Organic vs synthetics

[Marzcanna]

Oh no this topic again

Yes its an ongoing debate between us growmies, but as I light up on a "Green Crack Fast" By HOB,and as I admire the "rainbow" on a clear sunny day woundering how is that even possible (could be dank) I suddenly had this question pop up in my head, organic or synthetic? 

Yes, we have heard this question before, but I want to know what the family here perfers and why

When I started off I used synthetics, like most new growers. But as the years went by and my knowledge of our caltivators grew I eventually made the switch to organics, top dressing and weekly teas become a new thrill for me. The two biggest difference for me switching form synthetics to organics, was the pleasure of not having to mix nutes and the extra work behind it, I still PH even tho we know it's not needed in organics due to the natural buffers in the soil. The other difference I found was in terpene profile, the flavors seem to be abit profound. So less work more flavour seemed to be a win win for me. My only challenge than was to bring my favorite medium which was coco and bring the organic method to it, now, if we know how coco works and knowing that it doesn't hold on to much as much as soil does, my thought was "how was i going to keep a healthy microbial life in an insert medium"? Well that was actually alot simpler than I thought, but that's straying abit off topic .

Now i think there's absolutely nothing wrong with synthetics, infact I believe they even have a purpose in organics to quickly fix deficiencies if the occur. They are also much easier for the new grower. For me organics suits my routine, I'm very busy during the week so being able to just water my medium and letting the microbes do all the work, "works" for me. 

But want to hear from the rest of family here, what do you prefer? Do you grow in organics or synthetics and why? 

 

 

[Prom]

I used pure chemical fertilizers in my first indoor setup, hydro... and today i am growing in soil with organics.

Use what you enjoy using, I dont think there is a right or wrong. Both bring results, if used correctly.

 

And not that i went organic out of experience, asked a guy, who knows how to grow, what to use. Use A if you find, otherwise look for B  couldnt find A, went for B. Results to my liking, sticked with it. And B was the BioBizz range... A was Plagron. He suggested soil as more tasty... and that is a bit opinion based.. but i enjoy not to Ph at all. 

 

[SkunkPharm]

Ja I also started in coco with salts. Now I mix my own soil. Feed 3 malted barley and microbe teas during the whole life time of the plants.

[PsyCLown]

I started with soil and Biobizz, it works.

However I have moved away from that and moved over to coco with synthetic nutes as it just works better for me.
Quicker growth, more control and cheaper as well.

Sent from my Redmi Note 7 Pro using Tapatalk

[The_StonedTrooper]

I started out in soil,

Then a mate, convinced me to try the salts, but after changing to salts and coco, and not making contact with him for a year, met up again a year later, and he was using soil, and swore by it now.

I didnt grow more than one grow in coco with salts, and found in my opinion, that the size was bigger, more dense heads, and unfortunately also came with, what I call a crack high. Have a hit, and wow, nice high, but a few moments later, I'm back to smoke it again, for that brief moment of euphoria again. Yes you high, but that punch is gone.

For me, soil had a full high, longer lasting and more flavor, if done right it has such a sweet aftertaste and lingers on my lips for long.

if I was growing for size, and for bag appeal and selling, I'd grow in coco for that.

For me, soil and full organic flavor

[GGG]

Started with RDWC , then Coco/perlite a few grows and then soil .

Hydro had a faster veg , flower is more or less the same for me.But all soil now , my plants look better in soil for me , I think there is a place for both .


Sent from my Hisense Infinity H50 using Tapatalk

[Marzcanna]

4 hours ago, PsyCLown said:

I started with soil and Biobizz, it works.

However I have moved away from that and moved over to coco with synthetic nutes as it just works better for me.
Quicker growth, more control and cheaper as well.

Sent from my Redmi Note 7 Pro using Tapatalk
 

Coco with synthetic is boss, I grew like that for a couple of years, how often do you feed? There was days I was feeding 3/4 times a day 

[Marzcanna]

3 hours ago, The_StonedTrooper said:

I started out in soil,

Then a mate, convinced me to try the salts, but after changing to salts and coco, and not making contact with him for a year, met up again a year later, and he was using soil, and swore by it now.

I didnt grow more than one grow in coco with salts, and found in my opinion, that the size was bigger, more dense heads, and unfortunately also came with, what I call a crack high. Have a hit, and wow, nice high, but a few moments later, I'm back to smoke it again, for that brief moment of euphoria again. Yes you high, but that punch is gone.

For me, soil had a full high, longer lasting and more flavor, if done right it has such a sweet aftertaste and lingers on my lips for long.

if I was growing for size, and for bag appeal and selling, I'd grow in coco for that.

For me, soil and full organic flavor

I think we all agree on coco & synthetic for growth and dense, but I find its missing that flavour. So I agree with you  

[Marzcanna]

2 hours ago, GGG said:

Started with RDWC , then Coco/perlite a few grows and then soil .

Hydro had a faster veg , flower is more or less the same for me.But all soil now , my plants look better in soil for me , I think there is a place for both .


Sent from my Hisense Infinity H50 using Tapatalk
 

What I really want to do is a DWC run, haven't tried that yet but we have something called load shedding here, Its too risky 

[The_StonedTrooper]

3 minutes ago, Marzcanna said:

What I really want to do is a DWC run, haven't tried that yet but we have something called load shedding here, Its too risky 

Also had that on the list, but as you say, very temperamental with our power system and even if you have backup, you have the chance of pumps or something else failing and the whole lot going to shit. 

Edited April 25, 2021 by The_StonedTrooper

[Nope]

I like the work of growing in coir. 

It really doesn't matter what I do or you do in the end. Do what brings you joy, and leave others to what does the same for them. 

[Naughty.Psychonaut]

yeah I guess like most said, it's personal preference at the end of the day, but cause this thread is about explaining our preferences, here's mine

I've mentioned this a couple times before on here, I worked on a big export flower farm in Hermanus for a number of years, where I learned a LOT about the difference between organic and synthetic fertilizers. you'll be able to spot in my earlier threads that I used to mix organics and synthetics, used to also get good results even though a bunch of the members where frowning upon it. I grow all organic now.

for me, where I stand right now, I believe synthetic nutes should be discontinued completely. The existence of those products have devistating effects on our biodiversity right around the world. 

not only on our fauna and flora, but humans too. there has been studies done on the synthetic nitrates we add to our soils and research shows that plants consumed carrying those harmfull nitrates result in a toxic reaction with the hemoglobin in the blood stream, causing methaeglobinaemia which damages the vascular and respitory system. This causes shortnes of breath and suffocation in severe cases. 

this is not only from the weed we smoke but what contains most of these harmfull nitrates is our FMCG crops. that fat healthy looking bright green lettuce on the shelf in checkers is more harmful in this regard than the weed we consume

If you guys are interested we can go into detail as to who what why and where, but the fact of the matter is, organic farming, be it urban or commercial, will stand the test of time. the most important test, I would say.

[ORGANinc.]

So yes, I think everybody started with salts and has either tried soil and moved back to salts or stayed.

I really enjoy reading to expand my knowledge around micro-biological sciences, physics and chemistry as it correlates to agriculture so bio-physics and bio-chemistry, compiling all this info is super overwhelming for someone who barely got by in school, but comforting knowing the info comes from industry leaders, bringing agriculture to new heights! As you can imagine, there is new tech daily, the possibilities for AI, processing power increasing at an exponential rate. With all this comes a new understanding around microbiology and what chemical fertilizer/pesticide do in the soil.

Chemicals companies obviously didn't care about what could possibly go wrong back then, but now because of the direct linking to certain types of disease and cancers, they are highly implicated. You see this is still all happening in the background,  not much coverage, and still very little awareness. Bayer is facing in the 10s of thousands of law suites with direct links of Glyphosates causing cancer, and you thought you were being healthy eating that carrot. Glyphosate is the key ingredient in a once popular pesticide that had the ability to chelate a plethora of heavy metals resulting in the plant taking it up and you getting cancer to make the long story short.

Salt nutrients are definitely a successful way to grow crops, but it still the equivalent to a picture or a digital song, its is not analogous. Dr Aden Anderson who has the highest qualification in just about everything, explains that while in different parts of the plants life the nutritional requirements change drastically, there are about 5/6 different stages in the reproductive/flowering phase. Would make sense that you would be able to achieve a higher level of tastiness. But not the yeild. However, I don't think anyone would argue that we are far behind the more progressive countries practicing full regenerative models and knocking it out the park.

So yes, full organic... and still paying school fees.  

[ORGANinc.]

1 hour ago, Naughty.Psychonaut said:

yeah I guess like most said, it's personal preference at the end of the day, but cause this thread is about explaining our preferences, here's mine

I've mentioned this a couple times before on here, I worked on a big export flower farm in Hermanus for a number of years, where I learned a LOT about the difference between organic and synthetic fertilizers. you'll be able to spot in my earlier threads that I used to mix organics and synthetics, used to also get good results even though a bunch of the members where frowning upon it. I grow all organic now.

for me, where I stand right now, I believe synthetic nutes should be discontinued completely. The existence of those products have devistating effects on our biodiversity right around the world. 

not only on our fauna and flora, but humans too. there has been studies done on the synthetic nitrates we add to our soils and research shows that plants consumed carrying those harmfull nitrates result in a toxic reaction with the hemoglobin in the blood stream, causing methaeglobinaemia which damages the vascular and respitory system. This causes shortnes of breath and suffocation in severe cases. 

this is not only from the weed we smoke but what contains most of these harmfull nitrates is our FMCG crops. that fat healthy looking bright green lettuce on the shelf in checkers is more harmful in this regard than the weed we consume

If you guys are interested we can go into detail as to who what why and where, but the fact of the matter is, organic farming, be it urban or commercial, will stand the test of time. the most important test, I would say.

Not to mention the environmental effects, who remembers the explosion in Beirut? Yep abandoned ship filled with ammonia nitrate... Fertilizer or Facking BOMB!!!  hahaha never mind me growmies 

[Marzcanna]

2 hours ago, Naughty.Psychonaut said:

yeah I guess like most said, it's personal preference at the end of the day, but cause this thread is about explaining our preferences, here's mine

I've mentioned this a couple times before on here, I worked on a big export flower farm in Hermanus for a number of years, where I learned a LOT about the difference between organic and synthetic fertilizers. you'll be able to spot in my earlier threads that I used to mix organics and synthetics, used to also get good results even though a bunch of the members where frowning upon it. I grow all organic now.

for me, where I stand right now, I believe synthetic nutes should be discontinued completely. The existence of those products have devistating effects on our biodiversity right around the world. 

not only on our fauna and flora, but humans too. there has been studies done on the synthetic nitrates we add to our soils and research shows that plants consumed carrying those harmfull nitrates result in a toxic reaction with the hemoglobin in the blood stream, causing methaeglobinaemia which damages the vascular and respitory system. This causes shortnes of breath and suffocation in severe cases. 

this is not only from the weed we smoke but what contains most of these harmfull nitrates is our FMCG crops. that fat healthy looking bright green lettuce on the shelf in checkers is more harmful in this regard than the weed we consume

If you guys are interested we can go into detail as to who what why and where, but the fact of the matter is, organic farming, be it urban or commercial, will stand the test of time. the most important test, I would say.

I totally agree with you. Organic is the way it was intended to be grown. Also if we take how we need to flush after using synthetics and the fact we can't/shouldn't reuse the medium after harvest with synthetics, raised alot of red flags for me

[Marzcanna]

1 hour ago, ORGANinc. said:

So yes, I think everybody started with salts and has either tried soil and moved back to salts or stayed.

I really enjoy reading to expand my knowledge around micro-biological sciences, physics and chemistry as it correlates to agriculture so bio-physics and bio-chemistry, compiling all this info is super overwhelming for someone who barely got by in school, but comforting knowing the info comes from industry leaders, bringing agriculture to new heights! As you can imagine, there is new tech daily, the possibilities for AI, processing power increasing at an exponential rate. With all this comes a new understanding around microbiology and what chemical fertilizer/pesticide do in the soil.

Chemicals companies obviously didn't care about what could possibly go wrong back then, but now because of the direct linking to certain types of disease and cancers, they are highly implicated. You see this is still all happening in the background,  not much coverage, and still very little awareness. Bayer is facing in the 10s of thousands of law suites with direct links of Glyphosates causing cancer, and you thought you were being healthy eating that carrot. Glyphosate is the key ingredient in a once popular pesticide that had the ability to chelate a plethora of heavy metals resulting in the plant taking it up and you getting cancer to make the long story short.

Salt nutrients are definitely a successful way to grow crops, but it still the equivalent to a picture or a digital song, its is not analogous. Dr Aden Anderson who has the highest qualification in just about everything, explains that while in different parts of the plants life the nutritional requirements change drastically, there are about 5/6 different stages in the reproductive/flowering phase. Would make sense that you would be able to achieve a higher level of tastiness. But not the yeild. However, I don't think anyone would argue that we are far behind the more progressive countries practicing full regenerative models and knocking it out the park.

So yes, full organic... and still paying school fees.  

Well put

[PsyCLown]

I am in no way defending synthetic nutes or against organic nutes and ways of growing - however there are quite a few things being said here without any links to the actual soruces.

 

There are pros and cons to everything, sometimes what we expect is better or good can actually be detrimental to the environment - such as natural flavourings vs artificial flavourings. End of the day, they are the exact same compound once refined but the source of where the "pre cursors" came from is what determines whether it is classified as natural or as artificial. There are natural flavourings which are just not good for the environment. 

 

Now back to the topic on hand. I think we can all agree that ultimately we still know very little about cannabis and how to achieve the best results from it, lots of learning still happening and even a lot of incorrect information going.

Flushing being one of them, there have been recent studies that point towards the fact that flushing does not make a difference (it's soo small, it can not be classified as a substantial difference). If anything, the data points towards the wants which did not have a flush ending up with better bud, a smoother smoke etc.

 

I personally have not noticed difference in taste between my soil grows and coco grows. The difference in high is also not noticeable, far more difference noticeable in the way I have grown it and the time of year, environmental differences and so forth. All of those make a far bigger and noticeable difference than coco vs soil or organic vs synthetic. Until more research is done and it can be proven, how true is it really? It could be placebo or changes in environment. Grow the exact same cutting year round with the same nutes and such and it can differ between grows.

 

Glyphosates (Round up) is a herbicide. The appeal behind it was that crops can be modified to not react to it, so that farmers could spray the fields with it and kill any weeds and such, without affecting the crops. I agree that the evidence points towards it not being good stuff.

However if we stay on the topic of genetically modified crops, we will have a vast array of views on it - it is not always a bad thing though, there are benefits to it for sure and when people breed just about anything (dogs, horses, fruit trees, cannabis) we look for certain traits (sometimes in the form of a mutation which is beneficial) and try breed that trait into whatever it is which is being bred.

 

@Naughty.Psychonaut do you have a link to the source of your info regarding the nitrates having these effects?

For all we know, it may be a particular fertilizer which is possibly even banned in lots of places or seldom used and the others could be rather safe in terms of consumption.

I do agree that the use of fertilizers and how cheap they are and the quantities they are used in is not ideal for the environment. For us home growers, quite a small compared to the loads of commercial farmers who push KGs of nutes to their crops.

 

Commercial farming is at the point where one gets their soil analysed and you get a fully customised chart which states what nutes and how much you need to give every week for each growth phase of the crop. We are all pretty much using a general approach for cannabis and have broken it down into a 3 or 4 stages of growth typically with regards to nutrients, I still feel there is a loooot more research which needs to be done and a lot more which we can still learn about the plant.

I do not feel one can say organic is better than synthetic or the other way around, it really comes down to personal preference and what you are looking for in terms of growing style. I feel that soil with organic nutes is certainly the meta and what companies are pushing at the moment. If you take a look at grow medium and nutrients and what is most popular, organic is more expensive. Don't be fooled into believing it is better though. There are pros and cons to both.

[Ill_Evan]

42 minutes ago, Marzcanna said:

we need to flush after using synthetics

Myth.

42 minutes ago, Marzcanna said:

the fact we can't/shouldn't reuse the medium after harvest with synthetics

Double myth. 

[Nope]

10 minutes ago, PsyCLown said:

I am in no way defending synthetic nutes or against organic nutes and ways of growing - however there are quite a few things being said here without any links to the actual soruces.

 

There are pros and cons to everything, sometimes what we expect is better or good can actually be detrimental to the environment - such as natural flavourings vs artificial flavourings. End of the day, they are the exact same compound once refined but the source of where the "pre cursors" came from is what determines whether it is classified as natural or as artificial. There are natural flavourings which are just not good for the environment. 

 

Now back to the topic on hand. I think we can all agree that ultimately we still know very little about cannabis and how to achieve the best results from it, lots of learning still happening and even a lot of incorrect information going.

Flushing being one of them, there have been recent studies that point towards the fact that flushing does not make a difference (it's soo small, it can not be classified as a substantial difference). If anything, the data points towards the wants which did not have a flush ending up with better bud, a smoother smoke etc.

 

I personally have not noticed difference in taste between my soil grows and coco grows. The difference in high is also not noticeable, far more difference noticeable in the way I have grown it and the time of year, environmental differences and so forth. All of those make a far bigger and noticeable difference than coco vs soil or organic vs synthetic. Until more research is done and it can be proven, how true is it really? It could be placebo or changes in environment. Grow the exact same cutting year round with the same nutes and such and it can differ between grows.

 

Glyphosates (Round up) is a herbicide. The appeal behind it was that crops can be modified to not react to it, so that farmers could spray the fields with it and kill any weeds and such, without affecting the crops. I agree that the evidence points towards it not being good stuff.

However if we stay on the topic of genetically modified crops, we will have a vast array of views on it - it is not always a bad thing though, there are benefits to it for sure and when people breed just about anything (dogs, horses, fruit trees, cannabis) we look for certain traits (sometimes in the form of a mutation which is beneficial) and try breed that trait into whatever it is which is being bred.

 

@Naughty.Psychonaut do you have a link to the source of your info regarding the nitrates having these effects?

For all we know, it may be a particular fertilizer which is possibly even banned in lots of places or seldom used and the others could be rather safe in terms of consumption.

I do agree that the use of fertilizers and how cheap they are and the quantities they are used in is not ideal for the environment. For us home growers, quite a small compared to the loads of commercial farmers who push KGs of nutes to their crops.

 

Commercial farming is at the point where one gets their soil analysed and you get a fully customised chart which states what nutes and how much you need to give every week for each growth phase of the crop. We are all pretty much using a general approach for cannabis and have broken it down into a 3 or 4 stages of growth typically with regards to nutrients, I still feel there is a loooot more research which needs to be done and a lot more which we can still learn about the plant.

I do not feel one can say organic is better than synthetic or the other way around, it really comes down to personal preference and what you are looking for in terms of growing style. I feel that soil with organic nutes is certainly the meta and what companies are pushing at the moment. If you take a look at grow medium and nutrients and what is most popular, organic is more expensive. Don't be fooled into believing it is better though. There are pros and cons to both.

Thank you for this post.. You are spot on, particularly when it comes to commercial farmers. All commercial farmers worth their salt make use of an agronomist who analysis the soils and makes the calculations for amending accordingly prior to planting, as well as during to make sure the lands are as productive as possible, while not depleting the soil to a point of no return. 

 

Regarding flushing.. again, you are spot on. The whole flushing thing is made up WOO-WOO.  

[Marzcanna]

5 minutes ago, Ill_Evan said:

Myth.

Double myth. 

Research links? 

[Ill_Evan]

Just now, Marzcanna said:

Research links? 

You first. I got mine ready on standby. Also nothing new, they are all still available in other threads where we have discussed this before. 

[CreX]

 feel that there is too much pressure on having to choose one or the other as best... 

i have grown organically - but have never had an organic run where i didnt add salt nutes to fix a deficiency, and in the same breath, i have never run a synthetic grow, without adding some sort of organic additive.

where most soils fail is the fact that they are not loose enough for the accelerated growth of weed... sure they may have all the nutes and amendments, but lacks oxygen. i really feel the reason the premuim soils are so much better than common soils, is the amount of coco and or perlite added to loosen up the meduim and allow more oxygen to the root zone.

for a comprehensive test, one would need to be able to produce excellent harvests with both coco and soil and hydro actually... and have a stable environment year round - and then give it horns as to which is the best.

i feel a synergy between synthetic and organic nutes should be involved to produce the best of the best

[CreX]

56 minutes ago, Marzcanna said:

I totally agree with you. Organic is the way it was intended to be grown. Also if we take how we need to flush after using synthetics and the fact we can't/shouldn't reuse the medium after harvest with synthetics, raised alot of red flags for me

i used to flush... but then i stopped because it honestly never made a difference to me or the buds.

i have been reusing my coco for very long. sure you dont want to be a chop and harvest and then put new plants in the unwashed coco - you would destroy everything like that. rinse the coco from what ever EC it is at harvest and rinse the coco down to 0.1 EC and add calcuim and a 10% nute mix

boom, presto! i have fresh coco again... takes a bit of practice, but it can be done without failure or detriment to your future crops

[PsyCLown]

@CreX I agree with you on that one.

 

A combination of both organic and synthetic is actually what I do as well and feel it works best. Coco with synthetic nutes but organic / natural additives such as mycorrhizal fungi, trichoderma and some other additives which help support microbe life such as molasses based products and of course microbe incoulants.

 

I know many say and feel the synthtic chemicals and ferts kill the microbes and such, however I have noticed a difference for the better when using these compared to a grow without them.

 

One should not see either method / preference as inferior or better. Both have pros and cons. 

Is Indica better than sativa?

Is an SUV better than a sports car?

Is white a nicer colour than black?

[Marzcanna]

11 minutes ago, Ill_Evan said:

You first. I got mine ready on standby. Also nothing new, they are all still available in other threads where we have discussed this before. 

Lets talk logic than, you seem like a smart person with alot of experience. I'm sure you have used fabric pots with synthetics, what happens to the pots after harvest?