do caregivers and dispensary suppliers really cure for 2 weeks to a month?

[k0ijn]

This was something BrickTop posted a while ago on this...

Before drying, decarboxylation of inactive THCA acid into THC has not yet occurred. During the curing (final drying) process, the COOH bonded to the THC is released. The result is the psychoactive compound delta9 THC. Amounts of THC do not actually increase during the curing process. Non-psychoactive THCA, in part, becomes psychoactive THC. Even then not all THCA has become THC.

I'll believe it if BT wrote it but as I see no valid links I cannot believe it.
Yes I realize that the tiny amounts of THCA which is left will turn into THC, but this happens during drying as well, not just curing.
What you're trying to say is that if you don't cure, your THC is not psychoactive, or at least that is what you're making it sound like, and that statement is false.
I know many people who don't cure (mainly because suppliers don't want it cured) and no potency is lost really, just taste and odour (which is what curing does, improving taste and odour that is).
By far most THCA is converted into THC when trichomes go from clear to cloudy, there is no reason to say that you need to cure for 3 weeks or THC is not fully realized, it's simply a false statement because the % we're talking about are so tiny compared the to the THC already fully realized in the cloudy trichomes, therefore this whole discussion about curing will increase potency is invalid and unjustified.

 

[MrDank007]

I'll believe it if BT wrote it but as I see no valid links I cannot believe it.
Yes I realize that the tiny amounts of THCA which is left will turn into THC, but this happens during drying as well, not just curing.
What you're trying to say is that if you don't cure, your THC is not psychoactive, or at least that is what you're making it sound like, and that statement is false.
I know many people who don't cure (mainly because suppliers don't want it cured) and no potency is lost really, just taste and odour (which is what curing does, improving taste and odour that is).
By far most THCA is converted into THC when trichomes go from clear to cloudy, there is no reason to say that you need to cure for 3 weeks or THC is not fully realized, it's simply a false statement because the % we're talking about are so tiny compared the to the THC already fully realized in the cloudy trichomes, therefore this whole discussion about curing will increase potency is invalid and unjustified.

To be completly honest I do not personally have a lab to test these things so I can't tell you for sure. But I think that is where people get the idea from. Some believe that weed becomes more potent over time with a proper cure. BT is the only one I have seen post all the chemical discussions. I guess the point is that maybe it's really not "the cure", but the time...? Regardless, while googling this I saw you already had this decarb convo with BT...what is still missing is a valid link

 

[SimonD]

It has stopped doing that. I'll try leaving it in the jar longer without opening. This may be one of those annoying patience exercises.

Have you considered, perhaps, using a hygrometer to monitor the cure? If the product remains at a stable reading for 5-7 days, you can be sure the moisture is fully redistributed within the flowers.

Simon

 

[MrDank007]

Have you considered, perhaps, using a hygrometer to monitor the cure? If the product remains at a stable reading for 5-7 days, you can be sure the moisture is fully redistributed within the flowers.

Simon

Yeah...my buddy has all my stuff and he's out of town. I have another plant that is a long-flowering strain that will probably come down in 2 weeks that I will be using that for. Wish I would have thought to call him 2 weeks ago

 

[dbkick]

Where is that quote from?
Do you have any scientifically valid information?
THC is psychoactive, it does not need to be converted into anything to be psychoactive.
Curing doesn't "convert" any THC, what do you stipulate is converted into THC?

Curing slowly removes chlorophyll and other substances from the weed, thereby improving taste and odour.

the quote was from jorge, I no longer have the link but a little searching and I'm sure you can find it yourself.

 

[dbkick]

quote:A little background on what happens inside and outside the harvested drying plant will help you understand why proper drying and curing are so important to good quality dope. Drying evaporates most of the 70-75 percent water content in fresh marijuana. Drying also converts THC from its non-psychoactive crude acidic form to its psychoactive pH-neutral form. Once dry, THC-potent marijuana can be smoked and you will get high. Every THC molecule must shed their moisture content before they are fully psychoactive.
don't know who it is don't give a fuck, seems like solid info to me.

 

[jonnyquest]

I haven't read the thread but the title question is stupid, why wouldnt you cure for 2 months?

 

[k0ijn]

the quote was from jorge, I no longer have the link but a little searching and I'm sure you can find it yourself.

... Jorge is an author. He does not hold a degree in anything related to plant growing, genetics or biology.
It's already been established that Jorge takes information written by others and posts it in his books as his own.

He might be a good author and he might be a somewhat good grower, but he is NOT the a major player with regards to proper scientific evidence.
He does not know anything about the scientific sides of cannabis, last time someone quoted Jorge as if he was the sole contributor of knowledge that person was shot down not only by me, but also by many others who can see that quoting an author as a credible scientific informational person is like quoting a movie star, it has no relevance.


I would never base any knowledge on an author, unless the said author actually has degrees which prove that he knows what he is talking about.
Anybody can gather information and collect it in a book. Doing that does NOT make you an authority on the subject, it never has and it never will.

 

[dbkick]

... Jorge is an author. He does not hold a degree in anything related to plant growing, genetics or biology.
It's already been established that Jorge takes information written by others and posts it in his books as his own.

He might be a good author and he might be a somewhat good grower, but he is NOT the a major player with regards to proper scientific evidence.
He does not know anything about the scientific sides of cannabis, last time someone quoted Jorge as if he was the sole contributor of knowledge that person was shot down not only by me, but also by many others who can see that quoting an author as a credible scientific informational person is like quoting a movie star, it has no relevance.


I would never base any knowledge on an author, unless the said author actually has degrees which prove that he knows what he is talking about.
Anybody can gather information and collect it in a book. Doing that does NOT make you an authority on the subject, it never has and it never will.

maybe this will be easier, right on dude, you're the man! +rep. fuck it

 

[k0ijn]

maybe this will be easier, right on dude, you're the man! +rep. fuck it

Way to admit that basing all your knowledge on an author who has just piled together information and collected it in a book as if he is an expert, is not a smart idea.
I bet you believe everything you read.

 

[dbkick]

Way to admit that basing all your knowledge on an author who has just piled together information and collected it in a book as if he is an expert, is not a smart idea.
I bet you believe everything you read.

how many books you authored??? how many phd you hold? no matter wtf the answer dude, you win, you're the fucking authority.

 

[dbkick]

so you like have a nice nite and go solve world peace or wtfever it is you guys do, I'm off to other things but I find comfort knowing people like you can set the world straight! Hats off to you brother.

 

[k0ijn]

I never said I was an authority on anything. That is the difference between you and me.
You claim that Jorge knows it all and we should all listen to him, I debunked your theory by a simple use of rational thought and factual information.

I have a degree in microbiology. Granted it's not a PhD but does it have to be?
At least I have some formal education within a subject that crosses cannabis (and many other subjects).
And what does my degree have to do with anything? I don't post anything I've written myself, since I'm in no way an expert in plant microbiology, genetics or any other subject relating to cannabis.
All I do is to copy information from CREDIBLE sources, like scientific research information, and post it here on the forum, so people can get FACTUAL information which is based on proper scientific values.
I never post links to obscure sites made by anybody, I only post links to credible sources.

That is the main difference between me and other people who post all kinds of "valid information" they have taken from strange books, strange websites which has been written by Mr. John Smith.

 

[Warlock1369]

Jorge is the weed god. But we can change from his ideas. But if you want to do a 180 and not take insight go ahead. I'm not buying any of it. Or sell it. I care for the people getting my meds as much as I do my plants. 15 years doing this any I still get a crop I won't sell.

 

[STEADY BLAZING]

lol i love this site

 

[silusbotwin]

I'll believe it if BT wrote it but as I see no valid links I cannot believe it.
Yes I realize that the tiny amounts of THCA which is left will turn into THC, but this happens during drying as well, not just curing.
What you're trying to say is that if you don't cure, your THC is not psychoactive, or at least that is what you're making it sound like, and that statement is false.
I know many people who don't cure (mainly because suppliers don't want it cured) and no potency is lost really, just taste and odour (which is what curing does, improving taste and odour that is).
By far most THCA is converted into THC when trichomes go from clear to cloudy, there is no reason to say that you need to cure for 3 weeks or THC is not fully realized, it's simply a false statement because the % we're talking about are so tiny compared the to the THC already fully realized in the cloudy trichomes, therefore this whole discussion about curing will increase potency is invalid and unjustified.

Do some research on decarboxylation. It doesn't matter if you believe it. The only person at a loss is yourself. You seem very closed-minded. Every THC molecule must shed it's water before it can become psychoactive. Don't believe me? Like I said, oh well.

I don't give a fuck if someone has a degree or not. If they know their shit, they know their shit. Regardless as to if he stole all of his info or not, he has never been known to give bad info. You seem like you're just looking to debate.

 

[dirtysnowball]

you guys should taste some 1 year cure'd bud, its awesome, really try it. air tight canning jars... vacuumed sealed, the outside is brown or green or blackout out. the weed losses its green color and turns amber! so fucking good. the dispensaries weed is average at best, usually its wetter than preferable making your lungs feel super bloated when you inhale all that expensive steam, just remember this is a business and profit is the #1 priority.

 

[BA142]

Way to admit that basing all your knowledge on an author who has just piled together information and collected it in a book as if he is an expert, is not a smart idea.
I bet you believe everything you read.

Dude all i've seen you do is discredit everybody but yourself. Where are your links? Why are your sources automatically better than anyone else? You expect us to discredit everything Cervantes says but we're supposed to believe your linkless babbling?



If you're such a genius, then why don't you enlighten us?

 

[k0ijn]

Do some research on decarboxylation. It doesn't matter if you believe it. The only person at a loss is yourself. You seem very closed-minded. Every THC molecule must shed it's water before it can become psychoactive. Don't believe me? Like I said, oh well.

I don't give a fuck if someone has a degree or not. If they know their shit, they know their shit. Regardless as to if he stole all of his info or not, he has never been known to give bad info. You seem like you're just looking to debate.

What are you talking about?
The statement I made was because the guy said that without a cure, your weed will not be psychoactive.
That statement in itself is wrong. Yes, the weed will improve with time as continued decarboxylation will occur and the weed will improve in taste and odour through a proper cure. That however does not dictate that if you don't cure (which many people don't, either out of ignorance or time issues) your weed is worthless.

The decarboxylation of THCA into THC occurs when you heat up the weed, not only by letting the THCA molecule shed it's water.
You can't just say that "every THC molecule must shed it's water before it can become psychoactive". It's not a proper way of explaining what happens.
This is the same reason why eating fresh cannabis will not get you very high, but setting light to it will, since you are essentially just speeding up the decarboxylation.


I don't know why you have to attack me on this subject with your tough words, it just makes you come across as some bitter angry child.

Dude all i've seen you do is discredit everybody but yourself. Where are your links? Why are your sources automatically better than anyone else? You expect us to discredit everything Cervantes says but we're supposed to believe your linkless babbling?



If you're such a genius, then why don't you enlighten us?

I discredit the people who post shite information without any proper scientific links.
We just lost a lot of data due to the hack that occured, I'm not going to rewrite everything I had written about this exact subject, since I already have repeated myself countless times, but I have posted the links to the sites I'm quoting, if you cannot find them, you haven't looked.



I'm not saying my sources are better than yours or anybody else's.
If we're both posting links to proper scientifically valid sites with proper scientific information, then our sources are equally valid.
The problem that occurs here is that people who argue with me post links to cannabis shops websites (store front cannabis shops) or websites made by who knows who, some obscure website that nobody has ever heard of, just some person who has gathered cannabis information and posts it on his site as fact.
Do you realize how much shite information there is about cannabis?

Take just trichomes, people post wrong information about cannabinoids and what they do every day in this forum section, it's unbelievable how much shite is posted.

I'm not saying that you should discredit everything Cervantes says. I'm saying that you need to think for yourself instead of just blindly taking, what an author who gathered information from the internet from people he hardly knew and collected it in a book, for granted.


Just to shut you up I will post some of the links I have again:

http://montanabiotech.com/

http://naihc.org/hemp_information/content/hemp.mj.html


Cannabis and Cannabinoids:
Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Therapeutic Potential

Marijuana Chemistry:
Genetics, Processing And Potency

^ are books.

 

[silusbotwin]

What are you talking about?
The statement I made was because the guy said that without a cure, your weed will not be psychoactive.
That statement in itself is wrong. Yes, the weed will improve with time as continued decarboxylation will occur and the weed will improve in taste and odour through a proper cure. That however does not dictate that if you don't cure (which many people don't, either out of ignorance or time issues) your weed is worthless.

The decarboxylation of THCA into THC occurs when you heat up the weed, not only by letting the THCA molecule shed it's water.
You can't just say that "every THC molecule must shed it's water before it can become psychoactive". It's not a proper way of explaining what happens.
This is the same reason why eating fresh cannabis will not get you very high, but setting light to it will, since you are essentially just speeding up the decarboxylation.


I don't know why you have to attack me on this subject with your tough words, it just makes you come across as some bitter angry child.

Cool story bro