# Why flushing is a myth yes and no explained!



## Nightmarecreature (Jan 13, 2013)

The reason why flushing is such a heated debate is because it is misunderstood. I wrote this in laymans terms for everyone to understand. Does flushing work? Yes! Does not flushing also work? Yes! 

Flushing:
In nature Chlorophyll breakdown can be seen in the seasonal changes as the plants lose their green color in the autumn; it is also evident in fruit ripening and flowering. People flush their plants mimicking the fall harvest where plants lose their green color. 
In turn flushing starves your plants of Nitrogen and stresses them out. It is my opinion that this is the #2 reason for hermies. #1 is genetics #2 stress(Flushing) The plant wants to make seeds and when it knows the end is near, it tries to pollenate itself. Not all marijuana does this but some strains are very prone to it. While it's a natural process it's not what we want. What I mean by that, is we don't want pollen flying around our grow rooms or our plants making S1's (selfed first generation). 
Back to the maintopic. What flushing does is breaksdown most of the chlorophyll prior to drying. This makes the marijuana less harsh and gets rid of that hay taste and smell. Where the confusion comes in, is that it takes less time for the buds to be ready to smoke. Here's an example; One grower dries his flushed buds for 7 days. The same grower dries another unflushed batch for 7 days. Of course the flushed buds are going to be a better smoke because there is less chlorophyll in the flushed buds. The conclusion is flushing does work at the expense of stressing out your plants and the possibility of having a smaller yield. The upside to flushing is that is takes less drying time compared to unflushed buds to get a good smoke.

Unflushed:
Unflushed buds have the advantage in that your plants can uptake nutrients all the way through flowering and up to the chop. I believe this increases yields and I know it reduces stress.Unflushed buds will smoke as well as flushed buds if the drying time is increased. It's best to chop the whole plant from the base and remove all the fan leaves while keeping all your sugar leaves. You want to keep your sugar leaves because removing those leafs causes your buds to dry faster and traps chlorophyll.You can trim your sugar leafs wet but your buds will dry faster and I think it reduces the taste of the buds. The drying process is more important than the curing process. In order for your buds to smoke as good as unflushed bud, you will need to dry them for about 12 days in 55%-65% humidity.This will remove the chlorophyll and it's basically the same as flushing except your flushing the plant once it's finished. The disadvantage of unflushed buds is the longer drying time.
Both methods work and when someone says flushing is a myth, it's both yes and no. It boils down to which method you like to use. I prefer the latter one.

Doing a cure on both methods will reduce harshness of the smoke even further.


----------



## zubey91 (Jan 13, 2013)

So it has nothing to do with nutrients being in the plant, where flushing forces them out so it only retains mostly water? How des that work


----------



## Rumple (Jan 13, 2013)

Mine tastes much better flushed. But I know a lot of folks who don't mind the taste of unflushed bud.


----------



## zubey91 (Jan 13, 2013)

Do the nutes evaporate with the chlorophyll ?


----------



## ilovethegreen (Jan 13, 2013)

"nutes" dont go straight into the plants. by the time it gets up there it's converted into sugars


----------



## Nightmarecreature (Jan 14, 2013)

ilovethegreen said:


> "nutes" dont go straight into the plants. by the time it gets up there it's converted into sugars


Exactly! 

Also Chlorophyll does not evaporate, it gets broken down by a bio chemical reaction during the drying process. I was trying to keep this simple.

"Chlorophyll breakdown in green plants is a long-standing biological enigma. Recent work has shown that pheophorbide _a_ (Pheide _a_) derived from chlorophyll (Chl) is converted oxygenolytically into a primary fluorescent catabolite (pFCC-1) via a red Chl catabolite (RCC) intermediate. RCC, the product of the ring cleavage reaction catalyzed by Pheide _a_ oxygenase, which is suggested to be the key enzyme in Chl breakdown in green plants, is converted into pFCC-1 by a reductase."


----------



## 209 Cali closet grower (Jan 14, 2013)

I say this thread will got to 10 pages of wtf.


----------



## Nightmarecreature (Jan 14, 2013)

Rumple said:


> Mine tastes much better flushed. But I know a lot of folks who don't mind the taste of unflushed bud.


There is no difference in taste from flushed or unflushed bud. It's all about the approach of harvesting and drying.

Where you went wrong with the unflushed bud, is that it's best to chop the whole plant from the base, remove the fan leaves and hang the entire plant. Then trim the sugar leaves dry after 12 days and then put them in jars to cure.

Cutting the buds stem from stem and trimming the sugar leaves wet doesn't work well with unflushed buds. It interrupts the biological process. From a previous post, this is how you do it.

Unflushed buds require a different approach and this is where the flushing myth is created.


----------



## MrStickyScissors (Jan 14, 2013)

if your in soil no need to flush unless you have a salt build up. flushing will not make your weed better. its your fault that its shitty not that you didnt flush. i feed all the way up tell harvest and vomr dummer the clubs are fighting over it


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 14, 2013)

Nightmarecreature said:


> The reason why flushing is such a heated debate is because it is misunderstood. I wrote this in laymans terms for everyone to understand. Does flushing work? Yes! Does not flushing also work? Yes!
> 
> Flushing:
> In nature Chlorophyll breakdown can be seen in the seasonal changes as the plants lose their green color in the autumn; it is also evident in fruit ripening and flowering. People flush their plants mimicking the fall harvest where plants lose their green color.
> ...


When you tested unflushed buds what was the ppm that you ran at the end of the plants life cycle? High or low? Was it a full nutrient concentration until finnish or based on necesity? Dont you want a longer cure regardless for better final quality?? 
Youve provided opinions based on observation but havent given the technical details of the grow and that can lead to missinformation and crop failure..................please explain.


----------



## VTMi'kmaq (Jan 14, 2013)

you can inundate me with this experts opinion and all the literature at the smithsonian, im good i know what works for me and i dont need a disertation on plant root mechanics to know what works for me. thats laying off anything but straight water for the last two weeks. Call it what you will. It works for me and thats all i care about. have fun! I eat lego's too!


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 14, 2013)

zubey91 said:


> So it has nothing to do with nutrients being in the plant, where flushing forces them out so it only retains mostly water? How des that work


From what ive learned on the topic water retention causes a fermentation reaction ripening flowers.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 14, 2013)

ilovethegreen said:


> "nutes" dont go straight into the plants. by the time it gets up there it's converted into sugars


What about hydro w synthetic?


----------



## Nightmarecreature (Jan 14, 2013)

Unflushed bud contains more N and chlorophyll and require a longer drying time. By drying them differently you are allowing the unflushed buds time to dry slower. My friends runs a dispensary and he flushes his buds but he dries them quickly. I don't flush, but if I dry my buds fast like he does, they don't smoke as smooth. If I dry them say about 5 days longer, they smoke just as well. All it does it give the buds more time to break down the excess chlorophyll. A longer drying time is more important than anything. Wet trimming does decrease taste, try it for yourself. 

Fact! leaf nitrogen content and chlorophyll concentration are closely linked.
Fact! Wet trimming causes buds to dry faster.
Fact! Whole plant drying takes longer.
Fact! The longer the buds take to dry the smoother it will smoke, flushed or unflushed.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 14, 2013)

Nightmarecreature said:


> There is no difference in taste from flushed or unflushed bud. It's all about the approach of harvesting and drying.
> 
> Where you went wrong with the unflushed bud, is that it's best to chop the whole plant from the base, remove the fan leaves and hang the entire plant. Then trim the sugar leaves dry after 12 days and then put them in jars to cure.
> 
> ...


 i like your post, pleeze elaborate. Seems like you know of both sides of the debate, your opinion is non topic generalized which means that you explore science rather than listen to the accepted norm. Any insight would prove benificial at this point.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 14, 2013)

MrStickyScissors said:


> if your in soil no need to flush unless you have a salt build up. flushing will not make your weed better. its your fault that its shitty not that you didnt flush. i feed all the way up tell harvest and vomr dummer the clubs are fighting over it


What did you feed with at what ppm of what type of fertz?


----------



## Nightmarecreature (Jan 14, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> When you tested unflushed buds what was the ppm that you ran at the end of the plants life cycle? High or low? Was it a full nutrient concentration until finnish or based on necesity? Dont you want a longer cure regardless for better final quality??
> Youve provided opinions based on observation but havent given the technical details of the grow and that can lead to missinformation and crop failure..................please explain.


1200-1500 PPM. 
High
Full Nutes
Yes. The longer the cure the better. Curing distributes moisture evenly for a better burn.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 14, 2013)

Uncle Pirate said:


> Flushed and unflushed buds don't require to be dried differently. That is totally false and adding to the confusion. Did you make up that theory yourself? I'm glad you're trying to shed some light here, but come on man, keep it real.


Glad to see that you are looking past the end of your nose once again. How many times do i have to tell you that if you plan on making statements factually you have to possess facts initially. Were not here to listen to what youve been doing for years in an optimal non flush environment. Annnd were not here to listen to your angry bullshit. Produce facts or ride back to the last thread you almost hung yourself on.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 14, 2013)

Nightmarecreature said:


> 1200-1500 PPM.
> High
> Full Nutes
> Yes. The longer the cure the better. Curing distributes moisture evenly for a better burn.


soil with organics or hydro with synthetic? Thats alot of ppms, not hydro right?


----------



## CashCrops (Jan 14, 2013)

Nightmarecreature said:


> Exactly!
> 
> Also Chlorophyll does not evaporate, it gets broken down by a bio chemical reaction during the drying process. I was trying to keep this simple.
> 
> "Chlorophyll breakdown in green plants is a long-standing biological enigma. Recent work has shown that pheophorbide _a_ (Pheide _a_) derived from chlorophyll (Chl) is converted oxygenolytically into a primary fluorescent catabolite (pFCC-1) via a red Chl catabolite (RCC) intermediate. RCC, the product of the ring cleavage reaction catalyzed by Pheide _a_ oxygenase, which is suggested to be the key enzyme in Chl breakdown in green plants, is converted into pFCC-1 by a reductase."


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9624113


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 14, 2013)

CashCrops said:


> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9624113


Nice post, not saying that is incorrect by any means but its quite study specific and contains more four syllable words and abereviations than are comprehendable. That document should come with an index with laymans terms added. Oxygen.....oxygenolytically what? Just wondering what it all means, guide the blind man to the light plz.​


----------



## colonuggs (Jan 14, 2013)

hahahaha.... this thread needs a enema


----------



## Nightmarecreature (Jan 14, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> soil with organics or hydro with synthetic? Thats alot of ppms, not hydro right?


Coco Coir
I use organic and synthetic nutrients. House & garden are the synthetic nutrients I use.
The organic nutrients I use don't show PPM.


----------



## Nightmarecreature (Jan 14, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> Nice post, not saying that is incorrect by any means but its quite study specific and contains more four syllable words and abereviations than are comprehendable. That document should come with an index with laymans terms added. Oxygen.....oxygenolytically what? Just wondering what it all means, guide the blind man to the light plz.​


This one is better. I have taken 2 years of college chemistry. Bio and organic chemistry is difficult. I don't even understand all of it.
http://www.jbc.org/content/273/25/15335.full


----------



## colonuggs (Jan 14, 2013)

so let get this this straight.....flushed plants dry quicker than unflushed.....hmmmm well I just put on my boots cause the shit is gettin deep


----------



## Nightmarecreature (Jan 14, 2013)

colonuggs said:


> so let get this this straight.....flushed plants dry quicker than unflushed.....hmmmm well I just put on my boots cause the shit is gettin deep


No no no...I'm just saying I believe that unflushed buds benefit from a longer drying time.


----------



## Uncle Pirate (Jan 14, 2013)

I also like how he fails to mention that chlorophyll breaks down not only during the drying time, but curing time as well. This whole thread is based on one person's theory of how much chlorophyll is in unflushed vs flushed bud and how long that chlorophyll takes to break down. All speculation that the OP probably hasn't even tested himself. I'd never let my shit hang for 12 days at 55% humidity.


----------



## Sir.Ganga (Jan 14, 2013)

ilovethegreen said:


> "nutes" dont go straight into the plants. by the time it gets up there it's converted into sugars


If it all converted to sugars as you say...where do all the heavy metals come from. Have your un-flushed product tested they will tell you how it works.

I'm not worried about a little sugar, its the heavy metals man...

My shit would be DUST in 12 days hanging with leaves on or not!


----------



## robert030188 (Jan 14, 2013)

5 days hanging and 7 in a jar to cure i believe....and i believe he said around 55% RH when drying Sir Ganga.


----------



## colonuggs (Jan 14, 2013)

shit guys i live in the PNW by a lake... my shit can hang in my bathroom for a month and still have a sponginess to it

I do some sht in colorado too... there we have to use a tent to dry in or its bone dry in 5 days or less


----------



## CashCrops (Jan 14, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> Nice post, not saying that is incorrect by any means but its quite study specific and contains more four syllable words and abereviations than are comprehendable. That document should come with an index with laymans terms added. Oxygen.....oxygenolytically what? Just wondering what it all means, guide the blind man to the light plz.​


I only posted the link to the source of the OP's post as he did not.


----------



## CashCrops (Jan 14, 2013)

The most I have ever let my nugs hang was 3 days. Then a one to two week cure for perfectly smoke-able product.


----------



## ru4r34l (Jan 14, 2013)

CashCrops said:


> The most I have ever let my nugs hang was 3 days. Then a one to two week cure for perfectly smoke-able product.


This explains the name. 

I think this thread will add more fog for some, why not Just explain it for What it is personal choice.

Some flush some do not, most user hardly tell the difference If there is one at all. It's all about growers personal preference, and not who is right or wrong.

regards,


----------



## zubey91 (Jan 14, 2013)

So basically for someone like me whom lives in a 20%rh climate, flushing is a good idea since its almost impossible to extend the drying to2 weeks. No matter what you do (including adding a humidifier)


----------



## colonuggs (Jan 14, 2013)

zubey91 said:


> So basically for someone like me whom lives in a 20%rh climate, flushing is a good idea since its almost impossible to extend the drying to2 weeks. No matter what you do (including adding a humidifier)


3x3 or 4x4 grow tent closed off with drying plants inside the rh will raise alot and slow your drying process


----------



## CashCrops (Jan 14, 2013)

ru4r34l said:


> This explains the name.
> 
> I think this thread will add more fog for some, why not Just explain it for What it is personal choice.
> 
> ...


Exactly, it's the same as defoliation, 48 hrs of dark...The list goes on. Everyone here does it different. If it works for you then run it!


----------



## polyarcturus (Jan 14, 2013)

you only need to flush if you have been feeding heavily(organic or inorganic), towards the end, there is no reason to flush during the life time of a plant unless your using synthetics and going on beyond 3-4 months of growing it.

you should flush at the end though especially if you feed heavily and not what the plant needs and uses,which most of you do if you follow the instuctions on the bottles for the most part(some, very few, but some are labeled well)
here is a small list of some of chemical ferts when overly fed would ideally need flushed out, most inorganic fertilizer contain one or more of these, because they are cheaper than other chemical forms of nutrition.
*Ammonium Sulphate*

This fertilizer type comes in a *white crystalline salt* form, containing *20 to 21%* ammonia cal nitrogen. It is easy to handle and it stores well under dry conditions. However, during the rainy season, it sometimes, forms lumps. (TIP: When these lumps do occur you should grind them down to a powered form before use.) Though this fertilizer type is soluble in water, its nitrogen is not readily lost in drainage, because the ammonium ion is retained by the soil particles. A note of caution: Ammonium sulphate may have an *acid effect* on garden soil. Over time, the long-continued use of this type of fertilizer will increase soil acidity and thus lower the yield. (TIP: It is advisable to use this fertilizer type together with bulky organic manures to safeguard against the ill effects of continued application of ammonium sulphate.)
​*Ammonium Nitrate*

This fertilizer type also comes in white crystalline salts. Ammonium Nitrate salts contains *33 to 35%* nitrogen, of which half is nitrate nitrogen and the other half in the ammonium form. As part of the ammonium form, this type of fertilizer cannot be easily leached from the soil. This fertilizer is quick-acting, but highly hygroscopic thus making it unfit for storage. (TIP: Coagulation and Granulation of this fertilizer can be combated with a light coating of the granules with oil.) On a note of caution: Ammonium Nitrate also has an acid effect on the soil, in addition this type of fertilizer can be explosive under certain conditions, and, should thus be handled with care.

'*Nitro Chalk*' is the trade name of a product formed by mixing ammonium nitrate with about *40%* lime-stone or dolomite. This fertilizer is granulated, non-hazardous and less hygroscopic. The lime content of this fertilizer type makes it useful for application to acidic garden soils.

dressing, but it should not be applied along the seed.
​*Ammonium Chloride*

This fertilizer type comes in a *white crystalline compound*, which contains a good physical condition and *26%* ammoniac nitrogen. In general, Ammonium Chloride is similar to ammonium sulphate in action. (TIP: Do not use this type of fertilizer on crops such as tomatoes because the chorine may harm your crop.)
​


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 14, 2013)

CashCrops said:


> I only posted the link to the source of the OP's post as he did not.


So can anyone explain it or is it just some e ammo that sounds good lol


----------



## Rumple (Jan 14, 2013)

Nightmarecreature said:


> There is no difference in taste from flushed or unflushed bud. It's all about the approach of harvesting and drying.
> 
> Where you went wrong with the unflushed bud, is that it's best to chop the whole plant from the base......


Well my flushed bud comes out great and all the folks who reviewed my end products have had nothing but awesome things to say about it... I think I will continue doing it "all wrong". You can see more of me doing it all wrong in my harvest pictures located in my signature.

Also from what you said, if you don't flush you have to do other stuff to make it taste right? And if you do flush you can harvest the way I do it? Something about biology?

I have been talking to the growers on this forum who don't believe in flushing for a long time, I can bet none of them agree with the above statement. Most just feel flushing does nothing more than deprive your plant from nutrients, and the only adjustment you need to make is reducing nutrients the last few weeks. They feel the bad taste comes from bad drying and curing (no matter if you flush or not). 

To say if you harvest using "my method" of harvesting and curing, it will only work on flushed bud is a view you share alone. Both sides would disagree with that.


----------



## Cyproz (Jan 14, 2013)

dont care what you "scientists" say, i prefer smoking on flushed bud, instead of smoking chemicals. If i wanted to do that i would smoke meth.


----------



## MrStickyScissors (Jan 14, 2013)

i simply hang the plants upside down in walk in closets. i cut off the fan leaves simply to save time when trimming i have left them on no difference in taste maybe a tad bit quicker on the dry. i keep a small fan circulating in the closet for 6 days . then i trim. no jars its baged up and brought to the club. i then tell them it cured in jars for 2 weeks and charge them more lol silly


----------



## MrStickyScissors (Jan 14, 2013)

but you do got to burp the bags. just for 2 or 3 days if you have it that long. make sure if its fresh even if it dry leave the bag open on your way to vend when you get there suck all the air out the bag and close it when they open it to check it it will give them a nice little slap in the nose


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 14, 2013)

Nightmarecreature said:


> This one is better. I have taken 2 years of college chemistry. Bio and organic chemistry is difficult. I don't even understand all of it.
> http://www.jbc.org/content/273/25/15335.full


Its an expirement on peas and canola where they are centrifugeing plant matter to extract substances in solution to test chlorophyll break down. Doesnt really mention anywhere in it if the peas were flushed with water prior to the expiremen taking place, lol nor is there a comparison even mentioned. Its pretty much just someones analisis of pureed plant matter as it decays and chlorophyll degades.
I think a better study type to relate the flushing question to would be on extraction of harmfull elements by use of plants in contaminated areas. At least theres measurment of metals and elements of our concern.


----------



## Nightmarecreature (Jan 14, 2013)

colonuggs said:


> 3x3 or 4x4 grow tent closed off with drying plants inside the rh will raise alot and slow your drying process


I do this but I pour water on the ground. The humidity where I'm at is in the low 20's.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 14, 2013)

polyarcturus said:


> you only need to flush if you have been feeding heavily(organic or inorganic), towards the end, there is no reason to flush during the life time of a plant unless your using synthetics and going on beyond 3-4 months of growing it.
> 
> you should flush at the end though especially if you feed heavily and not what the plant needs and uses,which most of you do if you follow the instuctions on the bottles for the most part(some, very few, but some are labeled well)
> here is a small list of some of chemical ferts when overly fed would ideally need flushed out, most inorganic fertilizer contain one or more of these, because they are cheaper than other chemical forms of nutrition.
> ...


Hmmm flushing science....interesting. So these three compounds can be extracted with a flush? They are understandably bad for health but are they removable? Im learning as i go for the most part, but saying that at least the nitrogen part of these three compounds is mobile through xylem and phloem leads me to belive that flushing would be a benifit in removing excess nitrogen from the plants circulatory system. Is that safe to assume?


----------



## Howard Stern (Jan 14, 2013)

Im goona give it a shot! Worse case is I add 5-7 days to my curing process! Possibly a little harsher weed?  Big fucking deal! If the fucking idea works then it works if it doesn't it doesn't. Until you have tried both shut the fuck up! I personally don't see the benefit of feeding the last week. I believe you aren't going to get much more out of the girl the last week, but I am willing to try it and see before I open my dick holster and talk shit, Like so many of you have!

Everyone wants proof from the OP and he has told you that he has tried both! Until have tried both how are you going to say it doesn't? You don't prove your side, but the OP is speaking from personal EXP! It may not work for you, not all the conditions are the same as the OP's grow or cure room so the only real way is to try it yourself. one plant 5 days? I love how everyone is a fucking growing expert!  



Rumple said:


> Well my flush bud comes out great and all the folks who reviewed my end products have had nothing but awesome things to say about it... I think I will continue doing it "all wrong". You can see more of me doing it all wrong in my harvest pictures located in my signature.


Nobody said you were doing it the Wrong Way! This is just a different way that the OP is trying to share with everyone!


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 14, 2013)

Uncle Pirate said:


> I also like how he fails to mention that chlorophyll breaks down not only during the drying time, but curing time as well. This whole thread is based on one person's theory of how much chlorophyll is in unflushed vs flushed bud and how long that chlorophyll takes to break down. All speculation that the OP probably hasn't even tested himself. I'd never let my shit hang for 12 days at 55% humidity.


If flushing actually removes or breaks down chlorophyll from the plant before the plant is chopped down then its not speculation anymore. If your saying that chlorophyll break down is an intrinsic element of quality smoke then the op makes perfect sence. I also unfortunatly belive that you are the one speculating again...."probably". 
Please keep the momentum in the direction of science and not proving that everyones a fool but you.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 14, 2013)

Nightmarecreature said:


> No no no...I'm just saying I believe that unflushed buds benefit from a longer drying time.


Right gottcha..chlorophyll breakdown right? That would make sence.


----------



## rocpilefsj (Jan 14, 2013)

There will never be a right answer on this topic, do what works best for you. I have not flushed for years and cannot notice a difference between the two. I am an asthmatic and am allergic to millions of things so if there was "hard metals" or "chemicals" left over in the bud I would know lol. If you get great results with not flushing like me, good for you, if you get great results by flushing then do that. Simple. I will say that any of the supposed nutrient indicators: ie dark ash, sparkly weed, harsh taste, etc. have not been an issue since I got my drying down to a science years ago. Dry your plants for as long as you posssibly can. Don't bitch about nutrients causing black ash and harsh taste when you dried your crop in a day and a half! Do what works best for you, end of story.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 14, 2013)

rocpilefsj said:


> There will never be a right answer on this topic, do what works best for you. I have not flushed for years and cannot notice a difference between the two. I am an asthmatic and am allergic to millions of things so if there was "hard metals" or "chemicals" left over in the bud I would know lol. If you get great results with not flushing like me, good for you, if you get great results by flushing then do that. Simple. I will say that any of the supposed nutrient indicators: ie dark ash, sparkly weed, harsh taste, etc. have not been an issue since I got my drying down to a science years ago. Dry your plants for as long as you posssibly can. Don't bitch about nutrients causing black ash and harsh taste when you dried your crop in a day and a half! Do what works best for you, end of story.


Great advice as always Roc. Whats your take on the degradation of the clorophyll by the OP? Do you think theres merit to his claims? Seems like the lack of proper chlorophyll breakdown with a one day dry as you say is the determining factor in final quality.


----------



## ru4r34l (Jan 14, 2013)

Cyproz said:


> dont care what you "scientists" say, i prefer smoking on flushed bud, instead of smoking chemicals. If i wanted to do that i would smoke meth.


FYI THC is a chemical, and most people like smoking that particular chemical. 

regards,


----------



## polyarcturus (Jan 14, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> Hmmm flushing science....interesting. So these three compounds can be extracted with a flush? They are understandably bad for health but are they removable? Im learning as i go for the most part, but saying that at least the nitrogen part of these three compounds is mobile through xylem and phloem leads me to belive that flushing would be a benifit in removing excess nitrogen from the plants circulatory system. Is that safe to assume?


yes and other chemicals not to mention salts, and the fact plants move the mass of their water back into the soil and night. flushing is real, it has a real effect on plants but is not the most necessary thing like most growers would have you believe. its a tool, and like most tools knowledge of how to use it correctly is most important.


----------



## akula (Jan 14, 2013)

Do you flush?

Truth about flushing



> There have been a lot of debates on this forum about flushing and there is a lot of misunderstanding about it in general flushing has its place in gardening and in the real world (other than MJ forums) is referred to as leeching
> 
> This will be a long read but I hope it will set the record straight for everyone, this has been posted in several places here but I am putting to post together to clear things up a bit for all of you
> 
> ...


By the way, as for the organic vs inorganic or "chemical ferts"? organic is simply a process better for the environment as a whole. Organic ferts are created in a process in your medium where the by-products are what your plants desire...your macro nutrients (like nitrogen, potassium, phosphorus, c[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]alcium [/FONT] etc etc) and your micro nutes ([FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Boron[/FONT][FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif], Chlorine,[/FONT][FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif] Copper,[/FONT][FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif] Iron etc etc). [/FONT]The so called chemical nutes are (usually) just those nutrients that have been created in a lab. What goes into the roots (usually) is *exactly *the same as what is available via the organic process. I say usually because some fert manufactures add some extra crap that is outside these required nutes. So if you like to do everything you can to protect the enviroment, go organic. 

Nutrients cannabis plants need


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 14, 2013)

Oh jeez, not this post again^^^

ive read through all that, i dont see it, sorry. I cant even tell if the person who wrote that up is argueing for or against a flush, there is evidence to support both sides in that. It seems that they are definitley in favour of a proper dry and cure but really, wheres the flushing evidence? Says things move up and down in the plant...ok, were past that, now what? Drowning apple trees?

Can you explain this to me please? Where it is? Or even just pull out the quote from the text that supports the conclusion.


----------



## akula (Jan 14, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> Oh jeez, not this post again^^^
> 
> ive read through all that, i dont see it, sorry. I cant even tell if the person who wrote that up is argueing for or against a flush, there is evidence to support both sides in that. It seems that they are definitley in favour of a proper dry and cure but really, wheres the flushing evidence? Says things move up and down in the plant...ok, were past that, now what? Drowning apple trees?
> 
> Can you explain this to me please? Where it is? Or even just pull out the quote from the text that supports the conclusion.


Sorry if you are unwilling or unable to simply read and comprehend that thread to figure out the conclusion it makes, I could never sum it up in a word or two for you to properly digest since its not that simple obviously. There is however a *Summary **Section *that pretty much spells it right out for you in not too many words. There is also the entire section on *Translocation *which does a fairly good job of spelling this complicated process out in "laymens" terms. Of course you could also do your own due diligence, as I once did, and simply type *Translocation *into that Google search bar and look into it into much greater detail. 

But what I really think you are asking for is a simple statement that tells you what you want to hear. That doesn't exist and knowledge is not just something gained from a quick quote in a thread at rollitup. It actually takes a little bit of effort on your part if you really want to gain real knowledge. Of course that is hard and its easier to just continue to dismiss anything you find difficult to understand.


----------



## HeartlandHank (Jan 14, 2013)

I did not flush for the first this past harvest... I also used a new fertilizer.
I hit record yields, but at the same time everyone is saying my buds do not taste, smell, or carry the potency that my previous crops did, flushed.

I do not believe that this feedback really answers any questions about the debate. It is just another piece of the puzzle for me in deciding how I will do it in the future.

I'm going to flush again this round... nothing but water for the final 12 days. No copious amounts of water, just ph'd plain water.


----------



## BigBuddahCheese (Jan 14, 2013)

Common sense is to give the plant what it "NEEDS" for growth and there is NEVER a NEED to flush. 

Look at Organic growers like SuperSoil.. they ONLY add water there is NEVER flushing, as the nutrients are in the soil and never added. If they just flushed at the end with water, its exactly as they did the entire grow. The plants in SS take what they need, and they claim there buds are superior? 

So.. with that logic and my own research I never flush if I am on top of my plants and giving them just enough EC and not slamming them. 

It's common sense if your plants look like 90% of the plants that are slammed beyond EC constraints to squeeze every nug out of them, and slammed chemical additives and look like shit, YES flush the SHIT you slammed down their throats out. I mean these monkeys believe every snake oil myth out there, and flock to the hydro to buy it. Sad.

If you have common sense and grow the plants as they should be, and they healthy as they should be I would never flush and I never do. No one ever complains yet... many "oh wow" compliments though.


----------



## rocpilefsj (Jan 14, 2013)

akula said:


> Sorry if you are unwilling or unable to simply read and comprehend that thread to figure out the conclusion it makes, I could never sum it up in a word or two for you to properly digest since its not that simple obviously. There is however a *Summary **Section *that pretty much spells it right out for you in not too many words. There is also the entire section on *Translocation *which does a fairly good job of spelling this complicated process out in "laymens" terms. Of course you could also do your own due diligence, as I once did, and simply type *Translocation *into that Google search bar and look into it into much greater detail.
> 
> But what I really think you are asking for is a simple statement that tells you what you want to hear. That doesn't exist and knowledge is not just something gained from a quick quote in a thread at rollitup. It actually takes a little bit of effort on your part if you really want to gain real knowledge. Of course that is hard and its easier to just continue to dismiss anything you find difficult to understand.


So you don't understand it either is what you are saying lol. I don't think he is being lazy, I have read through that quite a few times and other than sound fancy it does not have anymore merit to it than anything else posted on this thread or the billion others... Love those half a page copy and paste jobs that 99% of people are never gonna take the time to read. This is a weed forum bud, I sometimes lose my place if there is more than three lines to read!


----------



## rocpilefsj (Jan 14, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> Great advice as always Roc. Whats your take on the degradation of the clorophyll by the OP? Do you think theres merit to his claims? Seems like the lack of proper chlorophyll breakdown with a one day dry as you say is the determining factor in final quality.


Could ne true, could be bs... There is probably more that we don't know about growing mj then we do, and that is just a fact. I have read and researched for hours and days on the subject and all you do is go around in circles with no clear cut evidence or proof. Just a bunch of links to studies with theories, no concrete facts. That is why I always have the same answer for flushing, R days of darkness, etc. Do what works for you in your situation. Who am I or some snooty scientist to tell someone what they are doing is wrong or right. If it works roll with it. Stay high!


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 14, 2013)

akula said:


> Sorry if you are unwilling or unable to simply read and comprehend that thread to figure out the conclusion it makes, I could never sum it up in a word or two for you to properly digest since its not that simple obviously. There is however a *Summary **Section *that pretty much spells it right out for you in not too many words. There is also the entire section on *Translocation *which does a fairly good job of spelling this complicated process out in "laymens" terms. Of course you could also do your own due diligence, as I once did, and simply type *Translocation *into that Google search bar and look into it into much greater detail.
> 
> But what I really think you are asking for is a simple statement that tells you what you want to hear. That doesn't exist and knowledge is not just something gained from a quick quote in a thread at rollitup. It actually takes a little bit of effort on your part if you really want to gain real knowledge. Of course that is hard and its easier to just continue to dismiss anything you find difficult to understand.


The translocation part is what i was saying when i said that nitrogen is mobile within the plant. Thats where this text to me becomes contradictory. If excess is trying to be avoided and excess nutrients are mobile, then why wouldnt the flush be effective? 

Im kickin at 1500 ppm right now and im sure thats just a little excessive for hydro. My plan is not to run straight water for 14 or 12 days. Instead i plan to run 400 ish five or six days before chop and just fill with straight water For those last days. So i understand the summary section you talked of also.


As for you telling me what i want to hear, i dont want to hear anything except the truth on the topic. The truth for every grower is what works best for them. Im reading, learning, and participating in basicly an online study group of professional growers to shape my perspective on flushing, its called RIU lol 


This topic has many opinions that are black or white. Im taking gray on this one. I still believe that Uncle Pirates method of reducing feed at the end of the life cycle to between 200 - 400 ppm is what the plant wants at that point in time. He is a No flush advocate but runs very minimal nutrients in the final stages, in essence running mostly water or the f word to me. Theres a big difference from 1500 ppm to 300 ppm so excess nutrients in theory are f'd out of there, right? 


The problem i have with that post about drowning apple trees and cigars is that it seems that it has more to do with a good dry and cure like i said, and touches just minimally on the actual flush specifics, aplication, and results, of flushing or not flushing. That my friend is why i am dismissing the post, not because its difficult to understand.


----------



## Sir.Ganga (Jan 15, 2013)

Do a little research on having your meds tested, pay the couple hundred dollars and see for yourself what actually was in it! I think you non-believers will be quite suprised to see what you are actually smoking.

This is the only true test that will proove this theory. People you can't keep saying "well if its on the internet".

Taste aside I have seen what I was smoking and personally...I would rather smoke bugs than some of the products we introduce, chemical or organic.


----------



## althor (Jan 15, 2013)

Sir.Ganga said:


> Do a little research on having your meds tested, pay the couple hundred dollars and see for yourself what actually was in it! I think you non-believers will be quite suprised to see what you are actually smoking.
> 
> This is the only true test that will proove this theory. People you can't keep saying "well if its on the internet".
> 
> Taste aside I have seen what I was smoking and personally...I would rather smoke bugs than some of the products we introduce, chemical or organic.



No matter test results, I will always flush. It doesnt hurt the plant at all, so at worst it doesnt help, but I believe it does help.


----------



## Rumple (Jan 15, 2013)

Nightmarecreature said:


> Where you went wrong with the unflushed bud, is that it's best to chop the whole plant from the base, remove the fan leaves and hang the entire plant.





Howard Stern said:


> Nobody said you were doing it the Wrong Way! This is just a different way that the OP is trying to share with everyone!


Sounded like he said I was harvesting wrong. I harvest the same plant from clone every 70 to 80 days for well over eight years. Tried it flushed and not flushed a few times. Every time we did it not flushed the taste and quality suffered. No yield gain at all. I have tried lots of different ways to dry and cure my bud, including hanging the whole plant. The way I am doing it now seems to work well for me and produces a quality product.

I am cool with folks wanting to do things different and I am open to trying some of them myself. I don't hold to any weird grow ideology and will not try and shove my methods down anyone's throat, or even be mad when others disagree with me. Some folks here will call you names, question your education and even criticize your spelling (ultimate douche bag move) if you don't run the same way.


----------



## Uncle Pirate (Jan 15, 2013)

Have actually you had your bud tested, or are you speculating? What kind of test and where? A guy on here, Huel Perkins, took his unflushed bud and had it tested. The results came back fine, no foreign chemicals or heavy metals were found.


Sir.Ganga said:


> Do a little research on having your meds tested, pay the couple hundred dollars and see for yourself what actually was in it! I think you non-believers will be quite suprised to see what you are actually smoking.
> 
> This is the only true test that will proove this theory. People you can't keep saying "well if its on the internet".
> 
> Taste aside I have seen what I was smoking and personally...I would rather smoke bugs than some of the products we introduce, chemical or organic.


----------



## NW2AZ (Jan 15, 2013)

I dont flush anymore. I didnt flush a plant that i fed with non organic feed right up to the last day this same plant had a very unique hashy flavor with a little dirt/soil hint. None of these flavors were harsh or unenjoyable and i feel were more fully developed when i did not flush. No crackle or charred buds and i only dry for 4 days before smokable. DONT FLUSH!


----------



## akula (Jan 15, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> The translocation part is what i was saying when i said that nitrogen is mobile within the plant. Thats where this text to me becomes contradictory. If excess is trying to be avoided and excess nutrients are mobile, then why wouldnt the flush be effective?
> 
> Im kickin at 1500 ppm right now and im sure thats just a little excessive for hydro. My plan is not to run straight water for 14 or 12 days. Instead i plan to run 400 ish five or six days before chop and just fill with straight water For those last days. So i understand the summary section you talked of also.
> 
> ...



Dude like I said, whole books are written on single aspects of this process. This small forum post simply touches on the basics. You cant expect someone to do your work for you and spend hundreds of hours of their time developing a synopsis of their research so you can get the information you wanted right? Not hear at least maybe on their own site to increase traffic. That post (not the exact thread but one of the more original varieties) is what set me on my quest to research the points made. Anyone that is really interested in their own knowledge of the subject that has the time would do the same. One good place to start is Botany for Dummies (no really it is). 

But with that said I like the old School House Rock shows. Do you remember those? Simplified very complex topics and cartoonified and personafied it so that even kids could understand? OK so how about a school house rock version of translocation? 

So lets get a few things out of the way. The calyxes (or buds) are the sinks we are talking about. In a immature vegging plant, the roots and leaves are also considered sinks, but they are not-so-much so during late flowering. A sink is a final destination point of as defined by the translocation system. Also most people always refer to the stems and stalk as the *primary* storage system which is true, but does not mean it holds the majority of the micro and macro nutrients, especially late in bloom, these are always the roots. They(the roots) serve much like a bank vault that has been slowly filled and built during the plants life. 

OK so on with our School House Rocks. 

Translocation in cannabis as explained a Ancient Pyramid building society in Egypt. 

For our show, let us define the following. 

Caylxes (buds) = The pyramids. 
Nutrients (both macro and micro) = The rocks
The roots = The rock quarry 
The leaves = The cement producing factories. 
The Stems and stalk = The rock moving slaves



The Pyramids (calyxes) 

Ok this one is easy, the rocks (nutes) get delivered here to build the pyramids bigger. They are the main sinks and do nothing but take rocks and add them to their structure. They are destination only and dont store any rocks for "later use). 

The rocks (nutes)

These are taken initially in the roots by much larger super slaves. These super slaves grab theses from the medium as large mountains, then smash them into the quarry into tiny pebbles like rocks for later usage. 


The rock quarry (roots) 

The rock quary becaomes the main storage unit for the plant because this is the best place to keep the rocks for long term success of the pyramids. The quarry can store many hundreds of billions of rocks during time of plenty (high ppms....1500 or so plus). They also contain slave drivers that are very greedy in watching over their quarry and the amount of rocks that it contains. They have a direct proportional effect on the speed how the rock moving slaves (stems and stalks) work according to the surplus in the quarry. 

The rock moving slaves (stems and stalks)

These are the slaves that move the rocks and deliver them to the sinks. There are a few rules these slaves live by. First they are lazy and will move rocks at only the speed the slave drives demand them to. Second they require water to both quench their thirst from working and lubricate the process of moving rocks. They simply take a rock from another slave and hand a rock to the next slave. They do this at the exact same time, so they almost always have a rock in their possession. If their rock is ever given to a sink and used, the slave drivers add another rock to the slaves. So their are approximately 100k slaves in our system so their are approximately 100k rocks in the system at all times give or take a 1k. 

Slaves can only handle rocks and cement. They cannot hold water. They do not have the ability to hold water. They cannot replace the rock (or cement) they carry with water. Instead if they do not have a rock to move, they get fat lazy and die within a short amount of time. Their death would also bring on the death of the pyramid building system as a whole. This is where the slave drivers come into play. When they notice the rock quarry getting low on resources, they slow the slaves down. The keep them working slow, until the quarry is reset to acceptable levels. If the quarry gets down to real low levels (lets say 10 times the amount of slaves or 1 million rocks) then this is a catastrophic event and the slave drivers have the slaves working at almost a standstill. That means no growth for our pyramids at all. 

Dont worry though, getting to this drastic level is not easy. It actually takes a long period of drought and famine (or lack of rocks). The slave drivers will also slow the slaves downs at other times. One is that they dont like to work in the extreme hot and cold. They sometimes start to slowly slow down work at about 90F and below 50F. But this is just a slight slow down, as would be a slowdown with two weeks of famine (two weeks of drought in a hydro system would be more like two months and result in collapse). But the important thing to take out of this is that the rocks in the system are always constant, the speed they are moved is what is changed. 


The cement producing factories (the cannabis leaves). 

These are the clerics and priests of our society. They take rocks and a piece of the sun and combine them to make pyramid cement (sugars). It is quite the miracle of the system really. Yet when the quarry starts to run out of supplies (or the large mountain grabbing slaves age and die) the cement producing factories are blamed and sacrificed. They fall near the plant in the desperate hope they will quickly decompose providing more mountains (micro and macro nutes) for the quarry. 


Thats the school house rock of it. Also my numbers are simply arbitrary.

**Edit--Just to be clear I am also in the step down nutes group. I am two-three weeks out right now and have my nutes below 700ish. The last week will be 500-600. I dont have scientific backing on this so I dont go around spouting it as a "must do". I mainly do it because I dont notice much of a difference and really dont like flushing my nutes away if I dont have to, even if its not really that much cost wise. Just something I do. Again, I do it...its a quirk of my grow, so I dont run around saying if you dont do it your a idiot...because I dont have any scientific backing. Just feelings.


----------



## ru4r34l (Jan 15, 2013)

Sir.Ganga said:


> Do a little research on having your meds tested, pay the couple hundred dollars and see for yourself what actually was in it! I think you non-believers will be quite suprised to see what you are actually smoking.
> 
> This is the only true test that will proove this theory. People you can't keep saying "well if its on the internet".
> 
> Taste aside I have seen what I was smoking and personally...I would rather smoke bugs than some of the products we introduce, chemical or organic.


Quite intresting that you would rather smoke bugs than your own grown herb , what exatcly were you indroducing into your feeding 

I have had my bud tested and I use AN "Snake Oils" and there was nothing unexpected, I have two strains that I have recently sent for testing and I am sure the results will be fine.

regards,


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 15, 2013)

akula said:


> Dude like I said, whole books are written on single aspects of this process. This small forum post simply touches on the basics. You cant expect someone to do your work for you and spend hundreds of hours of their time developing a synopsis of their research so you can get the information you wanted right? Not hear at least maybe on their own site to increase traffic. That post (not the exact thread but one of the more original varieties) is what set me on my quest to research the points made. Anyone that is really interested in their own knowledge of the subject that has the time would do the same. One good place to start is Botany for Dummies (no really it is).
> 
> But with that said I like the old School House Rock shows. Do you remember those? Simplified very complex topics and cartoonified and personafied it so that even kids could understand? OK so how about a school house rock version of translocation?
> 
> ...


Thanks i think. I hope that was a cut and paste job because thats alot of typing otherwise. 
Your right, that is some pretty basic info lol. Im a little past that point but thanks regardless.
I have a huge garden in my back yard that takes up a good chunk of my time when were in the right season so ive read up on basic botany and such, i belive that i was the one who first added that nitrogen was a mobile nutrient in the phloem an xylem. If you were trying to help me with this post i apreciate it, but i still cant tell if its an insult  these flush/no flush threads get pretty heated sometimes. Thanks for your end feeding regiment. That sheds some light on your opinion of the topic. Quick questions..soil or hydro, organic or synthetic, sea of green or tree?


----------



## akula (Jan 15, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> Thanks i think. I hope that was a cut and paste job because thats alot of typing otherwise.
> Your right, that is some pretty basic info lol. Im a little past that point but thanks regardless.
> I have a huge garden in my back yard that takes up a good chunk of my time when were in the right season so ive read up on basic botany and such, i belive that i was the one who first added that nitrogen was a mobile nutrient in the phloem an xylem. If you were trying to help me with this post i apreciate it, but i still cant tell if its an insult  these flush/no flush threads get pretty heated sometimes. Thanks for your end feeding regiment. That sheds some light on your opinion of the topic. Quick questions..soil or hydro, organic or synthetic, sea of green or tree?


No it wasn't an insult and no I didn't cut and paste anything. But yes sometimes people play the "ehh I dont really believe in your scientific link there, since I can always taste chemicals in my weeds....I will put my "faith into that" and yes that gets frustrating. I figured I would just put is out there in a simple format, not particularly for you even though I responded to you. 

I am almost full on coco coir now. Best of both worlds IMHO. I still do most of my clones in dirt, because of clone exchange I am part of demands it and I sell my excess clones and it just makes it all around easier not to have to explain that its coco coir and not dirt their clones are in. I do some testing (rarely) with a small vertical hydro set up. But I hardly ever set it up anymore, no need and I am limited with my plants. I use a mix of organic and synthetic. I use Canna Coco and Soul Synthetics and roots organics mainly, but still use Calmag+ and Pro-TeKt. I dont use SOG because as a medical grower with fixed amount of plants for my patients, it just doesn't make sense. I use scrog on occasion but it really is a pain in the ass IMO. I top and then use LST in a swastika like pattern when growing from seed. Just normal circular lst or "tree" if I am being lazy from clones. Use roots organic fabric pots at all times.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 15, 2013)

Uncle Pirate said:


> Have actually you had your bud tested, or are you speculating? What kind of test and where? A guy on here, Huel Perkins, took his unflushed bud and had it tested. The results came back fine, no foreign chemicals or heavy metals were found.


That would be a good link


----------



## BeaverHuntr (Jan 15, 2013)

Nightmarecreature said:


> There is no difference in taste from flushed or unflushed bud. It's all about the approach of harvesting and drying.
> 
> Where you went wrong with the unflushed bud, is that it's best to chop the whole plant from the base, remove the fan leaves and hang the entire plant. Then trim the sugar leaves dry after 12 days and then put them in jars to cure.
> 
> ...


I have to agree with this , not about the flushing but about hanging the whole plant. In my noob years I would always cut the branches and hang that way then I took some advice and chopped at the base, hung the whole plant and started trimming that way.. Buds tasted much better.


----------



## HeartlandHank (Jan 15, 2013)

BeaverHuntr said:


> I have to agree with this , not about the flushing but about hanging the whole plant. In my noob years I would always cut the branches and hang that way then I took some advice and chopped at the base, hung the whole plant and started trimming that way.. Buds tasted much better.


I find that when I hang whole plants that by the time I get the buds manicured and in a jar half the resin is sitting on the table.

When I cut into branches and trim/manicure while the plants are still wet my buds look pristine when they go into jars. The resin glands are not nearly as delicate when wet. Also the amount of handling when trimming wet and in smaller branches is a fraction of drying a whole plant.

I think that it is not so much a whole plant that makes for a good taste as it is a slow dry... although drying a plant whole with sugar leaves on will help a plant dry slower... that is not the only way possible to get a good slow dry.

I find that 2 weeks minimum for dry is best... The longer you can keep the buds damp the better. High humidity for the first 3-5 days does wonders. Obviously, you run risk of mold.

When I was a noob I was hanging whole plants... I've gone back and forth.. but these days i cut into 8-12 inch branches and fully manicure. Dry over 2 weeks... it's not the best, but it is my preferred balance of being easy and effective (quality).

Fitting 4+ lbs of buds (dried) in its post harvest state in a 3x2x5 cabinet requires a sacrifice or two.... i'm still dreaming of a warehouse.


----------



## HeartlandHank (Jan 15, 2013)

BigBuddahCheese said:


> Common sense is to give the plant what it "NEEDS" for growth and there is NEVER a NEED to flush.
> 
> Look at Organic growers like SuperSoil.. they ONLY add water there is NEVER flushing, as the nutrients are in the soil and never added. If they just flushed at the end with water, its exactly as they did the entire grow. The plants in SS take what they need, and they claim there buds are superior?
> 
> ...


Common sense is flushing a toilet after using it rather than using a cup to scoop out your shit and throw it in the garbage. What you have listed above is your opinion. There is quite a difference.

Even professional controlled studies, in a lab, by universities do not make definite claims like people are making on RIU.

Just saying... growing dope and finding your preferred methods is far from "research".


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 15, 2013)

HeartlandHank said:


> I find that when I hang whole plants that by the time I get the buds manicured and in a jar half the resin is sitting on the table.
> 
> When I cut into branches and trim/manicure while the plants are still wet my buds look pristine when they go into jars. The resin glands are not nearly as delicate when wet. Also the amount of handling when trimming wet and in smaller branches is a fraction of drying a whole plant.
> 
> ...


Thanks double H, if the plants are healthy and happy there shouldnt be a high humidity concern right? I like the not whole approach myself too. It looks more professional IMPO. And you catch more sugar


----------



## HeartlandHank (Jan 16, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> Thanks double H, if the plants are healthy and happy there shouldnt be a high humidity concern right? I like the not whole approach myself too. It looks more professional IMPO. And you catch more sugar


 I would think that if you have genetics with decent mold resistance and a clean environment then high humidity would be less of a risk..
I have had some genetics that I could not slow dry because there was always little PM during flower... Romulan, Apollo 11, and some old old mothers that were past their glory days. I;m not a clean freak, but by no means was my garden filthy either.

I also do not use circulation fans in my drying space... nothing but a very very low cfm exhaust. Then I also set the exhaust to a timer and sort of toy with it based on how fast they are drying and humidity... i guess a humidistat would be great for that. early in the dry the fan runs 24/7. by the end of the dry it is only running for 15 minute intervals, 3-4 times a day.

My super hazy SSH plant is a mold resistant champ... I slow dry those buds as slow as I have the time/dry space free.

I hear you... branches are just so much easier to work with too. I think that handling is a much overlooked importance of the dry/cure process. There is quite a difference between rough handled and delicately handled buds. When I manicured dry whole plants I would go through boxes of latex gloves... all those dirty gloves are your potency going to the garbage. Sure, you can get them off with alcohol and evaporate, but i would rather have that resin on my buds.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 16, 2013)

HeartlandHank said:


> I would think that if you have genetics with decent mold resistance and a clean environment then high humidity would be less of a risk..
> I have had some genetics that I could not slow dry because there was always little PM during flower... Romulan, Apollo 11, and some old old mothers that were past their glory days. I;m not a clean freak, but by no means was my garden filthy either.
> 
> I also do not use circulation fans in my drying space... nothing but a very very low cfm exhaust. Then I also set the exhaust to a timer and sort of toy with it based on how fast they are drying and humidity... i guess a humidistat would be great for that. early in the dry the fan runs 24/7. by the end of the dry it is only running for 15 minute intervals, 3-4 times a day.
> ...


Or in my hash pipe


----------



## jpill (Jan 16, 2013)

VTMi'kmaq said:


> you can inundate me with this experts opinion and all the literature at the smithsonian, im good i know what works for me and i dont need a disertation on plant root mechanics to know what works for me. thats laying off anything but straight water for the last two weeks. Call it what you will. It works for me and thats all i care about. have fun! I eat lego's too!


flush with straight water for two weeks!? Man, you're really fucking yourself !!


----------



## 209 Cali closet grower (Jan 16, 2013)

where getting there


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 16, 2013)

jpill said:


> flush with straight water for two weeks!? Man, you're really fucking yourself !!


Question...what if you have a plant that is as green as the day you flipped her to flower. Lush and healthy green. Never dropped a leaf without it being rubbed off. No sign of age or deterioration at all and looks like itll stay growing way past the due date of your already nicely swollen harvest...still no two week water run to kill her a little bit? Comments


----------



## Vincent VonBlown (Jan 16, 2013)

Sure I agree, the first post is spot on. 

Reminds me of girdling, remember that old columbian and mexican gold. They stripped the stalk right out in the field, so the pot would oxidize faster. And the 
chlorophyll will leave more quickly.


----------



## BeaverHuntr (Jan 16, 2013)

HeartlandHank said:


> I find that when I hang whole plants that by the time I get the buds manicured and in a jar half the resin is sitting on the table.
> 
> When I cut into branches and trim/manicure while the plants are still wet my buds look pristine when they go into jars. The resin glands are not nearly as delicate when wet. Also the amount of handling when trimming wet and in smaller branches is a fraction of drying a whole plant.
> 
> ...



I live in AZ with like 16% humidity at all times..But maybe thats why hanging the whole plant works for me so well because it gives me "slow dry" especially for having such low humidity by hanging the whole plant it takes 7-10 days here in AZ to dry and be ready for the jars


----------



## WIskyDick (Jan 16, 2013)

BeaverHuntr said:


> I live in AZ with like 16% humidity at all times..But maybe thats why hanging the whole plant works for me so well because it gives me "slow dry" especially for having such low humidity by hanging the whole plant it takes 7-10 days here in AZ to dry and be ready for the jars


16% rh? That seems awfully dry to me I have added a small humidifier to keep a room closer 65-70% rh to keep a good long dry. Even at 40%rh my buds dry up tooooooo fast! 16% for me would crisp my plants into dust when I touch them! (in my experiences & most of everyone ik) not saying your wrong. but maybe for a whole plant hang and dry 16% works but seems very dry to me even for hanging the whole thing untrimmed....?


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 16, 2013)

Vincent VonBlown said:


> Sure I agree, the first post is spot on.
> 
> Reminds me of girdling, remember that old columbian and mexican gold. They stripped the stalk right out in the field, so the pot would oxidize faster. And the
> chlorophyll will leave more quickly.


This is turning into a good thread, lots of pro wizdom at this table. Nice to see someone with some backstory supporting the OP.


----------



## masterbasians (Jan 16, 2013)

hey guys, im not trying to say i know some shit, but im just kinda puttin in my 2 cents so dont hate on me for it
so, im just kinda reading inputs, i thought the pyramid was very logical in some ways but not in others
such as, u refer to the "slaves" but i would consider it like a co-owner in a business
because, the plant works as a whole, which is why i like a pyramid as a reference, but its not like the slaves don't want to take the nutrients, it's like, if u worked for a company that u had some peice of ownership in, you want it to succeed, because that makes yourself succeed as well.
but i agree that there would be an example of 100k of stone moving through the plants at a time, because the plant will take what it will USE, not necessarily what it needs. I mean it's a living thing, we are not MAKING it grow, it will grow outside unattended, but i beleive we are trying to HELP it grow the best way we believe.

so with that said, the plant taking everything that it will use, what happens to npk, i've seen reference to spraying nutes on your buds and then smoking them, to see if u taste a difference. does it stay npk in the buds or does it break down and convert to buds, sugars, leaves, stock, etc.?
and after its npk but before its buds, what is it?


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 16, 2013)

masterbasians said:


> hey guys, im not trying to say i know some shit, but im just kinda puttin in my 2 cents so dont hate on me for it
> so, im just kinda reading inputs, i thought the pyramid was very logical in some ways but not in others
> such as, u refer to the "slaves" but i would consider it like a co-owner in a business
> because, the plant works as a whole, which is why i like a pyramid as a reference, but its not like the slaves don't want to take the nutrients, it's like, if u worked for a company that u had some peice of ownership in, you want it to succeed, because that makes yourself succeed as well.
> ...


And then this happens?? Oh boy lol


----------



## akula (Jan 16, 2013)

masterbasians if you were to look more in depth into the xylem/phloem vascular system you would find out they are exactly that, slaves. But ok if slaves is a bit too hard of a term for you, you can say co-owner if you want. A co-owner that has one simple labor intensive job that others tell him how hard to and fast to do that job. But politically correctness and all.....

I made it pretty simplistic in my analogy before, but the fact of the matter is that I sort of combined the xylem and phloem into one group that I called the slaves.....err or co-owners. The fact of the matter is that they are two separate distinct systems. The xylem system brings the nutes to the leaves to produce carbs and sugars that are then transported by the phloem system to the sinks through fluid dynamics. The the calyxes (buds) dont do any processing, they only build. They take the raw materials and build the reproductive systems. The ultimate goal is to combine these with outside production (pollen) obviously. No storage (even short term) is done in the calyxes. The raw materials are used immediately. Your macro and micro nutrients have already be converted to energy long before they even get to the sinks.


----------



## BeaverHuntr (Jan 16, 2013)

WIskyDick said:


> 16% rh? That seems awfully dry to me I have added a small humidifier to keep a room closer 65-70% rh to keep a good long dry. Even at 40%rh my buds dry up tooooooo fast! 16% for me would crisp my plants into dust when I touch them! (in my experiences & most of everyone ik) not saying your wrong. but maybe for a whole plant hang and dry 16% works but seems very dry to me even for hanging the whole thing untrimmed....?


Yeah man its that dry up here in the desert. I was always taught to jar them up when the buds feel "dry to the touch" I never get over dried buds and I do know what over dried buds feel like because my very first grow I over dried my buds, but maybe I will try to throw a couple humidifiers in the room and see if that changes anything. I have no complaints about my finished buds though they are always sticky icky and dense after a 14 day cure. Anyways I'll look into raising the R/H.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 16, 2013)

akula said:


> masterbasians if you were to look more in depth into the xylem/phloem vascular system you would find out they are exactly that, slaves. But ok if slaves is a bit too hard of a term for you, you can say co-owner if you want. A co-owner that has one simple labor intensive job that others tell him how hard to and fast to do that job. But politically correctness and all.....
> 
> I made it pretty simplistic in my analogy before, but the fact of the matter is that I sort of combined the xylem and phloem into one group that I called the slaves.....err or co-owners. The fact of the matter is that they are two separate distinct systems. The xylem system brings the nutes to the leaves to produce carbs and sugars that are then transported by the phloem system to the sinks through fluid dynamics. The the calyxes (buds) dont do any processing, they only build. They take the raw materials and build the reproductive systems. The ultimate goal is to combine these with outside production (pollen) obviously. No storage (even short term) is done in the calyxes. The raw materials are used immediately. Your macro and micro nutrients have already be converted to energy long before they even get to the sinks.


Nice post, good science thanks,
So then since the leaves as you say do the energy convertion and move the necessary food to buds. I would assume they store excess useable nutrients aswell correct or not?

Another question, are you talking about the fan leaves or the leaves covered in tricombes that are in the bud? I know they will both convert energy but which one is the main provider of the carbs and sugars? Do they have different functions or are they primarily the same function? Thanks


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 16, 2013)

Also one more thing, Akula, if you say that the reproductive calyxes store no food storage then there can never be a build up of excess nutrients in the bud....no way no how?


----------



## jpill (Jan 16, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> Question...what if you have a plant that is as green as the day you flipped her to flower. Lush and healthy green. Never dropped a leaf without it being rubbed off. No sign of age or deterioration at all and looks like itll stay growing way past the due date of your already nicely swollen harvest...still no two week water run to kill her a little bit? Comments


water molecules have a weak bond to fertilizer molecules so flushing with plain water is not really the way to achieve what you want. IMO you are better off flushing with molasses Or an omri rated sweetener like ("Sugaree" from cutting edge) Or ("final" from Bloom yellow bottles) Or even nutrients at quarter strength. A lot of people don't realize that you gain ALOT of weight in the last weeks of the plants life.


----------



## jpill (Jan 16, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> Also one more thing, Akula, if you say that the reproductive calyxes store no food storage then there can never be a build up of excess nutrients in the bud....no way no how?


the plants roots take up what nutrients it wants it doesn't "store" any nutrients per say.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 16, 2013)

jpill said:


> water molecules have a weak bond to fertilizer molecules so flushing with plain water is not really the way to achieve what you want. IMO you are better off flushing with molasses Or an omri rated sweetener like ("Sugaree" from cutting edge) Or ("final" from Bloom yellow bottles) Or even nutrients at quarter strength. A lot of people don't realize that you gain ALOT of weight in the last weeks of the plants life.


Thank you, i was thinking about a banana compound sugar sub since my roots are well off or just quarter strength. Then running water up unto chop for 6-7 days. Sweet.


----------



## akula (Jan 17, 2013)

Lo


Ninjabowler said:


> Also one more thing, Akula, if you say that the reproductive calyxes store no food storage then there can never be a build up of excess nutrients in the bud....no way no how?


The calyxes don't use raw nutes, so what you mean by "food" is the plants processed products they use internally. And yes the xylems do not go to the sinks. And yes the calyxes are not storage, the "food" that has been previously processed and delivered by phleoms is never stored because it would break down too quickly is used to build when it is delivered. Now before you make any claim from this statement, you must first be able to define a calyex and know how they are defined in what we refer to as bud. 

As I said earlier, this is not a topic we can not just give a quick tl;dr and have everyone go....oh yeah I get it now.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 17, 2013)

D. Storage of food

Fleshy leaves of Indian aloe, Portulaca and fleshy scale leaves of onion store food materials and water for the future of the plants. Fleshy and suc*culent leaves of xerophytic plants grow*ing in desert area always store a huge quantity of water, mucilage and food materials.

dioxide and water to simple glucose sugars in the presence of sunlight. This food is used (and stored) by the plant to grow and reproduce. As plants are able to produce "food" they are normally

^^ these two quotes seem to disagree with what you say of the leaf not storing food. Id rather not argue because nothing is accomplished through yelling and this is quoted from the internet so the validity my be limited. 

The reasons i figured that plants would store nutrients in leaves and excess nutrient are just visual observations. When the plant stretches sometimes it can turn some of the leaves yellow. This to me seems like its useing some of its stored energy from leaves.

Oohhh my lights just came on...

The other reason is when theres an over abundance of nitrogen in the fertilizer the leaves turn dark green. Also when theres a deficiency they seem to be getting sucked dry of their nitrogen and chloropyhill in lower zones, i would think..to be used in other more pertinant proccesses.

Another observation relevant would be during a flush period where the leaves all seem like theyre sucked dry.

Thats why i asked...im no plant scientist myself, im just trying to figure it all out.
*edit - this relates to jpills comment*


----------



## k0ijn (Jan 17, 2013)

This thread is a mess.

At least Akula & jpill use scientific research and publications to support their conclusions.


First of all, this thread is started on a fallacious basis.

We're talking about PRE-HARVEST FLUSHING here. Not flushing.
You have to first of all make a distinction between pre-harvest flushing and flushing in general.
It seems like the OP doesn't quite know what he is talking about.
He is correct in some conclusions and utterly mistaken in a lot of other conclusions.

Back to pre-harvest flushing vs. flushing;
One is good for nothing, the other can be used to clear a salt-buildup, error correction etc.

The easiest way to deconstruct the pro pre-harvest flushing theories is to focus on the nutrients, trans-location and usage.
The calyxes do not store nutrients.
There is a huge misunderstanding with regards to this topic.
People think that the nutrients used in growing automatically go to the calyxes (buds) and build up, leaving you with harsh tasting bud if you don't flush.
There is absolutely no proof of this being true.
In fact, scientific evidence shows that nutrients are stored primarily in the roots, stem(s) and leaves (fan leaves in particular).

Some nutrients are mobile, others aren't. That is why some parts of the plant reacts strongly to a deficiency, since the plant can't just move more nutrients to the distressed areas, it needs another feeding to solve the deficiency.

I get what jpill is saying, and he is somewhat correct in saying that no storage really occurs.
Since trans-location and usage of nutrients is very fluid and organic.
The only time you will see a 'storage' of nutrients in cannabis is if you overfeed.
And we're talking a proper abundance here, not just 5-10% overfeeding.


This subject has been discussed endlessly and it seems like we will never reach a consensus.

On the one side we have people who trust what science, logic and facts spell out.
On the other side we have people who will do it the way they always have done it and don't care about scientific research or facts.

That is fine, they can do whatever they want to. Anyone can do whatever they want to.

But don't claim pre-harvest flushing improves weed when you have zero proof.
It's in the same fallacy group as people who urge you to believe anything with evidence.


I will quote a post I've posted several times, in numerous different threads.
In which I explain the controversy of pre-harvest flushing in detail.
It's a long read, but if you're interested in the discussion you should read it.




k0ijn said:


> All the information is out there, you can find it with a simple search of the forums.
> 
> But just to rest the case I've gathered up the points and links in one post (this is quotes of what I've written):
> 
> ...


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 17, 2013)

^^ nice post kOjin. Your kinda right, this tread is a little of a mess but its still in the direction of the OP. Also my question line is leading somewhere just so you know. I just noticed though that you stated that nutrients are stored in roots, stem(s), leaves (primarily fan leaves) but then said that that you could see what jpill was saying and no extra nutrients are stored. Most of the growers i know feed way too high ppm, and as for saying that anyone knows the optimal nutrient doseage, if there was say twenty dip sticks in the plant we would know what optimal is, theres is not twenty dip sticks so over feeding in one area at certain points in the plants development is almost unavoidable when constantly adding fertilizer especially chemical fertilizer right?


----------



## AltarNation (Jan 17, 2013)

fwiw, my first harvest got hung up in big pieces with all leaves, took a solid 12 days to dry. I was worried about it at the time, but the smoke was amazing. Even before curing it was not harsh at all. No flush.

My second harvest took 3 days to dry. It was trimmed up before hand to try something different. No flush here either. It smoked comparably worse. Significantly worse even.

I really have nothing to say about whether or not you SHOULD flush, but I will say with some certainty that long dry time is better and essentially cures the bud a good bit. Manage the humidity and keep the air moving and it's not going to mold. 12 days is fine and dandy. 3 days was like no cure at all.


----------



## akula (Jan 17, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> ^^ these two quotes seem to disagree with what you say of the leaf not storing food. Id rather not argue because nothing is accomplished through yelling and this is quoted from the internet so the validity my be limited.


Was that directed toward me? Where did I ever say leaves did not have storage capacity for wither nutes or carbs/sugars? The leaves are conversion factories that take the micro/macro nutes and convert them into carbs sugars. To some degree the leaves will store both, but they are not the primary storage units, those are stems and stalks. The reason they are considered primary is because the are the direct connection links to the sinks. 

Now I have a suspicion you may be a bit confused about what constitutes a calyx. Or maybe that response was not directed toward me.

**edit I just noticed your edit and guess it wasn't directed at me. 

Anyways I also noticed you asked this



Ninjabowler said:


> The other reason is when theres an over abundance of nitrogen in the fertilizer the leaves turn dark green. Also when theres a deficiency they seem to be getting sucked dry of their nitrogen and chloropyhill in lower zones, i would think..to be used in other more pertinant proccesses.
> 
> *Another observation relevant would be during a flush period where the leaves all seem like theyre sucked dry.*


Yes plants will cannibalize themselves in times of drought/famine for preservation. But remember, the leaves are energy producers. That means they use the micro/macro nutrients as to produce carbs/sugars for use in the sinks. 

Take a look at this very....very simplified illustration it might help understanding what I am talking about. 



Notice how the xylem do not connect to the reproduction sink? Now they call the leaves and roots sinks because they are sinks. In our case they are the main sinks in the veg stage, in flowering they quickly become less important as a sink (to where the end of the life, you will see leaves start to die no matter what you do).

And in case anyone is confused at this point, the phloem transport energy made in the leaves...aka carbs/sugars.


----------



## WIskyDick (Jan 17, 2013)

BeaverHuntr said:


> Yeah man its that dry up here in the desert. I was always taught to jar them up when the buds feel "dry to the touch" I never get over dried buds and I do know what over dried buds feel like because my very first grow I over dried my buds, but maybe I will try to throw a couple humidifiers in the room and see if that changes anything. I have no complaints about my finished buds though they are always sticky icky and dense after a 14 day cure. Anyways I'll look into raising the R/H.


 I just find that when I raised my RH and keep them moist longer I get better taste and more weight at the end. I to dry them til they are dry to the touch, but I also feel that there is wrong conditions to use the (dry to the touch) timing. If it's too low RH and hot I have experienced that they can dry out from middle more than the eye or fingers can feel just losing a bit too much moisture to fast. I preferably like it moderately cooler and with a RH of %55 -%60 seems to be optimal for how I dry and cure. But drying and curing is like reading a MEN's Health Magazine finding the best work out, every month there is a new work out plan for the best abs!..lol so take it for what it's worth. I'm sure your buds are proper and headie! with 6,000 posts I'm sure you know more than I do.. Just My two cents.


----------



## k0ijn (Jan 17, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> ^^ nice post kOjin. Your kinda right, this tread is a little of a mess but its still in the direction of the OP. Also my question line is leading somewhere just so you know. I just noticed though that you stated that nutrients are stored in roots, stem(s), leaves (primarily fan leaves) but then said that that you could see what jpill was saying and no extra nutrients are stored. Most of the growers i know feed way too high ppm, and as for saying that anyone knows the optimal nutrient doseage, if there was say twenty dip sticks in the plant we would know what optimal is, theres is not twenty dip sticks so over feeding in one area at certain points in the plants development is almost unavoidable when constantly adding fertilizer especially chemical fertilizer right?



We're talking about context here.
Nutrients are taken up by the plant as ions and then goes through changes during the translocation and eventual processes which the plants use them for.
What I meant with regards to jpill is that your argument seemed to be faced towards the production of sugars and not the retention of nutrients.
And in either case; Nutrients are not stored per se.
Nutrient uptake and conversion is very rapid, in normally fed gardens you will rarely see a nutrient storage in the plant.
Nutrient storage only really occurs during overfeeding, especially in new growth.
This is when a plant can retain as much as up to 10 times the amount of nutrients it would normally have in it's material.
This differs of course from roots to stems and so on, but you can see the picture I linked for more info.

No it's not unavoidable to refrain from attaining an abundance of nutrients in the plant.
This goes back to the misinformation and misconceptions surrounding flushing and pre-harvest flushing.
You don't need to flush anything unless some sort of error or accident happens.

I'd say that those who grow in soil use flushing rather frequently.
Not pre-harvest flushing. But flushing. 
Because the soil can retain some unused salts and other minerals which will then build up over time.

In hydroponics this is usually not a problem if you just change the water regularly between grows.
It's all down to hygiene really, if you clean your pots and equipment properly then you will never run in to such a problem (unless of course an accident happens, like a nutrient spill from the container etc).
And again, please remember that it's not really a problem a lot of people run in to.
Most people I know don't overfeed or have salt buildups etc.
The optimal nutrient dose is something you learn with experience and by looking at the plants.
It's not that hard really, it's just down to; pay attention to details.

And I'd like to point out that there really isn't any difference between chem fertilizer and whatever other fert you may use.
Nitrogen ions are nitrogen ions, and just because it's synthetically produced does not mean it sticks more to the plant or your equipment.

Whether there's a difference in how the plant grows and performs on synthetic nutrients vs. organic is another discussion.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 17, 2013)

kOijin, thanks for taking the time to chat with me. Where i was going with my question is here, since leaves can store excess food to some degree, and chlorophyll, and the buds contain chlorophyll that all have to go through a chemichal reaction to reach an optimal curetime. And we intend to dry the buds and small amount of leaf debris that inherently stays after trimming to smoke. Wouldnt the OPs claim that unflushed buds vs flushed buds dry time be noticably different be correct? The time, i belive was the main point he was stating and its relation to doing or not doing a flush. The time is the test, maybe its his take on everything else which may grab people the wrong way but i believe hi main point makes sence, do you?


----------



## GK1 (Jan 17, 2013)

Ok, I dont have time to read all this BS but let me tell ya something about synthetic chelators.....they cling to the root and allow absorption while not being absorbed. They are left free, looking for the next ion to grab and make available to the plant. That ion can be heavy metals just as easy as NPK. As time goes on you add more nutes, thus more synthetic chelators and the potential for heavy metal absorption increases.....on and on. Hmmm, no benefit to flushing? Child please. Peace.


----------



## GK1 (Jan 18, 2013)

One of the problems to understanding this is looking at nutes as "food" rather than building blocks.....the phloem flows/carries pre-photosynthesis and the Xylem flows/carries post photosynthesis. Nute ions are used as building blocks rather than food that is consumed, this concept helps to understand the translocation of nutes around the plant when def occurs. To say they "store" NPK is a misnomer however. They store sugar/carbs. Temp dif can be used to encourage a storage of carbs during veg and to spur the later utilization during bloom. Peace.


----------



## ruudong (Jan 18, 2013)

all i know is i flushed 1 plant,
kept nutes going in second plant ,
the plant that i flushed was ready sooner and tasted great 

the plant i did not flush took longer to finish yield was more or less the same 
but the taste was very harsh on the chest and lost a lot of the original flavor this was using strain blue cheese


----------



## littlegiant (Jan 18, 2013)

Wow! spent an hour reading all the posts here and everyone has a different scientific theory on this with not one shred of evidence that flushing is better or does nothing.
The only evidence is personal preference.
So here is my scientific theory.
I would never shit and piss in my toilet every day for a few months without flushing.
Whyyyy? Duh!


----------



## zubey91 (Jan 18, 2013)

littlegiant said:


> Wow! spent an hour reading all the posts here and everyone has a different scientific theory on this with not one shred of evidence that flushing is better or does nothing.
> The only evidence is personal preference.
> So here is my scientific theory.
> I would never shit and piss in my toilet every day for a few months without flushing.
> Whyyyy? Duh!


Lol
(makes farting sound)


----------



## akula (Jan 18, 2013)

GK1 said:


> One of the problems to understanding this is looking at nutes as "food" rather than building blocks.....the phloem flows/carries pre-photosynthesis and the Xylem flows/carries post photosynthesis. Nute ions are used as building blocks rather than food that is consumed, this concept helps to understand the translocation of nutes around the plant when def occurs. To say they "store" NPK is a misnomer however. They store sugar/carbs. Temp dif can be used to encourage a storage of carbs during veg and to spur the later utilization during bloom. Peace.


Your partially right here. You did however confuse the xylem/phloem systems. Xylem is the upward flow driven by surface tension and destination leaves. Phloem is the "downward" system driven by osmotic pressure differences that carries sugars/carbs to the sinks.


----------



## k0ijn (Jan 18, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> kOijin, thanks for taking the time to chat with me. Where i was going with my question is here, since leaves can store excess food to some degree, and chlorophyll, and the buds contain chlorophyll that all have to go through a chemichal reaction to reach an optimal curetime. And we intend to dry the buds and small amount of leaf debris that inherently stays after trimming to smoke. Wouldnt the OPs claim that unflushed buds vs flushed buds dry time be noticably different be correct? The time, i belive was the main point he was stating and its relation to doing or not doing a flush. The res of the OP was just his take on everything else which may grab people the wrong way but i believe hi main point makes sence, do you?


There are a few variables which can change how quickly the plant material dries.
Let's assume that the two plants were grown to the same extent, with similar calyxes and hydration.
The only difference; one was fertilized all the way to chop. The other was given only water 2-3 weeks (or whatever time) up to chop.

There would not be a difference in those two, drying wise, since the hydration which saturates the plants would be equal and therefore evaporate equally.
The difference in nutrient levels would not affect the drying time. I'll get back to the difference in nutrient levels further down.

Whether there would be a difference in chlorophyll and how large/small it might be is very difficult to say.
Most growers don't let their calyxes wither, and therefore most growers will basically hover around a normal chlorophyll level in the sugar leaves and calyxes.
Some may have deficient fan leaves, others might not.
But the part of the plant we're smoking does usually not vary in moisture level, nutrient levels nor chlorophyll levels.

What truly affects the drying time is the water potential, the tissue water content so to speak.
To clarify; The water retention and moisture inside the plant determines how long it takes to dry the plant (including the calyxes).
Of course variables like humidity, temperature etc. would all affect the time, but I assume we're talking exact same variables for both and thus it's irrelevant.


The difference in levels of nutrients, I would stipulate, is not great enough to be noticeable.
What you see is a 3 times higher nutrient concentration in normally fed plants vs. a deficiency (which pre-harvest flushins causes).
But the concentration in normally fed plants is really not that high.
In facts it's rather low.
When we measure how large the concentration is, we measure in ions in millimolar (mM).
And what you see is around ~0.5 - ~9 ions in the leaf material, in normally fed plants.
In deficient plants you see; ~0.2 - ~3 ions in leaf material.

The levels are really quite low, if you look at how many ions you have in a grain of salt it's: 6.97 X 10^17.
This number is very large, if I were to type it out for you it would look something like this; 6,970,000,000,000,000,000.00 -
I've probably made an error there typing it out, but you get the point, it's around 6.97 quadrillion. 

And yet some people claim they can taste, smell and feel a difference (harshness wise etc.) between pre-harvest flushed weed and normally grown weed.
I find this strange.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 18, 2013)

k0ijn said:


> There are a few variables which can change how quickly the plant material dries.
> Let's assume that the two plants were grown to the same extent, with similar calyxes and hydration.
> The only difference; one was fertilized all the way to chop. The other was given only water 2-3 weeks (or whatever time) up to chop.
> 
> ...


You say that the difference in moisture content in a pre harvest flush plant vs. a non flushed plant is the same but i disagree. Which is fine, no biggie. From my limited expirence ive noticed non flushed plants remain more vital at chop with more moisture rich green matter on the plant where the flushed plant has cannibalized itself and dried the leaves out to the point where a vigorus shake removes them. This is why i agree with the OP and thats why i posted the question earlier, if i should flush a hydro plant that is still as green as the day i flipped the lights oh her and shes almost done, just to kill her a bit already. Although it would be in my best interest to poke you with a couple more questions since you are a fountain of knowledge ill save it for another day. Thanks for the info.


----------



## k0ijn (Jan 18, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> You say that the difference in moisture content in a pre harvest flush plant vs. a non flushed plant is the same but i disagree. Which is fine, no biggie. From my limited expirence ive noticed non flushed plants remain more vital at chop with more moisture rich green matter on the plant where the flushed plant has cannibalized itself and dried the leaves out to the point where a vigorus shake removes them. This is why i agree with the OP and thats why i posted the question earlier, if i should flush a hydro plant that is still as green as the day i flipped the lights oh her and shes almost done, just to kill her a bit already. Although it would be in my best interest to poke you with a couple more questions since you are a fountain of knowledge ill save it for another day. Thanks for the info.


You don't smoke the fan leaves.
You smoke the calyxes.

The only time I see "cannibalized" calyxes is when the plant is near death or has infestation or some other disease.

You have to remember that just because you've caused a deficiency in the fan leaves doesn't mean you've removed anything from the calyxes.
It takes quite a long time for a deficiency to negatively affect the calyxes, since the plant will start to feed on itself to sustain the flowering.
I think you are misunderstanding where the deficiency actually occurs.
And I would argue that most pre-harvest flushers don't flush their plants for so long a hard shake will rid the plant of fan leaves.
Most pre-harvest flushed plants I see have yellow leaves, showing a deficiency has begun to take hold but nowhere near dying leaves.
I don't know where you got the conclusion about pre-harvest flushed plants have dead fan leaves.
And even if they did have dead fan leaves it wouldn't necessarily mean the calyxes were yet affected.

Look at Rumples crop, he's a strong advocate of pre-harvest flushing.
His plants don't look dry nor particularly famished.
His calyxes look nice and green, sugar leaves are still dark green.
Those plants he just harvested (according to his thread) look vigorous and fresh.
My point is that moisture levels are roughly the same in calyxes in pre-harvest flushed & non-flushed plants.


Either way, there really is no difference in moisture levels unless we're comparing a nearly dead plant to a vigorous plant.
And I think it's fairly factual to say that no pre-harvest flushers allow their plants to dry up.
I have never heard the argument of drying up the plant before harvest by pre-harvest flushing, when you're still giving them water it's really an oxymoron.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 18, 2013)

k0ijn said:


> You don't smoke the fan leaves.
> You smoke the calyxes.
> 
> The only time I see "cannibalized" calyxes is when the plant is near death or has infestation or some other disease.
> ...


We dont smoke the fan leaves but we do smoke parts of the sugar coated bud leaves, and even yellowing leaves would mean less moisture content to me. I belive the OP said he chopped the whole plant and hung that. To me it seems that hanging a cannibalized yellowing flushed plant that there would be a difference in drying time from one fed all the way through thats lush still. I guess well just have to disagree on this one


----------



## Uncle Pirate (Jan 18, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> We dont smoke the fan leaves but we do smoke parts of the sugar coated bud leaves, and even yellowing leaves would mean less moisture content to me. I belive the OP said he chopped the whole plant and hung that. To me it seems that hanging a cannibalized yellowing flushed plant that there would be a difference in drying time from one fed all the way through thats lush still. I guess well just have to disagree on this one




You're like a 4 year old constantly asking questions and not ever understanding what's being said. Really, yellowing leaves means less moisture to you? Go grow some plants and quit frying your brain in here.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 18, 2013)

Uncle Pirate said:


> You're like a 4 year old constantly asking questions and not ever understanding what's being said. Really, yellowing leaves means less moisture to you? Go grow some plants and quit frying your brain in here.


Sure does, this leaf feels quite dry to me lol, nice to see you again pirate.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 18, 2013)

Uncle Pirate said:


> You're like a 4 year old constantly asking questions and not ever understanding what's being said. Really, yellowing leaves means less moisture to you? Go grow some plants and quit frying your brain in here.


Actually im like a one year old, im sucking everything up right now and developing opinions of my own so when im old and expirienced i can stop learning and always be right on every topic like you


----------



## Uncle Pirate (Jan 18, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> Sure does, this leaf feels quite dry to me lol, nice to see you again pirate.


It looks like it was ready to fall off, which would account for the dryness, not the lack of chlorophyll. Find a yellow leaf that you have to tug to get off.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 18, 2013)

Uncle Pirate said:


> It looks like it was ready to fall off, which would account for the dryness, not the lack of chlorophyll. Find a yellow leaf that you have to tug to get off.


How bout these two, theres still water leaking out of the yellowed one and the yellow ones noticably lighter, water depleted and chlorophyll robbed.


----------



## Uncle Pirate (Jan 18, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> How bout these two, theres still water leaking out of the yellowed one and the green ones noticably lighter, water depleted and chlorophyll robbed.


No shit? The one on the left is burnt to a crisp. You couldn't figure that one out just from using common sense?


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 18, 2013)

Uncle Pirate said:


> No shit? The one on the left is burnt to a crisp. You couldn't figure that one out just from using common sense?


That is a lower canopy fan leaf you say is burnt, and the top canopy leaves like the green one and all the others on her are not burnt....next guess please. This is why i can see the OPs point. Less water and chlorophyll should lead to a faster dry time when drying a whole hanging plant. Troll on UP, RIU is for learning and helping, were not here to listen to how many years youve been doing it the right way


----------



## k0ijn (Jan 18, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> We dont smoke the fan leaves but we do smoke parts of the sugar coated bud leaves, and even yellowing leaves would mean less moisture content to me. I belive the OP said he chopped the whole plant and hung that. To me it seems that hanging a cannibalized yellowing flushed plant that there would be a difference in drying time from one fed all the way through thats lush still. I guess well just have to disagree on this one


I think we're going around in circles now.
I already pointed out how pre-harvest flushing doesn't really affect the moisture levels or water retention of calyxes and sugar leaves.

Sugar leaves are almost never yellowing/shriveled nor dead upon harvest.
Unless some disease or major mistake has taken hold.
Show me a picture of a withering sugar leaf on a properly grown calyx.
Even the most stringent pre-harvest flushers don't let their plants starve to such an extreme that the calyxes suffer.


I will again advice you to look at Rumples newest harvest.
Rumple pre-harvest flushes, yet his calyxes look just like mine do.
They are not yellowing or dying. In fact the sugar leaves and the other green parts of the calyxes themselves look very dark green.
A sign of the nutrients taken from the fan leaves being translocated into the calyxes to keep flowering going, even under deficiency.
Some of the fan leaves however might be yellowing or shriveling, and I think that's where your confusion comes in.

Even if you do pre-harvest flush you won't see adverse affects on the calyxes and/or sugar leaves unless you let this deficiency continue for months.
This is the crux of my position.
You must not confuse withering fan leaves with how the other parts of the plant functions and how it affects water retention.
Fan leaves shrivel and die all the time during a plants growth, it's normal.
When it happens due to a deficiency it happens because the plant is noticing it's not getting a steady stream of nutrients and thus is feeds on it's production facilities (fan leaves, lesser importance to survival) to sustain the vital flowers (highly important for survival).
Just because you pre-harvest flush it doesn't mean you draw out moisture from the calyxes nor the sugar leaves, because you are still giving the plants water.

The pictures you have shown here are of fan leaves and it really has no relevance to water potential (retention possibilities) in the cellular membranes.
You are seeing withering fan leaves and concluding that this must mean the plant has lost water and will dry quicker.
When in fact the stem(s), sugar leaves, calyxes, roots and everything but the fan leaves will still have the same moisture levels as always (unless you don't feed them any water, in which case the entire plant will shrivel and die obviously).


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 18, 2013)

k0ijn said:


> I think we're going around in circles now.
> I already pointed out how pre-harvest flushing doesn't really affect the moisture levels or water retention of calyxes and sugar leaves.
> 
> Sugar leaves are almost never yellowing/shriveled nor dead upon harvest.
> ...


Yup, that why im saying that were going to disagree. I see lack of chlorophyll and water speeding the dry of the whole plant and you dont. Im mean, its not like i tested it myself, the OP did and i just think his claim is valid.


----------



## k0ijn (Jan 18, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> Yup, that why im saying that were going to disagree. I see chlorophyll and water absorbtion speeding the dry of the whole plant and you dont. Im mean, its not like i tested it myself, the OP did and i just think his claim is valid.


You can't just take it out of context like that and make up my position.
I haven't said water absorption (water potential really) doesn't affect the drying time.
If you have a shriveled plant and a fresh plant, they will obviously dry in different time frames.

But what you're arguing for makes no sense.
Pre-harvest flushed weed does not have less moisture in the stems, calyxes, sugar leaves, roots etc. than normally grown weed.
Just because some fan leaves have fallen off or some are yellowing it doesn't mean the drying period is quicker.

There is no disagreement on how water retention works but you are arguing that pre-harvest flushed weed has less chlorophyll and less moisture because the fan leaves have lost their nutrient supply and thus will dry quicker than normally grown weed.
That in itself is an oxymoron.
You are still giving the plant water. The amount of water needed for the particular plant has not changed.
The calyxes on pre-harvest flushed weed looks just like normally grown weed, with obvious exceptions if you have let your plants go with only water for months, if disease has taken hold, if the pH has been out of wack etc.

The chlorophyll in the fan leaves have no direct effect on the chlorophyll in the sugar leaves or the calyxes.
The cells themselves change, based on the availability of nutrients and the variables (light, CO2, nutrient levels, disease, pH levels etc.).

I haven't seen one picture from the OP either, not that it would prove anything, unless he's somehow harvested weed which has yellowing sugar leaves while still no damage to the calyxes themselves.
That would indeed prove the it's possible to limit the chlorophyll levels in the parts of the plant we smoke.


----------



## GK1 (Jan 18, 2013)

akula said:


> Your partially right here. You did however confuse the xylem/phloem systems. Xylem is the upward flow driven by surface tension and destination leaves. Phloem is the "downward" system driven by osmotic pressure differences that carries sugars/carbs to the sinks.



Uhhh, partially right? The phloem carries photosynthate......by definition post photosynthesis. It is primarily sucrose that the phloem carries. Peace.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 18, 2013)

GK1 said:


> Uhhh, partially right? The phloem carries photosynthate......by definition post photosynthesis. It is primarily sucrose that the phloem carries. Peace.


I F ing love this thread! There are some great minds at this table.


----------



## Uncle Pirate (Jan 18, 2013)

Ninjabowler said:


> That is a lower canopy fan leaf you say is burnt, and the top canopy leaves like the green one and all the others on her are not burnt....next guess please. This is why i can see the OPs point. Less water and chlorophyll should lead to a faster dry time when drying a whole hanging plant. Troll on UP, RIU is for learning and helping, were not here to listen to how many years youve been doing it the right way


Ok Rocky Dennis, the ideas you have make no sense at all. You're lower leaves are yellow and burnt up, the top ones aren't, so you have a fucked up plant you're pulling leaves off and trying to compare the water weight in the two in relation to chlorophyll. One of the leaves was burnt, and missing most of it's tissue. Those leaves didn't come off a healthy plant. You're the troll, trolling your crazy ideas and writing them off as "learning". Lmao.


----------



## Ninjabowler (Jan 18, 2013)

Uncle Pirate said:


> Ok Rocky Dennis, the ideas you have make no sense at all. You're lower leaves are yellow and burnt up, the top ones aren't, so you have a fucked up plant you're pulling leaves off and trying to compare the water weight in the two in relation to chlorophyll. One of the leaves was burnt, and missing most of it's tissue. Those leaves didn't come off a healthy plant. You're the troll, trolling your crazy ideas and writing them off as "learning". Lmao.


Rocky Dennis lol thats funny, this isnt my idea, its the original posters. I just see how he makes sence....and you always make funny assumtions about my plants. Lmao. My plants are as green as they could possibly be. Im useing a high N bloom line. I was just showing the leaf because its relation to drying a whole plant. When theres less water and chlorophyll present drying is faster is what he says. I dont think thats a crazy idea, do you?


----------



## ogreb (Jan 19, 2013)

I slow flush ( fade )
And will continue to do so.
I've done it both ways and way prefer faded.
The taste difference alone is worth the effort. By the time my plants are done it looks like fall in Kentucky in my room.
I also use Molasses / humic in my flush for the chemical binding.
I grow the best smoking, best tasting weed that I know of. Even the local dispensary Top Shelf blows in comparison. Their weed sucks anyway..crappy hydro.






This is a Blueberry 2 1/2 weeks from harvest.

Slow fade FTW !


Unless your growing pure organics...I would flush.


----------



## bullwinkle60 (Jan 19, 2013)

I've never flushed and always trim my fan leaves and my sugar leaves at harvest. I dry for about 7 days then into jars for the cure. The smoke has always been excellent and I've never had anyone complain about the smoke being harsh. In my opinion flushing is just a myth passed on and on and on until people believed it like an urban legend.


----------



## thoumayest (Jan 24, 2013)

Nightmarecreature said:


> There is no difference in taste from flushed or unflushed bud. It's all about the approach of harvesting and drying.
> 
> Where you went wrong with the unflushed bud, is that it's best to chop the whole plant from the base, remove the fan leaves and hang the entire plant. Then trim the sugar leaves dry after 12 days and then put them in jars to cure.
> 
> ...



So are you saying...

- Cut the entire tree from start
- Cut the non usable fan leaves
- Let plant dry 100%
- Then trim and cure

(if so...man I agree from my experience but I just dislike trimming dried trees...it seems like twice the work)


----------



## dee520 (Jan 24, 2013)

What do you guys think of my wrong method of flushing. I grow only 4 nodes and top. Once i see the strongest four nodes on those four i top again and trim the rest then let 12/12. I veg with 50% 1000w hps advance nutes gmb bb b52 carbo voodo and a mix of bat guano 10-4-1 for xtra-nitro in veg. Using 8L auto pot system with straight perlite 4 gal res. My ppm near end of flower is around 1000+-ppm. when I harvest i manicure then trim the little soft pieces from the bottom and chop the branch then set it in water. Then i place back in the grow room for about 3-4 day unit i start to see some leaves to go limp. I then trim remain and cut buds off stem and place on screen to dry on both ends. Its done in about 4 days then I jar for 7. Smoke is not thick and does not float around in the air and stink up the environment.


----------



## Nightmarecreature (Mar 15, 2013)

The last run I did smokes better than my friends flushed buds. Now that my buds have had time to cure, I used a humidpack 62, they are some clean smoke. The only time I flush is to clear the roots of excess salt buildup, not to flush and starve my plants in the last weeks of harvest.

Trimming dry sucks but my buds have a way stronger smell than when I trim wet.


----------



## guevera (Mar 22, 2013)

Randomly, on the herb I just harvested, I flushed half of it. It's the first time I've ever flushed anything in ~20 years of growing. 

For the last 10 days before harvest:



25% of my girls got nothing but water PH'd to 5.8 (i know, no need, but I can't put anything in my reservoir that's not Ph'd. It just feels wrong. And I'm kinda neurotic.)
25% got PH'd water with a little sugar supplement ... just what I had left over in a bottle.
50% got full nutrients all the way until the day I cut 'em.

There is absolutely no observable difference in quality between the different parts of the crop. I think but wouldn't swear that the part that got full nutes is just a little bigger than the half that didn't, but it's less than %5 difference.

That said, I didn't get anything lab analyzed, and it's just one guys observation during one run on two strains. I think I won't bother flushing on the next run, but I might try again next time I use new genetics.

------------------------

Better question, IMHO, am I the only one who uses paper as part of my cure? A lot of people talk about how long they hang, what conditions, etc., but it's always hang, trim, glass, or hang, trim, plastic (ugh). 

I've always done hang it till it's mostly dry, trim, paper bag it for 4-7 days, then put it in glass. I like the way bagging it in paper bags (approx 1/2 lb per paper grocery bag) slows down the drying just a little bit, even though it's still not dry enough for glass or a barrel. Am I the only person that does it this way (besides my momma, who's the one who showed me )


----------



## Ninjabowler (Mar 22, 2013)

guevera said:


> Randomly, on the herb I just harvested, I flushed half of it. It's the first time I've ever flushed anything in ~20 years of growing.
> 
> For the last 10 days before harvest:
> 
> ...


Random observer of the post and im wondering if theres no difference then why would you waste the nutrients on a last rez change? If its all equal. What humidity do you keep in paper?


----------



## Trousers (Mar 22, 2013)

TLDR

There is no scientific evidence that flushing does anything but hurt your plants. 



> *In turn flushing starves your plants of Nitrogen and stresses them out. It is my opinion that this is the #2 reason for hermies. #1 is genetics #2 stress(Flushing)*



Genetics rarely are the reason for "hermies" (female plants that produce male flowers).
Most of the time it is due to over fertilization and/or heat stress. 
Flushing definitely stresses plants. I do not like to stress my plants.


Flushing for taste and smell is a myth, A MYTH.








Yeth?


----------



## fattiemcnuggins (Mar 22, 2013)

It just seems silly to me to think that by running water through your bucket or not feeding it is going to somehow wash the bud clean from the inside out


----------



## Ninjabowler (Mar 22, 2013)

I personally think that since the plant requires such low levels of food at the end anyway, and its pretty much a guarentee that theres nutrients still in the soil, that if your not actually leaching the soil at every watering that you wouldnt hurt your plant by just giving her water the last 10-14 days. Its fact that theres mobile elements that will come out of the circulatory system but theres alot of things that just wont come out. Dont trick the readers into thinking its a good idea to run 1200 ppm right to chop cause that just isnt right.


----------



## Lurkdewitt (Mar 22, 2013)

My last harvest me and my buddy decided to try to debunk the flushing myth. We flushed one white rhino and didn't flush the other, we cut off one at day 46 of flower and continued to keep nutes at about 1500 ppm on the other until day 60 when they were chopped. We chopped at the base of both took off ALL fan leaves and left in my drying room with 50-55% rh for 3 days then we took off the buds but left the sugar leaves for another week slowly reducing the rh by 5% daily until we were at about 20%. Then we trimmed and cured all buds for 3 weeks burping consistently until we got em down to 10% rh. The flushed buds were MUCH sweeter and smoother but I yielded about 10 grams more off the non flushed. The smoke of the the unflushed was good but not all smooth and tended to make me feel like I was coughing up a lung. Keep in mind they both had the same mother and were cut on the same day with pretty much identical growth. We came to the conclusion that flushing helps smoke but hinders yield to a degree. In my opinion if your cash cropping don't flush if you aren't than make the smoke more enjoyable at the expense of some yield.


----------



## Trousers (Mar 22, 2013)

I am not trying to trick anyone. derp.

If you feed properly, there is no reason to flush. Flushing soil is dumb.
Some people grow in soil and only feed a couple times. By giving a plant in soil water you are not flushing. Running 8 gallons of water through a 5 gallon pot is crazy. 

I run coco and kinda sorta water to waste. I check the runoff. If the ppms are higher going out, I lower the amount of fert and run a bit more through the coco to waste. Some people think that is a flush. I would never run plain water in coco, that would stress the plant. 




Rumple said:


> They have no scientific evidence that aliens were not at the first Thanksgiving.


Some say cucumbers taste better pickled. 
Buds do not store fertilizer.


----------

