I guess I don't understand the two charts and the point that is attempting to be made with them. Both charts show essentially similar readings overall and the very small increase in CBD levels seems immaterial at best, at least to me. I get that it's three times the first reading but neither is enough to make any real impact, positive or negative.
Concur (agree).
Also, I see THC-A actually went up by a material amount? That also doesn't make sense to me since my understanding is that THC-A levels peak while still on an actively growing plant and begin to degrade into THC and then on to CBN.
My question remains, if that was Juanita LaLagrimosa going in, why ISN'T there somewhere around 6-9% in the final result?
In my very limited experience with lab chemistry, you have to be careful to specify what constitutes a SIGNIFICANT change, or what can be easily attributable to random causes (such as chemicals, user error, machine insensitivity, etc.).
I would be willing to look at a significant increase in the first decimal place (say, from 0.1% CBD to 0.3% CBD) as a reason to fun a further test. However, when it is 0.01% increasing to 0.03%, I think that *CAN be attributable to other factors.
In other words, yes, there is a difference, but it is not a reliable predictor because the percentage readings can be explained in other ways. I do not want to speak for him, but I think that *MIGHT be what Shed was trying to say (not sure).
I agree, probably you have to put some high-CBD weed in to get a meaningful, readable result.
So, if the research does not exist, I guess I can take Tangwena's advice, and put 10% of the crop into cob, and send some out for checking, before and after.
But before I do all of that, probably I need to do a web search. Probably a half an hour limit, before I go spending time and money on lab tests...
I've not done cobs but they are supposed to have some magic to them, probably because of the fermenting process, but I wonder if their effects are from something other than what we would normally test for in more typical use.
I do not do caffeine anymore, but do you ever do a Kombucha tea? It is a lot of black tea, sugar, and Kombucha starter. It is kind of like a blob that eats sugary tea, and gives off fermented sugary tea. It is great for the stomach.
Same story with yoghurt or kefir. It is just milk, but the sum of the fermentation process is much more healthwise than the whole of its parts.
Kimchi, sauerkraut, same. Both are good for the stomach and digestion. And I am sure there are more, but I never met a fermented input I did not like better than the original...
Meaning, the fermentation process adds to the sum of the parts. (Maybe like cooking Supersoil?)
(Probably I can commit more of the second crop to a ferment. Just so long as the CBD does not drop out, or convert to THC. (I cannot imagine it doing that, but you never know! Lol! And I do not mean to be a pain, but this is medical for me, so I have to quadruple check, or it will be my fault.)
Also, the CBD levels show essentially zero in both charts.
I need to see if I can find a flower test facility. I know they have some micro labs here that make oil. I am sure that one of them will be willing to test a sample of flower for not too much money.
And in the meantime, I bet it will probably work.
I will probably stick to 10% of the first crop, but I think much of the second crop can go into cob.
If anything, there is a trace indication of an increase, which may mean nothing, or it may mean who-knows-what.
Is there any way to contact the original poster of the Juanita La Lagrimosa sample, to verify that is what it was (and that he was not too stoned on cob, haha??)
CBD and CBD-A are two different molecules and interact with some of the cannabinoid receptors differently. For example CBD can offset the high from THC by disrupting its ability to fully lock into to the CB1 receptor, but CBD-A does not share that property.
Hmm.
I did not know that!
Thank you.