frostqueen
Active member
Let me clarify the lack of intelligence that went into your thought process
0 chemical inputs equating to 0 chemicals in the output isn't bro science it is a simple product of critical thinking.
Showing interest in a turf product for use on pot FUCKING GENIUS
some people aren't smart enough to discern expertise
who was it that said there was a sucker born every minute?
I mentioned a small portion of the dangers from when this thread started, still waiting for the intellectual bar to be raised enough to drive it deeper into the rabbit hole.
Here is the most unbaised and recent review on the reality of what we know
http://www.coloradogreenlab.com/blo...ntext-of-cannabis-cultivation-and-consumption
Great post, Weird! MORE like this. Not the usual B.S. character attack part, but the link. This is the stuff we need more of.
It seems clear that good studies are needed now regarding the toxicity of this stuff as it burns. I'm not advocating ignoring defined risks; just looking for more solid data regarding what the real risks are here. Stating the difference between metabolizing the chemical via eating vs. it being ignited and inhaled is key information.
The persistence links and this post are great info. To my understanding the Colorado situation involved extremely high levels of the chemical. I wonder how Cali will do with their zero-tolerance rules? Oregon has settled upon .2 ppm; I wonder how they decided on that?
On an anecdotal level: I heard from a friend today that he had 3 strains that were treated with Ea20 at 10 days before going into flower, and then he ran them 8 weeks before harvesting. He had applied at 2.5 ml/gallon, to be specific. He then had these 3 batches tested at a Portland lab and they came back as 'undetectable'. That seems odd to me and I don't honestly buy it; seems like traces would definitely have still been present.
I think part of the problem is the lack of regulation and standards in labs here. That will be changing in July when we have the minimums linked to in my previous post become law. Labs will have to invest in better equipment and the cost of basic compliancy tests will go to as high as $300 per batch.
If it has to be completely zero tolerance for this, I am willing to accept that. I understand that 'absolutely zero' is your own preference. I honestly very rarely use Eagle 20. For some reason every November we have massive problems with powdery here, though. Happens every year, happens to all my pro/warehouse friends, too.
I got powdery this November because I forgot to use Ea20 two weeks before flower like most Novembers. For most of the year just using silica and keeping the plants healthy is enough. But they were in peak health this time and still got it, as with all of my associates. Rather than do anything toxic or using sulfer late in the game I just picked early and cut my losses.