Radio fucking active ferts?! Thanks for the links alpha. Luckily my last grow failed! I was using Osmocote potting mix which was obviously full of osmocote fert... it scores second highest on that list @ 2021
dude you got some balls i will give you that. theirs no way i would be growing in the dorms even if it was decrim. when i was in dorms we had noisy RA's and if shit happened word go around to everybody quick. a couple of people got busted freshman year slinging green in the dorms that place was full of snitches and the RA's where the worst.
gl on your next grow and i am sure you will get it right. if you haven't stumbled across CMH's you should have a look at them instead of the hps the heat is less and you can flower and veg under the same bulb (hps is good for flower but will stretch if you try to veg under it) and it emits UV-B which the HPS lacks. here is a link (http://advancedtechlighting.com/cdmed18.htm) way better than HPS imo runs off same ballist so you could easily change out the bulb if you where dis-satisfied which i doubt you would be.
and if i where you i would keep your grow to yourself around the dorm word gets around to quick in those type of living conditions. bad memories living in the dorms at my school glad i got out of there. does your school make you have a food plan? mine did and the food sucked.
and don't let anybody get down on you for your low yield because everyone has to start somewhere we can't all have amazing yields all the time learn from your mistakes and you will be growing the best bud you can get your hands on for much cheaper than you could buy.
gl on your next grow and i am sure you will get it right. if you haven't stumbled across CMH's you should have a look at them instead of the hps the heat is less and you can flower and veg under the same bulb (hps is good for flower but will stretch if you try to veg under it) and it emits UV-B which the HPS lacks. here is a link (http://advancedtechlighting.com/cdmed18.htm) way better than HPS imo runs off same ballist so you could easily change out the bulb if you where dis-satisfied which i doubt you would be.
and if i where you i would keep your grow to yourself around the dorm word gets around to quick in those type of living conditions. bad memories living in the dorms at my school glad i got out of there. does your school make you have a food plan? mine did and the food sucked.
and don't let anybody get down on you for your low yield because everyone has to start somewhere we can't all have amazing yields all the time learn from your mistakes and you will be growing the best bud you can get your hands on for much cheaper than you could buy.
alphacat
Member
It's the Ammonium Phosphate levels in MG - besides the geiger counter shit, the stuff is hot hot hot nitrogen-wise and will tend to acidify things more than you want as well as blocking Potassium uptake.
MG is hotter/stronger and resultantly can lockout other nutes. How this affects you will depend on your medium and water and how they react. This is also a concern with other commercial chemical ferts so beware, This is no doubt MG weakness though.
However-If your level of concern with radioactivity is that much you have a major major quandary to face living in this day and age, the domestic and imported products u use (electronics) the radio towers, powerlines, microwaves, other chemicals, foods, the list goes on. You would'nt want to reside in this dimension. (i can appreciate your concern though - that 50's gen "lets eat synthetically produced canned meat and build a radio tower on our roof!" is scary, along with the mentality driving it..I don't like that stuff either though man)
Those aren't links to grows using MG though, IE. proof in the pudding! I still see negative bias there-
Im not refering to "i grew it with mg and it turned out..eh.uh, well, ehhhh errmm ooooook, kinda weird", because theres plenty of grows on grow forums testing these results, controls and all, with "wow. big, tastey, no difference" results.
Yes MG bloom when mixed in my water is more acidic than the vigoro. BUT If i make an EWC tea using my same water, its the same ph almost as the MG if I don't PH it..as for the types of nitrogen, look at any other commercial non organic fert brand, same types and % of N pretty much.
I'm trying to keep things object and unbiased, because lots of people like me don't have the time or space, or aren't ready for the variables of 100% homegrown organics and a worm bin etc.. and don't feel like paying 50% for worm tea off the shelf especially if its a learner crop and don't have more than $5 to spend on ferts that will last more than 1 season especially... not because its shitty- its not- its cheap and widely available. If it makes you feel better though get vigoro, get shultz... theres just as many arguments about other issues ((same N) against them that you could levy as there are possible for MG. Then you can continue the crusade against any other fertilizer even the $50/quart shit. Theres always effort to put mud on something for the hell of geting it dirty apparently. Point being, theres not enough evidence out there to justify "OMG MG IS WHY YOUR GARDEN FAILED CHANGE YOUR FERT IF YOU WANT TO SUCEED" or "OMG MG WILL KILL UR PLANTS"- I see that EVERY damn time someone mentions using MG, its unfounded and old.
Heres where I can agree with you Alphacat: You only need concern yourself with the negligible "downfalls" of MG when you are ready to go for a 100% optimized crop and your variables are tied down and you are eradicating EVERY measurable weakness in your garden. I'm talking 2% difference in temp and humidity strain dependent- thats when you should even bother concerning yourself with how optimal MG is. for the majority of growers int these instances using MG and just getting on their feet, MG is the lesser of their concerns.
Fact: is MG the best for Cannabis? NO
Fact: is MG shit? no
Fact: can I use it with comparable success? yes.
so RockinNick, give schultz or vigoro a try as well and see how they react in your water/soil before you get your next plants in- not because MG is evil/won't work, just so you can find what cheap widely available nute works best for your situation now.
However-If your level of concern with radioactivity is that much you have a major major quandary to face living in this day and age, the domestic and imported products u use (electronics) the radio towers, powerlines, microwaves, other chemicals, foods, the list goes on. You would'nt want to reside in this dimension. (i can appreciate your concern though - that 50's gen "lets eat synthetically produced canned meat and build a radio tower on our roof!" is scary, along with the mentality driving it..I don't like that stuff either though man)
Those aren't links to grows using MG though, IE. proof in the pudding! I still see negative bias there-
Im not refering to "i grew it with mg and it turned out..eh.uh, well, ehhhh errmm ooooook, kinda weird", because theres plenty of grows on grow forums testing these results, controls and all, with "wow. big, tastey, no difference" results.
Yes MG bloom when mixed in my water is more acidic than the vigoro. BUT If i make an EWC tea using my same water, its the same ph almost as the MG if I don't PH it..as for the types of nitrogen, look at any other commercial non organic fert brand, same types and % of N pretty much.
I'm trying to keep things object and unbiased, because lots of people like me don't have the time or space, or aren't ready for the variables of 100% homegrown organics and a worm bin etc.. and don't feel like paying 50% for worm tea off the shelf especially if its a learner crop and don't have more than $5 to spend on ferts that will last more than 1 season especially... not because its shitty- its not- its cheap and widely available. If it makes you feel better though get vigoro, get shultz... theres just as many arguments about other issues ((same N) against them that you could levy as there are possible for MG. Then you can continue the crusade against any other fertilizer even the $50/quart shit. Theres always effort to put mud on something for the hell of geting it dirty apparently. Point being, theres not enough evidence out there to justify "OMG MG IS WHY YOUR GARDEN FAILED CHANGE YOUR FERT IF YOU WANT TO SUCEED" or "OMG MG WILL KILL UR PLANTS"- I see that EVERY damn time someone mentions using MG, its unfounded and old.
Heres where I can agree with you Alphacat: You only need concern yourself with the negligible "downfalls" of MG when you are ready to go for a 100% optimized crop and your variables are tied down and you are eradicating EVERY measurable weakness in your garden. I'm talking 2% difference in temp and humidity strain dependent- thats when you should even bother concerning yourself with how optimal MG is. for the majority of growers int these instances using MG and just getting on their feet, MG is the lesser of their concerns.
Fact: is MG the best for Cannabis? NO
Fact: is MG shit? no
Fact: can I use it with comparable success? yes.
so RockinNick, give schultz or vigoro a try as well and see how they react in your water/soil before you get your next plants in- not because MG is evil/won't work, just so you can find what cheap widely available nute works best for your situation now.
i worked in nuclear power plants, nuclear propulsion plants and now work with other aspects of radiation mainly how it affects the body and routes of removal and excretion
and both of those statements are completely false
completely
in fact
the last one is absolutely backwards
fractionation of radiation is much safer than one large dose
if you have any "real" questions that arent founded on tabloid bullshit please let me know id be glad to answer
alphacat
Member
Demasoni: it's important to distinguish between types of radiation though. EM waves are a little spooky but non-ionizing (ionizing radiation is the really bad stuff.) Particulates with a ½life are though.
Sleeprz: OK, you caught me. I'm not a nuclear physicist. I've long been under the impression that serious ionizing radiation is irreversible partly because there's no known treatment for any kind, fractional or single-dose. True that fractional radiation is preferable because it gives the body more time to repair damage incurred by exposure; however, when all's said and done, I'll just see if I can avoid it in general since I obviously don't understand it as intimately as I should. I know it's a mutagen and cancer are just mutated normal cells. Maybe there's a causal link... maybe not.
Again though, my point is not about minutiae or nitpicking; it's about the principle of using harsh, mildly radioactive chemicals to grow when it's not that difficult to buy, make, or otherwise obtain decent nutes that produce more vigorous, tastier, and less worrying end results.
Let's play devil's advocate here - is there anyone reputable on these boards who claims superior results from MG compared to other "name" nutes used heavily in the grow world? I'm seriously asking, not just trying to make a point.
Besides, let's say he tries the Lucas formula and buys a quart each of GH Micro & Bloom at around $22... OR liquid MG at $14 for a half gallon - that MG formulation is still only optimized for veg and not flower, so either he's gonna fuck up the plant by not giving it what it wants at the right time or he's gonna go out and buy even more nutes that can do it, so it's not even cheaper.
Sleeprz: OK, you caught me. I'm not a nuclear physicist. I've long been under the impression that serious ionizing radiation is irreversible partly because there's no known treatment for any kind, fractional or single-dose. True that fractional radiation is preferable because it gives the body more time to repair damage incurred by exposure; however, when all's said and done, I'll just see if I can avoid it in general since I obviously don't understand it as intimately as I should. I know it's a mutagen and cancer are just mutated normal cells. Maybe there's a causal link... maybe not.
Again though, my point is not about minutiae or nitpicking; it's about the principle of using harsh, mildly radioactive chemicals to grow when it's not that difficult to buy, make, or otherwise obtain decent nutes that produce more vigorous, tastier, and less worrying end results.
Let's play devil's advocate here - is there anyone reputable on these boards who claims superior results from MG compared to other "name" nutes used heavily in the grow world? I'm seriously asking, not just trying to make a point.
Besides, let's say he tries the Lucas formula and buys a quart each of GH Micro & Bloom at around $22... OR liquid MG at $14 for a half gallon - that MG formulation is still only optimized for veg and not flower, so either he's gonna fuck up the plant by not giving it what it wants at the right time or he's gonna go out and buy even more nutes that can do it, so it's not even cheaper.
Those are valid points. In the end however MG is not going to RUIN your garden if used with discretion, nor is it automatically the cause of your problems if your gardens going wrong. hell ed rosenthal even published MG as a nutrient to use..Hes no MJ growing noob, but hes not the all knowing either. just so MG is not useless, or even worse the physical manifestation of satan some paint it to be; simply because its what they heard (not refering to you alphacat since you actually substantiated your claim haha).
Point blank, MG is'nt my choice or what i'd recommend, but it is important to make sure people legitimize such claims when its such a popularly circulated idea. Don't want any rumors stopping a grow from happening!
Point blank, MG is'nt my choice or what i'd recommend, but it is important to make sure people legitimize such claims when its such a popularly circulated idea. Don't want any rumors stopping a grow from happening!
medical_breeder
Member
great looking t5 grow bro
First, congrats on your first grow. Don't worry about it's yield. The first is the waffle run, you get to throw it out, it doesn't count against your score.
You mentioned a fan blowing inside but what you need is air exchange. Movement isn't enough. With intake and exhaust you pump out heat and replace it with cool(er) air from the room. Without exchange, what you have is an Easy-Bake Oven.
You mentioned a fan blowing inside but what you need is air exchange. Movement isn't enough. With intake and exhaust you pump out heat and replace it with cool(er) air from the room. Without exchange, what you have is an Easy-Bake Oven.
you in no way are able to get any appreciable amount of radiation from your MG soil or ferts
i work on a daily basis with multiple(3-4) curies of activity(curie is one of the units of radioactivity)
and what you are dealing with here is pico curies .000000000001 curies or 1 x 10^-12
now look at this
you need somewhere in the 400-700 rems range of exposure in a short period of time to have any appreciable affect on you
and for fractionation its even more
now i work with multiple curies of activity and my YEARLY amount of exposure is around 1-1.5 rems
and i am allowed to have 5 rems per year
if you guys dont get this im sorry
all im saying is you are safe
it wont do jack
there is actually a benefit to my exposure to radiation over time
a little known thing called radiation hormesis.......it is a theory in the real world but it is absolutely proven 100% in the lab and it says that chronic low doses of ionizing radiation are beneficial, stimulating repair mechanisms that protect against disease
the human body is not a passive accumulator of radiation damage but it actively repairs the damage caused via number of different processes, including:
* Mechanisms that mitigate reactive oxygen species generated by ionising radiation and oxidative stress.
* Apoptosis of radiation damaged cells that may undergo tumorigenesis is initiated at only few mSv.
* Cell death during meiosis of radiation damaged cells that were unsuccessfully repaired.
* The existence of a cellular signaling system that alerts neighboring cells of cellular damage.
* The activation of enzymatic DNA repair mechanisms around 10 mSv.
* Modern DNA microarray studies which show that numerous genes are activated at radiation doses well below the level that mutagenesis is detected.
* Radiation induced tumorigenesis may have a threshold related to damage density, as revealed by experiments that employ blocking grids to thinly distribute radiation.
* A large increase in tumours in immunosuppressed individuals illustrates that the immune system efficiently destroys aberrant cells and nascent tumors.
i work on a daily basis with multiple(3-4) curies of activity(curie is one of the units of radioactivity)
and what you are dealing with here is pico curies .000000000001 curies or 1 x 10^-12
now look at this
you need somewhere in the 400-700 rems range of exposure in a short period of time to have any appreciable affect on you
and for fractionation its even more
now i work with multiple curies of activity and my YEARLY amount of exposure is around 1-1.5 rems
and i am allowed to have 5 rems per year
if you guys dont get this im sorry
all im saying is you are safe
it wont do jack
there is actually a benefit to my exposure to radiation over time
a little known thing called radiation hormesis.......it is a theory in the real world but it is absolutely proven 100% in the lab and it says that chronic low doses of ionizing radiation are beneficial, stimulating repair mechanisms that protect against disease
the human body is not a passive accumulator of radiation damage but it actively repairs the damage caused via number of different processes, including:
* Mechanisms that mitigate reactive oxygen species generated by ionising radiation and oxidative stress.
* Apoptosis of radiation damaged cells that may undergo tumorigenesis is initiated at only few mSv.
* Cell death during meiosis of radiation damaged cells that were unsuccessfully repaired.
* The existence of a cellular signaling system that alerts neighboring cells of cellular damage.
* The activation of enzymatic DNA repair mechanisms around 10 mSv.
* Modern DNA microarray studies which show that numerous genes are activated at radiation doses well below the level that mutagenesis is detected.
* Radiation induced tumorigenesis may have a threshold related to damage density, as revealed by experiments that employ blocking grids to thinly distribute radiation.
* A large increase in tumours in immunosuppressed individuals illustrates that the immune system efficiently destroys aberrant cells and nascent tumors.
oh and everything is radioactive
you just cant detect it
the radioactivity part is completely unavoidable in this case as it is in the soil, the air, the food you eat, the water you drink, the clothes you wear, your granite countertop has lots of it, the main source of radiation you get is from radon gas seeping up from the ground into your house
oh and if you smoke cigarettes or blunts you get a whole shit load of radiation
i use de bong and am exposed to much less radiation
and if you vaporize you get even less
her is what i mean about the smoking of cigarettes
Interestingly, this subject was initially investigated some 40 years ago by scientists at the School of Public Health at Harvard University. Working with physicians in the neighboring Harvard teaching hospitals, they were able to obtain lungs taken during autopsies of smokers who had died from lung cancer. The School of Public Health scientists carefully analyzed samples from selected areas of these lungs and found that they contained relatively high concentrations of 210Po (polonium-210), a naturally occurring radionuclide that the International Commission on Radiological Protection considers to be one of the most hazardous of all radioactive materials. In fact, it is far more hazardous than 239Pu (plutonium-239). Of particular significance was that the Harvard studies showed that this radionuclide tended to concentrate in "hot spots" at bifurcations of segmental bronchi within the lungs, precisely the areas where lung cancer originates among cigarette smokers.
Armed with this information, studies were conducted to determine the source of the 210Po. Although the initial assumption was that it was taken up by the tobacco plant from the soil, the investigations revealed that it was deposited on the leaves of the plants (which are large and sticky) from the air. Just as the decay of naturally occurring radium in the soil often results in the presence of relatively high concentrations of radon and its radioactive decay products in the air inside buildings, the decay of radium in the soil outdoors results in the presence of radon and its decay products in the surrounding air. Whereas radon is a gas, its radioactive decay products are solids. Enhancing the adherence of these decay products to the tobacco leaves is the fact that they are electrically charged and readily adhere to any surface with which they come into contact. When a smoker lights a cigarette, the 210Po is volatilized and, when he/she inhales, it is deposited in the lungs.
Based on careful assessments of the concentrations of 210Po in the lung tissues, it was estimated that the "hot spots" received an annual dose of about 160 millisievert (about 16,000 millirem), two of the more common units for expressing doses from ionizing radiation. To provide perspective, it is useful to compare this dose to the limit stipulated, for example, by the US Environmental Protection Agency for members of the US public. Making this difficult in this case, however, is that the annual dose limit for members of the public (1 millisievert, or 100 millirem) is expressed in terms of a dose to the whole body, whereas, as noted above, the dose to a smoker is limited to a very small portion of the body.
Nonetheless, in a report published in 1987, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP 1987) sought to make such a comparison, the tentative outcome of which suggested that the annual dose to a smoker (when converted into an equivalent dose to the whole body) was more than 10 times the annual dose limit for a member of the public. Having provided this estimate, however, the NCRP went on to state that they would prefer not to make such a comparison. That is to say, the comparison to the annual whole-body dose limit may not be completely valid.
you just cant detect it
the radioactivity part is completely unavoidable in this case as it is in the soil, the air, the food you eat, the water you drink, the clothes you wear, your granite countertop has lots of it, the main source of radiation you get is from radon gas seeping up from the ground into your house
oh and if you smoke cigarettes or blunts you get a whole shit load of radiation
i use de bong and am exposed to much less radiation
and if you vaporize you get even less
her is what i mean about the smoking of cigarettes
Interestingly, this subject was initially investigated some 40 years ago by scientists at the School of Public Health at Harvard University. Working with physicians in the neighboring Harvard teaching hospitals, they were able to obtain lungs taken during autopsies of smokers who had died from lung cancer. The School of Public Health scientists carefully analyzed samples from selected areas of these lungs and found that they contained relatively high concentrations of 210Po (polonium-210), a naturally occurring radionuclide that the International Commission on Radiological Protection considers to be one of the most hazardous of all radioactive materials. In fact, it is far more hazardous than 239Pu (plutonium-239). Of particular significance was that the Harvard studies showed that this radionuclide tended to concentrate in "hot spots" at bifurcations of segmental bronchi within the lungs, precisely the areas where lung cancer originates among cigarette smokers.
Armed with this information, studies were conducted to determine the source of the 210Po. Although the initial assumption was that it was taken up by the tobacco plant from the soil, the investigations revealed that it was deposited on the leaves of the plants (which are large and sticky) from the air. Just as the decay of naturally occurring radium in the soil often results in the presence of relatively high concentrations of radon and its radioactive decay products in the air inside buildings, the decay of radium in the soil outdoors results in the presence of radon and its decay products in the surrounding air. Whereas radon is a gas, its radioactive decay products are solids. Enhancing the adherence of these decay products to the tobacco leaves is the fact that they are electrically charged and readily adhere to any surface with which they come into contact. When a smoker lights a cigarette, the 210Po is volatilized and, when he/she inhales, it is deposited in the lungs.
Based on careful assessments of the concentrations of 210Po in the lung tissues, it was estimated that the "hot spots" received an annual dose of about 160 millisievert (about 16,000 millirem), two of the more common units for expressing doses from ionizing radiation. To provide perspective, it is useful to compare this dose to the limit stipulated, for example, by the US Environmental Protection Agency for members of the US public. Making this difficult in this case, however, is that the annual dose limit for members of the public (1 millisievert, or 100 millirem) is expressed in terms of a dose to the whole body, whereas, as noted above, the dose to a smoker is limited to a very small portion of the body.
Nonetheless, in a report published in 1987, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP 1987) sought to make such a comparison, the tentative outcome of which suggested that the annual dose to a smoker (when converted into an equivalent dose to the whole body) was more than 10 times the annual dose limit for a member of the public. Having provided this estimate, however, the NCRP went on to state that they would prefer not to make such a comparison. That is to say, the comparison to the annual whole-body dose limit may not be completely valid.
R
RockinNick
So... I guess im radio actve now from all the weed lol. O well. Im young and a pothead so ill heal haha...
Anyway, the only reason why i used MG is because it was the only brand they carried at HomeDepot where i live.
For my next grow im gunna go to the local hydro store to get some actual fertilizers. Probably fox farm.
And yes, my cabinet was like an easy bake oven... I couldnt destroy school property though and cut an intake and exhaust.
It was good though, because ive been reading alot on here but its different when you can actually see a plant and see it going through the changes.
Thanks for all the help and support!
By the way the bud is a really intresting smoke. I think i harvested it too early because its really a heady high. But its surpringly smooth and tastes sweet. I still prolly have 3-4 bowls left so im happy!!!! Ill try and get some macros of the dried buds this weekend.
The other guys on my floor that knew i was growing loved the whole expierience too. It will be something we always talk about I think. Especially cause we named it and everything haha
Anyway, the only reason why i used MG is because it was the only brand they carried at HomeDepot where i live.
For my next grow im gunna go to the local hydro store to get some actual fertilizers. Probably fox farm.
And yes, my cabinet was like an easy bake oven... I couldnt destroy school property though and cut an intake and exhaust.
It was good though, because ive been reading alot on here but its different when you can actually see a plant and see it going through the changes.
Thanks for all the help and support!
By the way the bud is a really intresting smoke. I think i harvested it too early because its really a heady high. But its surpringly smooth and tastes sweet. I still prolly have 3-4 bowls left so im happy!!!! Ill try and get some macros of the dried buds this weekend.
The other guys on my floor that knew i was growing loved the whole expierience too. It will be something we always talk about I think. Especially cause we named it and everything haha
Man, a group of guys in a college dorm knew about it and you didn't get caught. That's a minor miracle right there.
johnstuart
Member
Hopefully you can get on a medical marijuana scheme, lol
Lol alls well that ends well!
