Awesome job Icemud.
While I'm not a fan of concentrates myself, I realize there is definitely a place in the medical community for them.
We've got our very own weed warrior here on 420 mag. Congrats bud!
I'm happy to be fighting for a good cause Yea the thing with the extracts is that the federal government, they don't want to see people smoking medicine, so extracts will be key for isolating cannabinoids and terpenes for the ability for other delivery methods and dosed intake. Since its nearly impossible to smoke 50mg of thc, but very easily can be extracted, dosed out and put on a sublingual or a transdermal application extracts do make a lot of sense if taken to a clinical level, using professional equipment. Thats the reason that extracts are important on a medical level.
I never was a debater per say but
anyone who doesn't like being wrong always has to say something
especially if you know your right
I kind of thrive and take pride in trying to know as much as I can about any particular subject I care about, and when I know I'm right and someone is wrong, its so hard for me not to speak up.. Usually its out of being helpful in wanting to open the other persons mind, or show another perspective... but sometimes I have to bite my tongue and just know, like that old saying goes " Never argue with a pig, it just frustrates you and will irritate the pig" lol 
I am so happy right now! All my hard work at my job is paying off, and we are working to change california law. Our bill goes before the senate hearing tomorrow!!!!
In California, the use of any chemicals to extract cannabinoids is illegal, and hosts the same penalties as running a meth lab. This has lead to many residential explosions, burn victims and deaths due to an influx of black market butane extraction and open blasting. The current laws in California would not change the legality of extractions until 2018, so as a direct result of my research, my company, our lobbyists and partners, we have actively changed the content of legislation going to the senate committee tomorrow to allow for immediate licensing of regulated and approved extraction facilities. I couldn't be prouder of myself, my team/company (not mine but you know what I mean) and our partners and lobbyists!
I swear, I am smiling ear to ear right now, reading the bill text which is almost copied exactly from the research I did, and the narratives, summaries and outlines with facts I provided to our lobbyist team
(I reduced the content of the original post as I thought about it and I'm not sure how much information i can actually share about my companies involvement with this just yet... ) under a NDA
Hey Dr Cannabi! Thanks
I work in a cannabis company obviously, and some of us use cannabis, some dont. Its interesting the perspective questions of the non-users, saying things like "well how much should I use, and how do I know how it will effect me" or "if a doctor were to perscribe it to a patient, would he tell the patient take 5 hits of kush each night with food?".
Its sort of funny as I've smoked for decades, but it also makes a lot of sense coming from someone who never has used, and its exactly why extracts are perfect for those types of applications. The current black market state of extracts and back yard producers though, using non proper equipment and not subjecting their products to full lab tests though is what keeps the products sub par in quality and a lot of them straight up trash doesn't really exemplify the potential that extracts really do have.
Regulating will at least help the people who truely know how to make proper extracts, and make sure that they are only stripping what they want from the plants, without residual petrochemicals, fillers, oils or waxes. I'm proud to be a part of this movement, even though most of us think the whole thing is silly and back ass wards, I mean a plant that never has killed anyone is this huge threat to society? yet thousands of products passed by the FDA kill hundreds to thousands of people. Its easier to kill yourself from overdosing on water than with cannabis, yet cannabis is this horrible plants??? I just want to slap these politicians somtimes and knock some sense into them. I saw a great quote the other day which read... "Common sense, isn't really that common anymore" I loved it!
. But, alas, I cannot finance them for you. Therefore, since you are doing everything on your own dime, I can't complain much either way, ha ha. ). If you merely post a link here to a different thread, so as to keep things on track here, I'll understand. I love reading scientific articles about cannabis (even the 75% that I do not fully understand).
Been interesting reading the last few pages Ice !
Where i'm from we don't get much backyard stuff oils etc it is mainly bud & most off the time poor quality, hence any decent person will grow their own
I would like to take this moment to point out this sponsor - Buy CBD Oil UK | Buy Cannabis Oil Online
Mainly just CBD oil with the THC removed not sure how they do that ? but makes it legal where i'm from with a little bit of pressure from the people !
But extraction is done through high grade medical Co2, perhaps some boiling down of oil to make CBD %...
Mmm a little extra for research
, so at least I never took a chance on that kind of thing. And I never forgot that I was right beside a rapidly boiling flammable substance and decided to light a cigarette (or even smoke one), either - which I heard has actually happened (IDFK, maybe some idiots have (other) drug habits which they finance through trying to create/sell oil or something?) .
.Oh, bummer. Kind of like running an experiment to see if running up and down a flight of stairs for an hour makes a person sweat - without having the poor guy set on the couch for an hour first to see if maybe he's already sweating because it's August and 93°F, lol.
Yea I wish I had the capibilities of running like 10 different equal tents to have many lighting experiments going. Maybe eventually I will be able to make this happen. Who knows with the career I am in. Right now we are testing in a controlled environment 8 different prototype led panels we built, and a gavita hps to see if we can beat it, as well as testing different white light color temperatures to see which produces best yeild, best terpene, cannabiod profiles and gathering all the data. It wont be public because its internal but who knows, maybe I can run some tests in there after the tests are done.. ?
That would help. But that's the stretch. I'd be wondering what the difference in behaviors were between 12/12, 14/10, and 14/10 with far red supplementation. I guess I would love to see two control groups
Yea, I really wish I had many tents.... I'm curious on quite a few lights I own on certain parameters to test. Plus I would love to be able to just run LED vs LED comparisons to show actually which ones are top notch.. right now I can only give some testing data and just a thumbs up or down if it worked flawlessly and grew bud, or if there were bumps... I wish I could supply everyone with like a lab grade analysis... maybe in the future
I would agree that you ought to see some kind of noticeable change @ three weeks if there is going to be any. But there might not be a whole lot of difference (IOW, things may happen s l o w l y under that schedule, but still happen). And I guess it'd work best with fully mature plants that are ready to flower "at the drop of a hat." If you're already seeing a few "preflowers" on the mother, that'd be the one I'd grab cuts from.
I'm still deciding on how to run the test... after speaking with some folks on my youtube channel who have used far red light, they all recommend only running it for 15 minutes after the daylight, so I may do that instead to see. I may just have to run the test without a control group, to show whether it works or not. I mean I have 6 different strains which are all very genetically diverse so even though there is not a control group, I will know if they flower appropriately within the time constraints as normal as all the strains I have run mutiplie times before, so going back to when they show preflowers and full flower set, I can see if under a longer schedule this was delayed, or sped up or remained the same. After I run this test, I can always run the strains again, without the far red light, but with a 14/10 schedule just to be sure, and if they don't flower in the same time frame, then I can shift the schedule back to normal, or use the Far red light.
I started to wholeheartedly agree with the part that I highlighted. But then I though of "pure" equatorial landrace sativas. IIRC, the "day length" at the equator does not change from season to season. NEAR the equator in the tropics, you'd only see a slight variance. And so on, as one travels north (or south) from there. Plants will not have evolved to "look" for cues which will never appear in the area where they originally grew naturally, methinks. I just did a quick (lazy) search and saw that, in England, the length of daytime in June is around 15h 38m, and in December it's only 7h 51m. In Australia - things are reversed, of course :rolleyes3 - the daytime length in December is 14h 19m, and in June it is 10h 24m. Obviously, cannabis will not be flowering outside in England in December, lol... And IDK if there are any landrace varieties from there - or at least extant there - anyway. But in similar latitudes... Cannabis would have to begin flowering soon enough to actually finish before it got too cold. That could mean that such a hypothetical landrace strain would begin flowering when the day length was higher than we would normally expect. It could also mean a short-flowering indica, of course - but I'd still guess that the number of uninterrupted dark hours required to initiate flowering would be somewhat less.
Err... I forgot where I was going with all this. Unless it was to say that a person could spend several years experimenting with different day/night lengths of different strains... and, as a percentage of the whole, it might be as a drop of water in the ocean.
Great points and just as any plant research, especially with lighting there is always going to be variables in which may be true for the majority, but then doesn't work for the miniority. I know that most of us in the cannabis world don't have pure landrace equatorial sativas so for the majority of us, this test will show that its either a positive effect for us and the majority of the hybrids we have now adays, or not in regards to longer day length and flower triggering. The same goes for the strains dubbed "autoflower" which usually stemms from ruderalis varieties of cannabis. From my understanding ruderalis doesn't flower based on lighting but on the gene encoding telling the plant to flower at a certain maturity timeframe, but it also has been known to benefit slightly in a fluxuated lighting schedule with slightly shorter days than nights for flowering too. So there are a lot of maybe's out there... unfortunately I just 1 man, with a couple strains in an apartment with small grow tents so all those "want to do" tests on my list will have to wait.. I wish I could just figure out a way to fund it, however being more of a personal satisfaction of tests vs a profitable business model, I don't think many people would invest.. LOL
I wish I was still ten years old. I had all my cognitive ability - and hadn't started killing brain cells wholesale. <SIGH> It is completely irrelevant to the thread, of course, but: I hear they have a/c in schools now. I know that I was... brighter than the average brat as a youngin'. I don't think I ever had the thought, "I don't understand," as a child. And... The first computer I ever saw was a "new" Commodore Pet 2001 that was in the office of my junior high school - that someone had lost the manual to the first week. I taught myself BASIC by, basically, guessing, lol. But today... I have trouble with some things in my OS (linux) even with help, and wish that there was even an average twelve-year old around to deal with it. Kids' brains... It wouldn't work for all of them but, doggone it, a good percentage of them could be educated at such an accelerated rate, year-round, that THEY could be performing experiments and inventing things by, IDK, age 14 or 15, lol. We wouldn't even have to kill their "childhood development" in order to do it, either. We've already scratched things like cursive writing off the list. Uh, rambling pointlessly (apologies).
Awwww sh!t! You said Commodore! wow... Yea I remember my Grandfather sitting me down on a Sinclair computer, which read computer programs off of audio tapes
Hmm. I did not realize that some cannabinoids were actually higher under a schedule of fewer daylight hours. Interesting. I wonder if that was strain-dependent. Studies often only used one or two strains, so who knows? The only thing I remember about the one I read was that it was (I think) published in 1973 and listed two authors. Yes, please post any studies you can fine (extra points if the links are to NON-governmental websites
Here are a few clips of the study I screenshotted a while back. I'm sure if you took one of the lines out, and googled it verbatim you could find the study.
I have seen the same thing happen. It is very frustrating.
Our government really stifled research. Most of the (few) scientific articles that I've read from years back wouldn't have even happened, but the researchers originally set out to prove something bad about cannabis. However, I've read stuff from other countries now and then that was... I could tell that the researchers' beginning hypotheses were much more varied - like, instead of trying to vilify the plant in order to justify their grant money - and secure more in the future - they were actually trying to learn something. The NIDA has funded a good bit of cannabis stuff, but from its name (National Institute of Drug Abuse) it is clear that only certain topics would have a snowball's chance of getting funded. I have found a lot at UCSD's Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research website. But that is health-focused (which is not a bad thing).
Knowing how shady our government is, I think they could have found the research they needed to reschedule cannabis or even remove it already... but as the saying goes "if there is a will, there is a way" and I don't think they had the "will" to even find the way. There is overwhelming amounts of research available. I really wish that the whole disgussion and debate about rescheduleing was publicly available and televised... as most of the DEA comments that have been televised in that past were utter BS and lies...
Here is a clip to show these arsehats that regulate our beloved plant..
I'm wanting to say that I found the study from 1973 at a UN website, but that might be a faulty memory. Universities in locations such as India and various European universities occasionally did interesting studies. If one adds "industrial hemp" related research, Canada has a lot.
Something else that surprised me when I read about it. I know there have been green greenhouse/etc. lights for a while for working "after hours." I have also read that, after certain err... spectral minimums were met, that the quantity of light was much more important than the quality (so to speak). That was also mildly surprising - but then I realized that it might go a long way towards explaining the performance of HPS - which does not, on the face of it, seem to be a very good spectrum for growing/flowering cannabis... but the overall amount of illumination is high (and we've all grown lots of bud with HPS, lol). Some research proves that anecdotal evidence is correct, while other research disproves (other) anecdotal "evidence."
From most studies I have read, light quality mostly has to do with plant morphology and manipulation of growth traits, however in terms of plant mass (yield) and other factors like photosynthesis, light quantity is of the upmost importance.
Loads of info as always
.
