(cubes)
for those of you who do not believe that the flush creates any difference in potency, why do you suppose some cultivators find a difference in flush/potency?
please help me understand. i truly appreciate all responses
flush potency question for EVERYONE
Started By
tryptaminer
, May 03 2010 10:37 PM
10 replies to this topic
#2
curenado
-
- Expired Member
- 949 posts
Mycotopiate
Posted 03 May 2010 - 10:39 PM
Because there is a difference in flush potency? Guzman demonstrated that second flush mushrooms were more potent than the first flush - if that is the specific you are talking about...
#3
Freaky
-
- OG VIP
-
- 12,357 posts
Head Editor
Posted 04 May 2010 - 06:27 AM
From my experience the first flush has always held more potency. Why I think this is, more nutrients were available the first flush thus making that flush more potent to me.
In regards to potency, it's subjective completely due to chemical and physical reaction of the person ingesting, nutrients provided during the grow, along with genetics of the species you are growing.
Curenado, if by chance you have a link or info on Guzmans finding with the 2nd flush being more potent I'd love to read it. I believe it's been discussed here before but I can't remember the thread. Thanks!
In regards to potency, it's subjective completely due to chemical and physical reaction of the person ingesting, nutrients provided during the grow, along with genetics of the species you are growing.
Curenado, if by chance you have a link or info on Guzmans finding with the 2nd flush being more potent I'd love to read it. I believe it's been discussed here before but I can't remember the thread. Thanks!
#4
curenado
-
- Expired Member
- 949 posts
Mycotopiate
Posted 04 May 2010 - 07:09 AM
Freaky - first off, me busted. It wasn't Guzman at all :o it was Jeremy Bigwood & Michael Beug
Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 5 (1982) 287-291 "Variation of Psilocybin and Psilocin levels with repeated flushes (harvest) of mature sporocarps of Psilocybe cubensis (Earle) Singer"
The Evergreen State College, Olympia, Washington 98505
(Received 10/20/1980; accepted in revised form 6/18/1981)
They did a rigidly controlled lab series and then got some "street" samples - variation on the lab ones was over a factor of 4; On the street samples over a factor of ten. They also found that the psilocin levels in each flush varied more than the psilocybin levels did.
I don't know a link for this, I read it hard copy and I have no scanner to upload it. The graphs are the interesting part too!
I'll try to get my copy scanned or find a e-version for the vaults...
Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 5 (1982) 287-291 "Variation of Psilocybin and Psilocin levels with repeated flushes (harvest) of mature sporocarps of Psilocybe cubensis (Earle) Singer"
The Evergreen State College, Olympia, Washington 98505
(Received 10/20/1980; accepted in revised form 6/18/1981)
They did a rigidly controlled lab series and then got some "street" samples - variation on the lab ones was over a factor of 4; On the street samples over a factor of ten. They also found that the psilocin levels in each flush varied more than the psilocybin levels did.
I don't know a link for this, I read it hard copy and I have no scanner to upload it. The graphs are the interesting part too!
I'll try to get my copy scanned or find a e-version for the vaults...
#5
Freaky
-
- OG VIP
-
- 12,357 posts
Head Editor
Posted 04 May 2010 - 07:17 AM
:bow: thanks for the info Curenado!
Well, street samples aren't a good key for me, we all know if not harvested and dried properly the potency will be lacking without a doubt.
Thanks for the study info because I'm still going to read what I can on it.
Well, street samples aren't a good key for me, we all know if not harvested and dried properly the potency will be lacking without a doubt.
Thanks for the study info because I'm still going to read what I can on it.
#6
curenado
-
- Expired Member
- 949 posts
Mycotopiate
Posted 04 May 2010 - 08:00 AM
They just compared lab & street samples and noted the wide variance between the two.
Freaky says - "In regards to potency, it's subjective completely..."
They weren't being "MAPS" about it - they didn't do subjective at all, they did comparative chemical analysis of psilocybin and psilocin levels. Part of what may be subjective for people though is the difference between the psilocin levels - it shows that nut's aren't the major factor in the flush potency even if they are on the crop as a whole...you'll have to see the graphs. One thing it does show for sure is that there can be a real wide variance in these creatures!
I think we are saying kind of the same thing after a fashion when you look at them. (Graphs)
Unless this was replicated a few times it is a bit of a "snapshot" i.e. maybe four models like this should have been done comparatively instead of the "people on the street have no idea what they will get" exercise with the street samples. (?)
But I wasn't there and not Bigwood...Will try to scan or make you a copy of mine though.
Freaky says - "In regards to potency, it's subjective completely..."
They weren't being "MAPS" about it - they didn't do subjective at all, they did comparative chemical analysis of psilocybin and psilocin levels. Part of what may be subjective for people though is the difference between the psilocin levels - it shows that nut's aren't the major factor in the flush potency even if they are on the crop as a whole...you'll have to see the graphs. One thing it does show for sure is that there can be a real wide variance in these creatures!
I think we are saying kind of the same thing after a fashion when you look at them. (Graphs)
Unless this was replicated a few times it is a bit of a "snapshot" i.e. maybe four models like this should have been done comparatively instead of the "people on the street have no idea what they will get" exercise with the street samples. (?)
But I wasn't there and not Bigwood...Will try to scan or make you a copy of mine though.
#7
Freaky
-
- OG VIP
-
- 12,357 posts
Head Editor
Posted 04 May 2010 - 08:55 AM
Yes I'd like to read and look at graphs. It'd be good info to have here anyway. Thanks!
#8
Posted 04 May 2010 - 09:10 AM
I have heard and this is completely subjective but nutrients like Phosphorus and nitrogen could increase potency. It is extremely important in compost growing(the nitrogen) so it makes some sense.
I am still on the fence about that though, I really would need to see some good statistical studies before I would claim that as empirical in nature.
I couldn't agree more, I find that to be true myself :bow:
In Stamets, Psilocybin Mushrooms of the World which, is from 1996 so it is old, but it says this about cubensis potency: The % of Psilocybin is a little over 0.6% around 0.7% I would say. While the Psilocin is slightly lower with a 0.65% level. The lowest of all is the Baeocystin in cubensis with a 0.01%.
Combing all 3 you get a 1.3% which, according to Stamets is highly active or potent > .75-2%
So, as you can see the topic is very subjective with so much grey area until something solid comes out, that everyone can agree on scientifically we are beating the proverbial dead horse. (I feel bad for that horse).
Hope some of this helps:)
Mahalo-Dani
I am still on the fence about that though, I really would need to see some good statistical studies before I would claim that as empirical in nature.
From my experience the first flush has always held more potency. Why I think this is, more nutrients were available the first flush thus making that flush more potent to me.
I couldn't agree more, I find that to be true myself :bow:
In Stamets, Psilocybin Mushrooms of the World which, is from 1996 so it is old, but it says this about cubensis potency: The % of Psilocybin is a little over 0.6% around 0.7% I would say. While the Psilocin is slightly lower with a 0.65% level. The lowest of all is the Baeocystin in cubensis with a 0.01%.
Combing all 3 you get a 1.3% which, according to Stamets is highly active or potent > .75-2%
So, as you can see the topic is very subjective with so much grey area until something solid comes out, that everyone can agree on scientifically we are beating the proverbial dead horse. (I feel bad for that horse).
Hope some of this helps:)
Mahalo-Dani
#9
curenado
-
- Expired Member
- 949 posts
Mycotopiate
Posted 04 May 2010 - 09:19 AM
:horse:
(:lol: Just did that for fun...)
Hey! I did find this at the Lycaeum - it's a blurb but, lacking the graphs it's what I was trying to fumble out for Freaky...
http://www.lycaeum.o...ys&kwand=shroom
BIGWOOD J; BEUG M
Variation of psilocybin and psilocin levels with repeated flushes (harvests) of mature sporocarps of Psilocybe cubensis (Earle) Singer.
J Ethnopharmacol. 1982 May. 5(3). P 287-91.
Analysis of Psilocybe cubensis (Earle) Singer grown in controlled culture showed that the level of psilocin was generally zero in the first (or sometimes even the second) fruiting of the mushroom from a given culture and that the level reached a maximum by the fourth flush. The level of psilocybin, which was nearly always at least twice the level of psilocin, showed no upward or downward trend as fruiting progressed, but was variable over a factor of four. Samples obtained from outside sources had psilocybin levels varying by over a factor of ten from one collection to the next.
(:lol: Just did that for fun...)
Hey! I did find this at the Lycaeum - it's a blurb but, lacking the graphs it's what I was trying to fumble out for Freaky...
http://www.lycaeum.o...ys&kwand=shroom
BIGWOOD J; BEUG M
Variation of psilocybin and psilocin levels with repeated flushes (harvests) of mature sporocarps of Psilocybe cubensis (Earle) Singer.
J Ethnopharmacol. 1982 May. 5(3). P 287-91.
Analysis of Psilocybe cubensis (Earle) Singer grown in controlled culture showed that the level of psilocin was generally zero in the first (or sometimes even the second) fruiting of the mushroom from a given culture and that the level reached a maximum by the fourth flush. The level of psilocybin, which was nearly always at least twice the level of psilocin, showed no upward or downward trend as fruiting progressed, but was variable over a factor of four. Samples obtained from outside sources had psilocybin levels varying by over a factor of ten from one collection to the next.
Edited by curenado, 04 May 2010 - 09:25 AM.
- MycoDani likes this
#10
tryptaminer
-
- Expired Member
- 1,432 posts
at this for life
Posted 04 May 2010 - 11:07 AM
dozens and dozens of folks here at mycotopia have voted for no difference in flush to potency ..
HOW is it that reputable cultivators of this website claim no difference in potency per flush, yet these two guys mentioned (who I am sure are reputable) more or less claim the opposite
where do you guys suppose this difference in opinion comes from? one of the options has to be the right one,
HOW is it that reputable cultivators of this website claim no difference in potency per flush, yet these two guys mentioned (who I am sure are reputable) more or less claim the opposite
where do you guys suppose this difference in opinion comes from? one of the options has to be the right one,
#11
Freaky
-
- OG VIP
-
- 12,357 posts
Head Editor
Posted 04 May 2010 - 11:26 AM
The oldness of the report or study.
The fact that we've been doing this for years and ingesting all strains and flushes for first hand reports.
Maybe that we now know, thanks to Hippie3, PF, and the OMC, for educating us all on the know how to preserve our harvests correctly. We even eat fresh fruits from different flushes and most would say the opposite of what that study shows like you've pointed out.
I just think within the last 20 plus years we've gained more knowledge on the home mycology front.
Something to think about, my outdoor fruits are never as potent as my indoor fruits as far as cubensis. I always figured it was due to the elements and environment of outdoor versus indoor and how the elements are effecting potency rather than food provided or handling after harvest.
The fact that we've been doing this for years and ingesting all strains and flushes for first hand reports.
Maybe that we now know, thanks to Hippie3, PF, and the OMC, for educating us all on the know how to preserve our harvests correctly. We even eat fresh fruits from different flushes and most would say the opposite of what that study shows like you've pointed out.
I just think within the last 20 plus years we've gained more knowledge on the home mycology front.
Something to think about, my outdoor fruits are never as potent as my indoor fruits as far as cubensis. I always figured it was due to the elements and environment of outdoor versus indoor and how the elements are effecting potency rather than food provided or handling after harvest.
