BIG KUSH DADDY
Member
Hey old boy .... I would shoot one of the seed banks a email and ask them im sure they could point you in the right direction
I NEED The Munchies. Anyone Able To Help With Some Info?
- Thread starter HippySmoke
- Start date
- Status
HippySmoke
Active Member
Thank you kindly I'll give ol' attitude a mailing great idea! Thanks!
KingDavid91
Well-Known Member
og kush makes me hungry as fuckkkkkk
HippySmoke
Active Member
KingDavid91 I am familiar with the strain although haven't sampled it, the OG kush you sampled do you know the breeder?
KingDavid91
Well-Known Member
i did not, but it was legit. i have never ate so much in my life. it was almost bad haha. if you really are looking for something to increase your appetite i would try that out.
HippySmoke
Active Member
I know another grower cropping some of that soon will have to make a trade and try some thanks for the suggestion.
KingDavid91
Well-Known Member
no problem i promise itll be worth your time senor
klassifyme
Active Member
hey ak, what about tha fact that research is finding that the jwh's may be carcinogenic and cause cancer , they are not the same a s thc they are man made chemicals similar, not the same as thc ,why would you tell a sick person to put unproven chems in their body,
im not saying the jwh's dont have thier place for getting high,but thaTS IT, i wouldnt call them medicinal
im not saying the jwh's dont have thier place for getting high,but thaTS IT, i wouldnt call them medicinal
Send me your source. I think its funny you make that claim but then you say MAY BE...Hmmm.
If the JWH can help gain weight, then it can be considered 'medicinal.' Just because it has side effects doesnt mean its not. Its a chemical that can be used to treat certain conditions. Think of prescription drugs and recalls...Accutane, heart medications, etc, etc.
People put unproven chemicals in their bodies EVERYDAY. You ever eat a candy bar or processed food? What do you think a preservative is? Or that food coloring in your juice... Many of these chemicals are being shown to cause cancer but I dont see you complaining about that or boycotting food producers.
Carcinogenic and cause cancer? Redundancy, much?
If youre going to argue a point, you better have some knowledge to back it up. If you dont, then what do you have? Some hearsay? Some BS you made up?
You dont know anything about JWH; youve already shown that. The way molecules are shaped determines their function. Im not going to try and explain that to you. Theres alot more to know, trust me. Its not just, this is jwh, it gets you high. The world isnt so simple. Talking to you is like talking to a wall...When you learn something, then we can have a real discussion.
I did get off on a tangent because I was responding to another thread in a different section that was similar, so my thoughts were mixed. My bad...
I dont need to change your mind about anything. I got all of my information from people with graduate degrees and that pretty much says it all.
I
poplars
Well-Known Member
hey I also stated facts. it will dull the receptor from interaction with natural cannabinoids, and it will get the OP into a bad spot. two simple facts that I stand by. I started by posting, now I'm done by not posting anymore, simple.
and yes I realized I broke my promise last post by posting now, but thats chill I'm not that regulated....
and yes I realized I broke my promise last post by posting now, but thats chill I'm not that regulated....
I want to repost my last statement
I dont give two shits if this guy wastes away or not. Thats not my problem. Im just attempting to dispel all these rumors and bs facts that float around these boards.
I dont give a fuck if you like synthetics or not either. Thats YOUR OPINION, but to try and deny the facts of human physiology and chemistry is just insane...
Do you have evidence of this dulling? This is what Im talking about! You have no proof or theoretical knowledge to base your ASSUMPTIONS on. I have nothing against you, Im just trying to show your what the actual information is! Thats it!
I dont give two shits if this guy wastes away or not. Thats not my problem. Im just attempting to dispel all these rumors and bs facts that float around these boards.
I dont give a fuck if you like synthetics or not either. Thats YOUR OPINION, but to try and deny the facts of human physiology and chemistry is just insane...
Do you have evidence of this dulling? This is what Im talking about! You have no proof or theoretical knowledge to base your ASSUMPTIONS on. I have nothing against you, Im just trying to show your what the actual information is! Thats it!
poplars
Well-Known Member
Its not permanent...
It causes greater desensitization after administration. It makes no mention of long term effects. So quitting will return the brain back to its homeostatic state.The reason for that is becuase its been SHOWN and PROVEN that the JWH molecule actually fits better in its receptor better than THC, so its desensitizing because its more potent, leading you to need more THC to get high. I dont know about you but when I smoke alot for a while, my tolerance builds up to. Maybe not as high as JWH, but it does. Same thing...
It causes greater desensitization after administration. It makes no mention of long term effects. So quitting will return the brain back to its homeostatic state.The reason for that is becuase its been SHOWN and PROVEN that the JWH molecule actually fits better in its receptor better than THC, so its desensitizing because its more potent, leading you to need more THC to get high. I dont know about you but when I smoke alot for a while, my tolerance builds up to. Maybe not as high as JWH, but it does. Same thing...
poplars
Well-Known Member
I didn't say it was permenant, I just said it would put the OP in a bad spot.... would the OP having to adjust their tolerance in the midst of not being able to eat NOT be a bad spot?
poplars
Well-Known Member
I told you the point of mentioning it.... I'm done, peace.
I dont know why they need to delete the whole text but Im posting this up for reference for anyone whos interested in this debate of synthetics vs nature:
I highlighted the relevant parts:
Natural Hormones vs. Synthetic Hormones
Articles
Making Sense of Hormone Hysteria
Body Basics - When Hormones Go Awry
Gender Benders & Endocrine Disruptors around You
Natural vs. Synthetic Hormones
Toxins in Your Diet
What Is PCOS?
What Is PMS?
Women’s Health State Rankings
By Elizabeth Lee Vliet, MD
Excerpted and condensed from Women, Weight and Hormones, pgs. 214 – 216
Evans and Company, 2001
Many women express a desire to take only natural hormones. But the words “natural” and “synthetic” can be very confusing to patients and doctors alike.
Whether a compound is biologically “natural” (to plants, horses, or whatever), is not the issue. The molecule shape, make-up, and structure must be identical to what is made in the human body to provide the perfect “key” to unlock the body’s receptor sites.
A compound that meets these requirements is called “bioidentical.” The bioidentical hormone replacement process is sort of like getting a spare key from the locksmith. The manufacturer (the ovary) stops making your own hormone at menopause, so a “locksmith” (the laboratory) makes an exact duplicate hormone molecule for you to use if you choose to.
In today’s common usage, “synthetic” has come to mean “artificial,” but this is not always correct. Synthetic simply means “produced by synthesis”, or “made.” Synthroid and Estrace are “synthetic” in that they have been made in the laboratory rather than within a biological organism, but they are “natural” in that they’re the exact molecules made by the thyroid and ovary, respectively. Other examples of exact copies of our bodies hormones synthesized in the laboratory are Humulin® (insulin) and cortisone (cortisol).
So “natural” or bioidentical hormones are made in the laboratory, and the process is called “synthesizing.” Usually, the source of these “natural” human forms of ovarian hormones are the building blocks found in wild yams and soybeans. The laboratory converts these plant compounds into chemical molecules identical to those made in the human body for 17-beta estradiol, progesterone, or testosterone, which can then be fashioned into standardized tablets, patches, creams, gels and injectables for our prescriptions. Thus, we’re able to synthesize a natural, bioidentical compound to replace what our body no longer makes.
The flip side of this coin is that something “natural” may be foreign or “supernatural” for the human body. Consider Premarin: a “natural” mixture of estrogens made by a biological organism, the pregnant mare. But Premarin contains types of estrogen that are never found naturally in the human body. These estrogen types are more potent and more persistent than human 17-beta estradiol. In effect, Premarin is a “supernatural” estrogen for women that has some very undesirable consequences.
Another example is the “natural” estrogen-type compounds (genistein and others) found in soy and red clover and many other plants. These are “natural” substances, since they come from biological plant sources. These compounds are unnatural for our bodies, however, since we don’t make these same compounds and don’t have the enzymes to change the genistein or clover isoflavones into 17-beta estradiol.
These molecules act very differently at our body’s estrogen receptors, and don’t have the full protective effects of 17-beta estradiol on the heart, brain and bone. Furthermore, if you try to get enough active hormone from plant/herbal sources alone, it’s hard to determine how much you are taking and whether the amount is right for you, because plant/herbal sources aren’t standardized.
Don’t be misled by clever wording in advertising. While “natural” bears the mystique of being “better for you,” it isn’t always the case. If you aren’t sure about whether you should take natural or synthetic hormones, you might want to read more about it in Women, Weight and Hormones.
I highlighted the relevant parts:
Natural Hormones vs. Synthetic Hormones
Articles
Making Sense of Hormone Hysteria
Body Basics - When Hormones Go Awry
Gender Benders & Endocrine Disruptors around You
Natural vs. Synthetic Hormones
Toxins in Your Diet
What Is PCOS?
What Is PMS?
Women’s Health State Rankings
By Elizabeth Lee Vliet, MD
Excerpted and condensed from Women, Weight and Hormones, pgs. 214 – 216
Evans and Company, 2001
Many women express a desire to take only natural hormones. But the words “natural” and “synthetic” can be very confusing to patients and doctors alike.
Whether a compound is biologically “natural” (to plants, horses, or whatever), is not the issue. The molecule shape, make-up, and structure must be identical to what is made in the human body to provide the perfect “key” to unlock the body’s receptor sites.
A compound that meets these requirements is called “bioidentical.” The bioidentical hormone replacement process is sort of like getting a spare key from the locksmith. The manufacturer (the ovary) stops making your own hormone at menopause, so a “locksmith” (the laboratory) makes an exact duplicate hormone molecule for you to use if you choose to.
In today’s common usage, “synthetic” has come to mean “artificial,” but this is not always correct. Synthetic simply means “produced by synthesis”, or “made.” Synthroid and Estrace are “synthetic” in that they have been made in the laboratory rather than within a biological organism, but they are “natural” in that they’re the exact molecules made by the thyroid and ovary, respectively. Other examples of exact copies of our bodies hormones synthesized in the laboratory are Humulin® (insulin) and cortisone (cortisol).
So “natural” or bioidentical hormones are made in the laboratory, and the process is called “synthesizing.” Usually, the source of these “natural” human forms of ovarian hormones are the building blocks found in wild yams and soybeans. The laboratory converts these plant compounds into chemical molecules identical to those made in the human body for 17-beta estradiol, progesterone, or testosterone, which can then be fashioned into standardized tablets, patches, creams, gels and injectables for our prescriptions. Thus, we’re able to synthesize a natural, bioidentical compound to replace what our body no longer makes.
The flip side of this coin is that something “natural” may be foreign or “supernatural” for the human body. Consider Premarin: a “natural” mixture of estrogens made by a biological organism, the pregnant mare. But Premarin contains types of estrogen that are never found naturally in the human body. These estrogen types are more potent and more persistent than human 17-beta estradiol. In effect, Premarin is a “supernatural” estrogen for women that has some very undesirable consequences.
Another example is the “natural” estrogen-type compounds (genistein and others) found in soy and red clover and many other plants. These are “natural” substances, since they come from biological plant sources. These compounds are unnatural for our bodies, however, since we don’t make these same compounds and don’t have the enzymes to change the genistein or clover isoflavones into 17-beta estradiol.
These molecules act very differently at our body’s estrogen receptors, and don’t have the full protective effects of 17-beta estradiol on the heart, brain and bone. Furthermore, if you try to get enough active hormone from plant/herbal sources alone, it’s hard to determine how much you are taking and whether the amount is right for you, because plant/herbal sources aren’t standardized.
Don’t be misled by clever wording in advertising. While “natural” bears the mystique of being “better for you,” it isn’t always the case. If you aren’t sure about whether you should take natural or synthetic hormones, you might want to read more about it in Women, Weight and Hormones.
- Status