hiiipower
- 281
- 93
I started off as an organic grower in a living organic soil amending w/ teas. I'm familiar w/ really great organic bud, and it never falls short of blowing me away. However, nowadays I'm getting interested in hydro, the rapid metabolism of the plants excites me. The more research I do, the difference between synthetics and organic is becoming more muddled, and I know that might sound backward, but to give you an idea of what I mean, read this article(takes 5-10 mins.)
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/natural-vs-synthetic-chemicals-is-a-gray-matter/
by Dorea Reeser
In the article she trys to dispell 3 myths:
1. Synthetic chemicals are more toxic than natural/organic ones.
2. Organic food is better for you because its natural.
3. Synthetic copies are not as good as natural chemicals.
It's kinda an in depth subject, more than I could do justice to explain on here, so reading the article would be way better. And if you really pick out the inidividual points she makes and research those as well, you'll see why my brain is becoming more muddled over this subject.
Also, has it ever occurred to anyone else that living organics(any version: supersoil, tlo...) might not precisely fall under the definition of "natural". I mean, where in nature does such perfectly amended soil exist. And where on earth does it rain the amazingly rich in bio-life teas that are applied in living organics that really make it worth the extra effort. Yeah, I'm sure in at least one place on earth soil that perfect does exist, but it's got to be seldom. No? Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't most of nature(wild) have not so great soil, and uses the vegetative litter each year(during fall/dry season) to recycle to the nutrients? Does anyone have any of worthwhile info on this or links to scientific studies or such. If you can prove this wrong please do, I'm always down for a good knowledge drop! I'm certainly not a scientist and don't pretend to be.
Not trying to debate which bud is better, organic or synthetic. Even if organic truly is better, maybe it's just because it's been doing it for a lot longer than humans, and we have some catching up to do. But maybe we'll catch up(really hard to doubt this with today's technology). Anyways, this article definitely shows this is a very muddled topic, but a really interesting one imo. What's your opinion(read the article first!)??
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/natural-vs-synthetic-chemicals-is-a-gray-matter/
by Dorea Reeser
In the article she trys to dispell 3 myths:
1. Synthetic chemicals are more toxic than natural/organic ones.
2. Organic food is better for you because its natural.
3. Synthetic copies are not as good as natural chemicals.
It's kinda an in depth subject, more than I could do justice to explain on here, so reading the article would be way better. And if you really pick out the inidividual points she makes and research those as well, you'll see why my brain is becoming more muddled over this subject.
Also, has it ever occurred to anyone else that living organics(any version: supersoil, tlo...) might not precisely fall under the definition of "natural". I mean, where in nature does such perfectly amended soil exist. And where on earth does it rain the amazingly rich in bio-life teas that are applied in living organics that really make it worth the extra effort. Yeah, I'm sure in at least one place on earth soil that perfect does exist, but it's got to be seldom. No? Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't most of nature(wild) have not so great soil, and uses the vegetative litter each year(during fall/dry season) to recycle to the nutrients? Does anyone have any of worthwhile info on this or links to scientific studies or such. If you can prove this wrong please do, I'm always down for a good knowledge drop! I'm certainly not a scientist and don't pretend to be.
Not trying to debate which bud is better, organic or synthetic. Even if organic truly is better, maybe it's just because it's been doing it for a lot longer than humans, and we have some catching up to do. But maybe we'll catch up(really hard to doubt this with today's technology). Anyways, this article definitely shows this is a very muddled topic, but a really interesting one imo. What's your opinion(read the article first!)??
Last edited: