Flushing before harvest is Bro Science!

twentyeight.threefive

twentyeight.threefive

Well-Known Member
amneziaHaze said:
somebody needs to be a true bro and make a study with 20 clones 10 vs10 flush no flush all same clones
Click to expand...
Why? Either the flushers or non-flushers would call foul on the results depending which side the results favored.

The results would need to be repeatable so two or preferably more runs would be required with lab testing for each plant. I don't think any grower here is seriously that interested in the results to put that much time, effort, and money into this process.

So the flushing vs non-flushing debate will continue on forever.
 
Hollatchaboy

Hollatchaboy

Well-Known Member
Kassiopeija said:
yeah, and comparing now to outside in nature there plants do generally get less access to nutrition in autumn with the onset of colder temperature. they are somewhat used to it and can compensate by the storage in the leaves & sap, even breaking down of vegetative material in support of generative
Click to expand...
What about the warmer climates, where the access to nutrition is more available?
 
calvin.m16

calvin.m16

Well-Known Member
Kassiopeija said:
well, it stands to reason that the bud-tissue cannot be changed quickly - read: washed out of nutrients - otherwise the rain outside would just deplete all plants of nutes as well.

I'm just not seeing the point of fertilizing for the last days or weeks when argueably 0 of these nutes will make it into the tissue.

Have you ever seen farmers fertilizing their crop fields 1-2 weeks before harvest? does that make sense to waste one owns resources. for nothing...
Click to expand...
Yeah but those 1000+ acre farmers don't know what they're doing according to the anti-flushers.
 
calvin.m16

calvin.m16

Well-Known Member
Kassiopeija said:
could be that this BK is a shill for the industry, like an "influencer"... he's obviously trolling not seeking a mature conversation
Click to expand...
BK is the most annoying user on this forum. Fortunately I've had him ignored so I don't see his shitposting anymore. His grow room is the size of my closet he doesn't know shit. His record yield was probably 2 pounds.
 
calvin.m16

calvin.m16

Well-Known Member
If the smoke is good, Cannabinoids & terpenes are high why not flush? I don't get why people get angry about other people deciding to feed a plant plain water a week before chopping it. I personally believe the only time flushing is valuable is in saving on input costs and or correcting an issue in the rootzone. I feed plain water for the last week because I'm in 10 gallon pots and they do not run out of nutrients in that short of a period of time. Deciding to feed that plain water is to some a sin and you should be banished to hell.
 
Kassiopeija

Kassiopeija

Well-Known Member
bk78 said:
To my knowledge everything runs through xylem and phloem? Correct me if I’m wrong please?

shill for the industry haha
Click to expand...
most yeah... I'm just done with the master work u refered to... some nice data in it... but also a number of flaws u see it got reworked in the preface... though the relevance is there and the tissue sample didnt change much... ALTHOUGH one could argue that the scientific method p<0.05 ("insignificant") doesnt do much justice to 2 weeks when the plant grew for months.

they also established that drought stress didnt result in increased cannabinoid content but I can cite studies that proof this + the underlying physiological reasons of why it does.

tbh would have been more interesting if they would have measured EC of the xylem instead of water pressure if they go to the length of stem intrusion

what I'd like to see are studies comparing plant tissue - and esp. NH2 levels (and Al or other potentially harmful heavy metals) between plants grown at low, medium & max EC.
I just feel like 2 weeks before cut is already way too late to change much of anything
 
Kassiopeija

Kassiopeija

Well-Known Member
calvin.m16 said:
Tell that to anti-flushers.
Click to expand...
even in the master thesis they wouldnt call it different when they applied 10l of extra water or just gave water like a normal irrigation.

these kinds of definition problems just add to the distortion of the subject at hand

and that they used Pro-Mix - an organic medium high in CEC that will store nutrients and harbour a bacteria culture doesnt make it easier. why not just pure water culture where you can change the rhizosphere content within 10 mins completely...
 
calvin.m16

calvin.m16

Well-Known Member
Kassiopeija said:
even in the master thesis they wouldnt call it different when they applied 10l of extra water or just gave water like a normal irrigation.

these kinds of definition problems just add to the distortion of the subject at hand

and that they used Pro-Mix - an organic medium high in CEC that will store nutrients and harbour a bacteria culture doesnt make it easier. why not just pure water culture where you can change the rhizosphere content within 10 mins completely...
Click to expand...
Exactly, anti-flushers have their own definition of flushing then use that to argue with others potential definition of flushing. The fire rages on!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top