a jar when it's smooth enough to smoke.. I personally think it gets tastier over time in the jar, but to say that smoking fresh dried weed is crap, you must be doing something wrong.

if the weed is drying too fast in the box, i wrap the box with plastic. (you could also technically store it that way if you didn't have enough jar space)
 
Last edited:
A

anzohaze

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
I've had @homebrew420 's, and I can tell you that many more people buy his pot than yours for some very good reasons:

Try his and it will be an unforgettably potent, flavorful, aromatic and enjoyable experience. I can honestly say that about everything he's ever given me.

Then again, some people still try to do production with Subcool gear, too. There's always somebody...

And about the two month cure? We do it in a week or less and people rave over how smooth it is. It's just technique, not time.
Click to expand...
Whats your technique
 
homebrew420

homebrew420

Well-Known Member
@churchhaze and @blackforest this is exactly what I was speaking of. "Curing" is simply a storage technique that will not work if the flowers were too dry or too wet, or if they were not great to begin with. It will not make your flowers clean if they were crappy to begin with. 50-60% rh is money. Same rh in your storage container, maintained, you herb will stay wonderful for a long time. One would need those humidity packs for long term storage imho.

Glad to see we all relaxed a little bit.

Peace
 
blackforest

blackforest

Well-Known Member
homebrew420 said:
@churchhaze and @blackforest this is exactly what I was speaking of. "Curing" is simply a storage technique that will not work if the flowers were too dry or too wet, or if they were not great to begin with. It will not make your flowers clean if they were crappy to begin with. 50-60% rh is money. Same rh in your storage container, maintained, you herb will stay wonderful for a long time. One would need those humidity packs for long term storage imho.

Glad to see we all relaxed a little bit.

Peace
Click to expand...
I could concur that curing does not make shitty weed better. At all. It will preserve that shittyness for sure though.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
anzohaze said:
Whats your technique
Click to expand...
Trim wet levee it on shirt sticks and hang until it's spongy, maybe a day in a humid room.

Buck the buds off their sticks into a tub and close it up until they moisten up. Then, it's burp and close until they're ready. It never takes a while week start to finish, usually four or five days or so.
 
WestDenverPioneer

WestDenverPioneer

Well-Known Member
I hear it all the time from people showing me their flowers... "Oh, once its cured it will be fire!"
Nope. It has to be killer for it to end up killer.
I live in Colorado and I dry my flowers for maybe a week, if that. There's no point in waiting or curing. The results are top notch when its fresh or it will never be good.

I do not flush at the end. I do not perform any fancy cure.
People tell me that they can tell I flush my buds. Nope.
People tell me how good my cure is. Nope, no cure.
People tell me that my bud is smooth, that its been well cured. Yep, but nope.
Cut it. Dry it. Smoke it FRESH.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top