Flushing the murh busting

[Simplicio]

Here's an excerpt from that High Times article

New Research Shows Flushing Plants Before Harvest May Be Unnecessary

In a blind taste test, researchers have found that many prefer cannabis that has not been flushed before harvest.

hightimes.com

"The results of a new research trial released this month show that flushing plants before harvest may not improve the quality of cannabis flower. The results seem to contradict the commonly held belief that flushing plants improves the taste and burnability of dried cannabis flower.

Under common, although not universal, cultivation practices, cannabis growers stop fertilizing their plants one to two weeks before harvest in an effort to improve the quality of their finished product.

“Flushing is important because it removes excess nutrients that are leftover within the plant,” explains High Times senior cultivation editor Danny Danko. “So it helps with the burnability of the flower by leeching out excess salts and nutrients.”

But in the trial conducted by RX Green Technologies, a manufacturer of cannabis nutrients and other cultivation products, researchers determined that those participating in a blind test tended to prefer cannabis flower that had not been flushed before harvest."

Bottom line: this study says un-flushed weed tastes at least as good as flushed weed.
I agree that a study by a nute pusher might be suspect, but double blind tests need a lot of cheating to be wrong.
This study agrees with others I've seen, and disagrees with the silly notion that roots given plain water can somehow suck unwanted elements out of the buds.

 

[AutoWonders]

"The results of a new research trial released this month show that flushing plants before harvest may not improve the quality of cannabis flower.

That is how I feel. I nute to harvest. I don't believe in dark before harvest either.

 

[Oh Mr DC]

I'm no scientist hell I'm not even that good of a grower but I guarantee nobody that claims their flushed herb tastes better than unflushed hasnt done a double blind taste test!!!

 

[PotDaddy]

That is how I feel. I nute to harvest. I don't believe in dark before harvest either.

I am trying the Ice on the roots but I look at it as a slow watering also and I am cutting down in the next day or so. I have decent tricome production but curious to see if this helps.

 

[AutoWonders]

I am trying the Ice on the roots but I look at it as a slow watering also and I am cutting down in the next day or so. I have decent tricome production but curious to see if this helps.

Enjoy the fruits of your labor.

 

[PotDaddy]

Thanks

Enjoy the fruits of your labor.

Thanks!! The end product is a bonus, I really enjoy growing it's very calming. My friends laughed but it's true.

 

[dankstyle J]

I grow using a living soil methodology so this whole flushing thing is foreign to me .For me feeding the microbes an keeping a strong soul structure is important having worms an.other natural organisms as well an flushing would destroy that .I was told in college by my professor once a chemical enters a plant it never leaves .I'm all for organics but do limit my nitrogen towards the end of flowering an concentrate more on plant juices an sugars I have grown hundreds of plants an have noticed this to provide a richer terpene count after cure but this is just an assumption I do believe it provides a smoother smoke as well .

 

[Disburped]

The flush myth is annoying, why does it stay alive?
The logical answer would be cause it do something to the plant, that someone did invent this weed specific treatment cause it had a purpose beside of pouring nutes down the drain. So what is it?
I have two theories on that one.
Someone used nutes not made for plants grown for human consumption and decided the flush would be good for the health of the smoker.
The second theory is a bit better, someone noticed that by flushing the plant it became starved of nitrogen and did flower faster, then someone else decided to flush too late and the flush myth sticked.

 

[pop22]

I've been beating this subject for years. It's a myth period IMO. Let's say that flushing does work. But how well does it work? Casaual observation alone can answer that question. Take a good look at a cannabis plant that's had a 10 day flush. Notice anything interesting? Like that the buds are still nice and green and healthy? Where do you suppose the plant, knowing it's dying, is sending all the nutrients it can? To the buds? Plants have a survival " instinct" for the lack of a better word, it's proven. Producing male pollen sacks on a female is a survival mechanism,
( a damn good one too! ), so without a doubt, feeding your womb is first last and always your priority. Funny, I've never heard of any greenhouse veggie producers flushing their crops. Whittle away at this myth with Occam's razor. Yes, it will take science to put the nail in the coffin once and for all, but a close look at how a plant works should be enough to make anyone doubt. This ranks right up there with 5G causes the Covid virus....

A report suggesting that another couple weeks of pumping nutes is ok, written by employees of a nute company. What could go wrong?

The research may be good, but one does have to take the results with just a tiny grain of salt.

The research does get one thing right though, the issue cannot be sorted without statistically valid data from a double blind study. Statistical validity can be tough in a study like this. To check the flushing question would require cloned plants, multiple plants in both flushed and unflushed groups, randomized selection of cuttings for the two groups, randomized placement of clones in a growing space with as uniform a growing environment as possible re. nutes and light, consistent and randomized processing of plants, ideally repeated for at least a few strains and growing media, etc. etc. And double blind means that none of the the tasters growers, harvesters or processers can know which weed sample is which.

And after all that, potentially bugger all difference between flushed and unflushed. Lotta work, lotta money, lotta plants, lotta commercial growing space tied up for a grow session, etc. etc. And no one stepping up to do the job? Not a big surprise.

The unfortunate irony here is that this research is likely to be undertaken only by an entity with serious money in its pockets, and some sort of potential payback. The payback in this case would likely apply only to nute sellers and commercial growers. If the commercial growers take the research on which they may well have done already for all we know, they are unlikely to publish results for their competitors to use.

Hence where we are with this study, one by a nute company letting all and sundry know that ceasing use of their product early may not be such a good idea after all.

One sad part of this oft repeated setup to me is that the scientist(s) involved may well have done a stellar job with the work, and the company could even have committed to permitting publication of data regardless of conclusions in spite of the considerable costs involved. But we as outsiders will never know, and dedicated professionals, at least sometimes, are unfairly judged according to who pays the substantial bills.

Tough nut to crack this.

 

[pop22]

Nah, it was some hippie on a bad acid trip, bugging out over the plants he's grew. He pictured his plant food turning his pot into Audrey 2
( Little Shop of Horrors )....................

The flush myth is annoying, why does it stay alive?
The logical answer would be cause it do something to the plant, that someone did invent this weed specific treatment cause it had a purpose beside of pouring nutes down the drain. So what is it?
I have two theories on that one.
Someone used nutes not made for plants grown for human consumption and decided the flush would be good for the health of the smoker.
The second theory is a bit better, someone noticed that by flushing the plant it became starved of nitrogen and did flower faster, then someone else decided to flush too late and the flush myth sticked.