Flushing: Clearex or Water

[foomar]

Given the overlap of toxic chemicals present in tobacco and bud smoke , from the combustion of very similar material , it seems counter intuitive that bud could be entirely safe consumed in this way.

Huge problems getting accurate data with an illegal drug , unless the articles were based on serious peer checked research and verifiable dataset i would be wary.

Almost everyone here smokes bud mixed with tobacco , hope its true or at least helps , most i know have a vapouriser that sits unused in a box full of other gadgets.

 

[Hydrosun]

It may seem counter intuitive that smoked cannabis DOES NOT cause health issues, but it doesn't! If it did we would see the rash of lung, throat, and mouth cancers that tobacco users suffer from.

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=229212

The University of California (a very respected University system) followed 5,000 people for 20 years.

It may not be perfect for you, but that combined with the tens of thousands of people visiting this site and NOT reporting cannabis caused disease, should make one question the claims of cannabis and disease.

Also I have personally met three dozen + growers from this site, while some of them have rolled a blunt with me, and many have smoked cigs, NONE (NOT A SINGLE FUCKING ONE) has rolled a mix tobacco / cannabis joint.

I have smoked hundreds of bowls, joints, oil hits, ear wax, hash, and blunts with dozens of ICmagers and ZERO tobacco mixed with cannabis.

This may be a European thing, but for the most part heads in the states don't mix tobacco with cannabis.

 

[stihgnobevoli]

i mix some tobacco in with my joints sometimes or with bonghits. its mostly a product of me being addicted to nicotine, and sometimes just to make the joint burn slower.

but yeah people have been smoking weed for ages, and only very recently has any of it been "medicinal," with all these people having been smoking weed that was unflushed and rarely cured any and often times moldy and whatever else. if there was a risk we would have heard about it by now. and like hydrosun said there are numerous articles and studies, one involving some 40,000+ people. all indications are that cannabis actually fights cancers and other diseases.

cannabis is most likely this holy grail/fountain of youth everyone searches for.

 

[Jbonez]

Im with foomar, in regards to "smoke" affecting the cilia in the lungs, this is not debatable, as smoking anything will at the least affect your respiratory system, but usually this is slight cases of bronchitis and lower oxygen levels affecting your immune system temporarily.

Im with hydrosun in his arguement because there isnt any data Im aware of that shows a systematic breakdown of ones health as a result of smoking pot.. I mean my grandfather is 78 and hes been tokin for 60 years, and thats what my grandmother says.. He says hes been smoking since he was 12, I think hes trying to one up me..

Yeah, never thought about fuckin up my weed with tobacco, but Ive also never tried so I dont know, seems it would be harsh no?

 

[stihgnobevoli]

if you already smoke tobacco its not harsh at all. grew up smoking that harsh ass unflushed, early, cancer causing weed, as well as newports, not much is harsh on my throat anymore.

 

[foomar]

Pulmonary hazards of smoking marijuana as compared with tobacco.
Wu TC, Tashkin DP, Djahed B, Rose JE.
SourceDepartment of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles School of Medicine 90024.

Abstract
To compare the pulmonary hazards of smoking marijuana and tobacco, we quantified the relative burden to the lung of insoluble particulates (tar) and carbon monoxide from the smoke of similar quantities of marijuana and tobacco. The 15 subjects, all men, had smoked both marijuana and tobacco habitually for at least five years. We measured each subject's blood carboxyhemoglobin level before and after smoking and the amount of tar inhaled and deposited in the respiratory tract from the smoke of single filter-tipped tobacco cigarettes (900 to 1200 mg) and marijuana cigarettes (741 to 985 mg) containing 0.004 percent or 1.24 percent delta 9-tetrahydrocanabinol. As compared with smoking tobacco, smoking marijuana was associated with a nearly fivefold greater increment in the blood carboxyhemoglobin level, an approximately threefold increase in the amount of tar inhaled, and retention in the respiratory tract of one third more inhaled tar (P less than 0.001). Significant differences were also noted in the dynamics of smoking marijuana and tobacco, among them an approximately two-thirds larger puff volume, a one-third greater depth of inhalation, and a fourfold longer breath-holding time with marijuana than with tobacco (P less than 0.01). Smoking dynamics and the delivery of tar during marijuana smoking were only slightly influenced by the percentage of tetrahydrocanabinol. We conclude that smoking marijuana, regardless of tetrahydrocannabinol content, results in a substantially greater respiratory burden of carbon monoxide and tar than smoking a similar quantity of tobacco.

Inhaleing combustion products and particulates is not what i consider to be entirely free of risk , if you are really serious then just vape for the lowest risk longterm.

 

[Hydrosun]

Well increased burden on the respiratory system is NOT disease of the respiratory system AND, MANY healthy adults smoke daily and still jog, hike, play tennis, snowboard, play basketball (in the NBA), and win Olympic medals (M. Phelps).

Those guys conclude there is a burden of CO and tar compared to tobacco, but that doesn't mean shit. Cig smokers can't run marathons, weed smokers do it all the time.

What the white coats call a burden, seems just to be a different amount of tar but NO REAL burden to the cannabis smoker. Tobacco smokers are fucked from their tar.

Huge number of people on this site can attest to how they felt with cannabis as opposed to tobacco; so your bolded point above isn't too relevant.

As to vaping it is cool if that is your thing but I personally like the complete canaibnoid profile delivered by smoking cannabis. I do turn my low grade hash 120 - 190Mu into budder and cook / bake with it. No interaction with the lungs and a complete canabinoid profile.

To each their own.

 

[stihgnobevoli]

the "FACT" that marijuana deposits more tar (resin) in the lungs than cigarettes is a really old argument and needs to stop being dredged up. unless they are going to make the men smoke unfiltered cigarettes or put filters in the joints this study is null and void.
fact is in quotes and bold for the reasons stated. of course it leaves more tar, cigarettes are filtered. and this is not a real fact since this wasn't a real scientific experiment.

also 15 men who smoked marijuana and 15 who only smoke cigs or 15 men who smoke both?

this hardly sounds like a controlled experiment...but as long as the final determination is weed = bad i guess it doesn't matter huh?

i smoke weed before i do my exercises some times. 60-90 situps are part of the regimen. i hardly think i could do 6 to 9 situps after smoking tobacco, let alone 60-90 if marijuana was such a burden on my lungs.

 

[Hydrosun]

"and marijuana cigarettes (741 to 985 mg) containing 0.004 percent or 1.24 percent delta 9-tetrahydrocanabinol."

How old is this study and what kind of rope where they smoking? 1.24% THC? My fan leaves have more than that!

They may well be correct that smoking 1.24% trash is not so good for your lungs, doesn't mean that cannabis smoking is dangerous. Who the hell could smoke 1.24% crap? And why in the world would a cannabis user cite to such a weak source (pun not intended)?

 

[Jbonez]

Yeah, its kinda like saying "well, a hairdryer uses 1800 watts" I dont know anyone puffin weed like a pag of cigs, hell, I smoke an 1/8 a day, but I vape a ton of it, and smoke the shit that tastes good...

But lets face it, half of us are going to die from cardiac arrest, some form of Cancer, Alzheimers, Drunk driving, and our wives.....

 

[Oscar_NL]

You guys talking about flushing MJ,
but smoking that with cigarettes ?

Do not see the logic here, i'm sorry.

I'd have to say, I smoke my MJ with blond tabacco without any additives,
or how thats is called.

With that said, I smoked 2 or 3 cigarettes few days ago, since I did forget my MJ +Tabacco,
and man, what a frigging disgusting taste do they have. I really can taste the chemicals they're using.

Just my Dutch 2 cents.

 

[Green_science]

It is good to flush, mobile nutrients, ie nutrients that are able to translocate inside the plant, are sent to areas where they are needed, thus creating for a much more evenly ripe plant.

Jbonez, you say you feed your plant adequately until harvest, no doubt you do, but that is not best.

When a blooming plant is ripening heaps of processes are accelerated and, or, created, breaking down chlorophyll is one of these KEY processes that, "YOU", are deliberately avoiding.

Lots of research has been done in recent years on the ripening process of blooming/fruitful plants. The topic is not the most basic of plant physiology, but here is a real good easy to read article on why flushing, aka "accelerating ripening", and ripening per se, plays an INSTRUMENTAL role in said plants.

To the OP, use the Clearex for 3-4 days then plain Ph'd H20 for 4 days, or, until fruit seems to have slightly changed color, smells more, feels harder, etc etc.

Just because anyone in this thread has grown LBS of plants does not make them right on this topic.

 

[dramamine]

The topic is not the most basic of plant physiology, but here is a real good easy to read article on why flushing, aka "accelerating ripening", and ripening per se, plays an INSTRUMENTAL role in said plants.

That linked article is about the role of ethylene in ripening fruit. It has nothing to do with flushing.

 

[Jbonez]

great post GS, quick question, or Ill have to research this on my own, which I have no interest in doing lol, but does chlorophyll break down after the plant has been harvested? Also how much chlorophyll is in the product we are smoking, like the bud, obviously we arent smoking leaves so Im curious... Im really gonna have to go back to the drawing board on this topic.. ***damnit....

off subject, Im watching meteorite men and these guys found two meteors in two days worth 10 grand, I think Im in the wrong business....

 

[foomar]

From the NORML site , where the attitude is more cautious , and favours vapourisers over smokeing.

Marijuana and Smoking:

A recent survey by the Kaiser Permanente Center found that daily marijuana-only smokers have a 19% higher rate of respiratory complaints than non-smokers.These findings were not surprising, since it has long been known that, aside from its psychoactive ingredients, marijuana smoke contains virtually the same toxic gases and carcinogenic tars as tobacco. Human studies have found that pot smokers suffer similar kinds of respiratory damage as tobacco smokers, putting them at greater risk of bronchitis, sore throat, respiratory inflammation and infections.

Although there has not been enough epidemiological work to settle the matter definitively, it is widely suspected that marijuana smoking causes cancer. Studies have found apparently pre-cancerous cell changes in pot smokers.Some cancer specialists have reported a higher-than-expected incidence of throat, neck and tongue cancer in younger, marijuana-only smokers.A couple of cases have been fatal. While it has not been conclusively proven that marijuana smoking causes lung cancer, the evidence is highly suggestive. According to Dr. Donald Tashkin of UCLA, the leading expert on marijuana smoking:

"Although more information is certainly needed, sufficient data have already been accumulated concerning the health effects of marijuana to warrant counseling by physicians against the smoking of marijuana as an important hazard to health."

Fortunately, the hazards of marijuana smoking can be reduced by various strategies: (1) use of higher-potency cannabis, which can be smoked in smaller quantities, (2) use of waterpipes and other smoke reduction technologies, and (3) ingesting pot orally instead of smoking it.

 

[Jbonez]

highly recommend vaping just because of how far one bowl goes.... I like the taste of good herb but I smoke too much to be killin myself with jbone after jbone, or even hitting my pipe..

I read somewhere that vaping makes the most use of the thc, rather than incinerating half or more of the thc with a lighter.. anyone else heard this?

 

[dizzlekush]

highly recommend vaping just because of how far one bowl goes.... I like the taste of good herb but I smoke too much to be killin myself with jbone after jbone, or even hitting my pipe..

I read somewhere that vaping makes the most use of the thc, rather than incinerating half or more of the thc with a lighter.. anyone else heard this?

Vaporizers allow for the THCA to decarboxylate to THC before volatilizing, IIRC only ~30% of THCA normally decarboxylates to THC when smoking. So yes vaporizers are more effective at getting you a higher THC dose.

Interesting this thread has gotten so far, im not aware of any of the science behind flushing being up for debate...

 

[Green_science]

Hey Dramamine, I do not want to turn this post into something ridiculous and long that the majority of people will not bother reading or possibly not understand so I will try to keep it as simple as I can, if you are deeply interested in the causes of these processes and reactions that follow, PM me.

To get the bad news out of the way first, currently we do not understand exactly how the processes that "TRIGGER" ripening are "AUTOMATED" naturally, we understand a little of what happens and why it happens, just not what automates the trigger itself.
A little advanced research has been done on how plants regulate responses to ethylene, Google "ETR2" or have a little look here.

Fortunately we do know a lot about the processes and the responses that occur after this trigger, or triggers. Once triggered and active ethylene then triggers the production of enzymes, or catalysts that cause fruit to ripen, these processes are well documented, check here for a light read, or here, which is a previous link I posted, for a more in depth read, alternatively Google "ethylene ripen" which will yield hours of reading.

In response to your actual statement Dramamine

"That linked article is about the role of ethylene in ripening fruit. It has nothing to do with flushing."

on the contrary, starving a ripening plant of an external food source (aka flushing) will absolutely accelerate these processes, hence the mode of action of some of these flushing solutions!

The reduction of chlorophyll production for example, among many other processes, will promote production of ethylene, Google "abscission chlorophyll" or check here.

great post GS, quick question, or Ill have to research this on my own, which I have no interest in doing lol, but does chlorophyll break down after the plant has been harvested? Also how much chlorophyll is in the product we are smoking, like the bud, obviously we arent smoking leaves so Im curious... Im really gonna have to go back to the drawing board on this topic.. ***damnit....

off subject, Im watching meteorite men and these guys found two meteors in two days worth 10 grand, I think Im in the wrong business....

Okay I am back from my meteorite finding expedition, good question.
Cannabis, which is part of the cannabaceae sensu stricto family, is technically not a "fruit" bearing plant, it is a "flowering herb", as such we do not categorize it as a either a climacteric or non-climacteric fruit, here is a good definition of what a fruit being climacteric means, pretty much the opposite holds true for non-climacteric fruit. I have not done the adequate research and tests to concretely classify the "fruit" of canna as climacteric, neither as anyone for that matter, that I am aware of, however with what we do know canna definitely fits the criteria to do so.

Chlorophyll can be broken down on the living plant, even in the flower itself, everyone's seen flowers (Buds) change color right? It not common to see because for most of it's blooming life it`s the plants very job to stop this happening and concentrate its energy on developing this site, on the other hand some canna strains have a certain genes, ie your purple strains, that make them for example, more susceptible to produce or accumulate larger quantities of anthocyanin.

So to answer your question in short, the amount of chlorophyll you are smoking will be dictated by, somewhat the genes of the plant, how well you allowed/accelerated the processes that break down chlorophyll during ripening to happen, and how long/well you allow/force the breakdown of said chlorophyll after harvesting.

This is why I posted In this thread, in my opinion, and sciences, boosting the ripening process of cannabis is definitely beneficial to what we are trying to accomplish, of coarse some fruits exist where ripening is actually not desired, either way, flushing as apposed to feeding, (regular feed), during ripening, is definitely a way to help accomplish desired goals.

 

[dramamine]

In response to your actual statement Dramamine

"That linked article is about the role of ethylene in ripening fruit. It has nothing to do with flushing."

on the contrary, starving a ripening plant of an external food source (aka flushing) will absolutely accelerate these processes, hence the mode of action of some of these flushing solutions!

Maybe so, but I didn't mean to say ethylene has nothing to do with flushing...just that the linked article didn't touch on flushing at any point. I appreciate your post.....good stuff. Not sure who unhelpful-ed it...not me. It's interesting to wonder how ripening would progress by light manipulation alone. Slower, I'd guess, though some sativas will only ripen once days are shortened, even when fully flushed.

 

[ShroomDr]

I do something similar to Greyskull. It is not really a flush I just change what I feed. I feed Sucanat/Citric acid 2 wks out then switch to water 1 week out

You get 1 litre (1/4 of a gallon) of warm water then add 1 ounce (28gms) of Sucanat and 28 gms (1oz) of Citric Acid. mix it up till all the crystals disolve then store it in a opaque bottle. Add at the rate of 4 ml per gallon in the res

It will get the secondary metabolic pathways opened, the citric acid donates a protein to the raw sugar (Glucose) so the plant can absorb it, we get a symbiotic soup that does wonders for taste and smell.

Learned the from Ozgrower

I had completely forgotten about manipulating the Krebs cycle. I remember reading about it on OG a loooonnnngggg time ago. Thanks for the reminder Yosemite! Gonna play with this soon.

Can you elaborate on this YS?

Are you trying to interrupt a particular part of the krebs cycle, or are you just offering a mega dose of catalyst? (after removing the nutrition).

It seems like its the latter, but would love more an elaboration/confirmation.

This thread is getting long, maybe you could start another thread specifically about your citric acid dose and the krebs cycle? (wouldnt want good info, thats not very prevalent in the forums, lost in the wash).



I think most people who think they need to flush and have shitty tasting weed are feeding too much N too late in the cycle. Most micros are immobile, they need to be provided constantly. I dont think cutting off 'feeding' 3 weeks before chop is optimal.

(fwiw most liquid 'two parts' put the 'micros' in the same bottle as the N, technaflora does not. You can easily drop the N level late in flower with technaflora, while keeping the micros at optimal levels.)


-