Search results

It's still just people avoiding the question. Your response to my question was "I can see that logic. That's business."

Quote it.

You have seen first hand accounts that there is. Whether you deny them or not, people's negative experiences with unflushed weed indicates that there is a possibilty of a risk. The burden lies in proving that there is no risk and everybody that has had a bad experienced was smoking improperly...

The only thing I saw was that not flushing leaves N in your plant which is needed for the cure process. With how I've been saying to do it, you still have green fan leaves and N in your plant. I didn't read your links, if you could just say in this thread the general reason why feeding until...

The only answer to my question "If you don't have proof that not flushing is beneficial, and there is a risk associated with it, why not flush?" Majority of the thread is people avoiding this question and calling people names.

Whoa, no. I usually go for 30-40%, but definitely less than half. The pic I saw I didn't even see the amber at first glance. Oh nvm, that might not of been at me.

What size pots? Sounds like underwatering. Everytime you water you should water each plant so that some water comes out of the bottom of the pot. Pot weight is my favorite method of telling when they need water. When it's light, they used it all up.

Bleh sorry if it seemed like that's what I was defending. If you go back, my main premise has been that if not flushing isn't beneficial, and it has a risk associated with it, why risk it?

Lol sorry, I must of misinterpreted something or confused you with somebody. But as a personal question, if you haven't seen proof that not flushing is beneficial, and you have heard from multiple people that unflushed weed is harsh to them, why not flush?

Why does nobody have to prove that? Because a lot of people say so? That's a pretty flimsy argument to use and sit there and tell somebody that they are wrong.

I've yet to see a double blind proving not flushing is beneficial... If there's a risk with health problems, why take it?

There's the same amount of improperly cured flushed bud as unflushed bud, the variable is flushing.

Until somebody shows an experiment showing not flushing is beneficial, I see no reason to risk somebody's health who is already sick, plenty of first hand accounts out there of people having problems with unflushed bud.

And you guys are still completely discounting the two people sharing experiences with health problems and unflushed bud.

With the way I grow it's too early, I harvest later.

Aye. Pretty bud, any estimates on how much more weight you gained by not flushing? It's not like the plant just stops completely growing with out npk added.

Ah, I harvest with more amber than you then, I let my super lemon haze go probably another 2 weeks after that point.

That plant is too early to begin flushing, it's still growing, basically I'm saying to not add high npk nutes once you reach the harvest window.

But is that food being converted into measurable weights (please don't talk about molecules), And I'm not saying to give 0 ppm, just that they don't need the npk at that point, can you measure what nutrients are being absorbed during that period?

Yea I'm not sold on the N thing, somebody posted a link about it so just to cover bases, even if it does, it's in my plants anyways. Not adding base nutes for a week won't instantly yellow your plants No controls, my evidence is my experience, adding nutrients after I see that my plants aren't...