Cellobind

[haze420mist]

I agree with doc there is really no need for this, I never knew any personal growers who didn't know how to correctly dry/cure or store.

How did we ever survive without this miracle spray. Why contaminate something natural with a synthetic product after harvest. Sure we use synthetic nutes when growing the plant, but a decent flush of ph water can practically clear out most to all traces of nutrients in the plant. It's Even a different method of application compared to simply spraying shit on the buds externally, where is with nutes in the water is absorbed internally through the roots then the nutes is converted into starches and sugars to help the plant grow.

 

Haze

[The Blob]

That pdf doesn't justify using preservatives on cannabis in the slightest.  All it says is that there in a natural breakdown of the cannabinoids which was hastened with shitty storage conditions.   Now I guess you could argue that products like cellobind will give you greater freedom of storage options, will make the buds last longer, etc. but why would any personal grower ever consider using them when a simple glass jar provides the perfect storage environment?  You could never argue that potency alone justifies using them as the side effects from quick drying and not being able to cure are far worse than a second bong hit.  I just can't see any reason at all how products like cellobind could be suitable for personal growers which is what makes this product so evil.  Its very existence isn't about preserving a personal stash but instead allowing commercial growers to further rip people off when they're already hurting people so badly.

Hmmm.... Yeah and this natural breakdown,... what could slow this effect? A natural preservative maybe?

Playing devils advocate here, how could cellobind be seen as evil? Its according to the label a natural hemp based preservative, thats it. Used for expensive 'legal' oil protection no one would blink an eye.  The evil stuff in my opinion is the fibreglass and other shit 'some' commercial growers have going around the country. The actual intended use (as a oxidation preserve) aside, im surprised its taken this long for a healthy product to come on the market.  I actually see a use for the ocd connoisseus out there that want to store their 30 different strains for years  to show off to their mates.

Or maybe not after all...?

Edited August 28, 2013 by The Blob

[Sir PsychoHashy]

Some of these reasons for possible justification of the use of this product may hold a degree of validity, but lets face it, none of them really hold any water for personal growers, and all bullshit aside, personal growers aren't the real target market.  Like many have stated, proper drying and storage does a great job.  And as for oxidisation, it's my understanding (and I could be wrong here) that aside from exposure to light if the trichomes are left intact there is a degree of natural protection for the THC contained within, so yet again storing in airtight glass jars protects from this sort of damage, unless you pack the buds in too hard.  And if you are growing your own and it gets to that stage that it's so degraded you don't want to smoke it, chuck it out and stick to the fresh stuff.  I haven't had anything stored longer than 4 months yet, but if anything I'm only noticing improvements so far and I am extremely happy with my natural untainted buds, num num.

 

The question you have to ask is do you want it to stay a bit less degraded for longer, but watered down by extra non-THC mass, or stick to pure uncontaminated goodness.  Or, if you are commercial and without conscience, then by all means use this instead of some of the other evil shit you could use to the detriment of your end users.  Just remember that just because it says it's hemp based that doesn't mean it's safe, after all science has gotten involved so someone can make a buck, and that's never gone wrong before has it

[DoctorWho]

Hmmm.... Yeah and this natural breakdown,... what could slow this effect? A natural preservative maybe?

Playing devils advocate here, how could cellobind be seen as evil? Its according to the label a natural hemp based preservative, thats it. Used for expensive 'legal' oil protection no one would blink an eye.  The evil stuff in my opinion is the fibreglass and other shit 'some' commercial growers have going around the country. The actual intended use (as a oxidation preserve) aside, im surprised its taken this long for a healthy product to come on the market.  I actually see a use for the ocd connoisseus out there that want to store their 30 different strains for years  to show off to their mates.

Or maybe not after all...?

How is cellobind evil?

 

1) Its use mandates the buds be quick dried which means the buds will be a crap smoke compared to what they would have been given a week or more to dry normally.

 

2)  Its also designed to retain weight in the plant material.  For starters the only way to retain weight is to retain water which means people buying buds which are sold by weight have to give up a huge percentage of the plant material they want to purchase due to the higher than normal water content.  Not only that but it hasn't been established if this water would soak the buds while you are chopping up which I think could be a real possibility. Kids in 5 years will probably consider that a good trait like they do with pgr buds today, I'm guessing they'll say its so potent its dripping oil or some retarded teenage made up crap

 

3)  By retaining water by design it increases the chances of buds going rotten and moldy significantly.  This will definitely result in huge health issues for users especially the younger ones who don't know any better and will smoke it anyway.  There is also the fact that it creates an urgency to get the product sold so corners will be cut like only roughly manicuring the buds as it can take several hours to manicure a crop and thats much needed drying time for cellobind buds.

 

I could go on but I turned 28 ten minutes ago and its time to smoke lots of drugs

[louise]

Happy birthday Dr...  sorry, no emote there isn't a bday smilie.

 

 

 

Kids in 5 years will probably consider that a good trait like they do with pgr buds today

 

Kids? It's not just the kids that think the dense little nuggets they get from the dealers are the bomb. I've had a 50 y.o challenge me to grow as dense a bud as he buys... no competition because I wont put that crap on my plants. What he thinks really makes the bud is why I grow my own

[acidrain]

2)  Its also designed to retain weight in the plant material.  For starters the only way to retain weight is to retain water which means people buying buds which are sold by weight have to give up a huge percentage of the plant material they want to purchase due to the higher than normal water content.  Not only that but it hasn't been established if this water would soak the buds while you are chopping up which I think could be a real possibility.

 

 

Hi doc, happy birthday to you.

I was told something different here. Wanting to find out more details i spoke to my shop about this product. He had some samples and explained that cellobind doesnt retain water at all, quite the opposite. Mine actually came with a little bag of silica to remove final traces of water after snap drying. The consequential increase in weight came from the tiny particles of soluble hemp fibre that   bind to the surface of the trichomes etc hence protecting them. At least thats what i understood from the conversation. Oh and the need for quick drying was because the ingredients use water as a way to get coverage over flowers. This extra water wouldnt normally be present during drying obviously, so the manufacturer recommended the use of a dehumidifier to prevent any mold issues

 

I hope that made sense, it did to me at the time?

[DoctorWho]

Hi doc, happy birthday to you.

I was told something different here. Wanting to find out more details i spoke to my shop about this product. He had some samples and explained that cellobind doesnt retain water at all, quite the opposite. Mine actually came with a little bag of silica to remove final traces of water after snap drying. The consequential increase in weight came from the tiny particles of soluble hemp fibre that   bind to the surface of the trichomes etc hence protecting them. At least thats what i understood from the conversation. Oh and the need for quick drying was because the ingredients use water as a way to get coverage over flowers. This extra water wouldnt normally be present during drying obviously, so the manufacturer recommended the use of a dehumidifier to prevent any mold issues

 

I hope that made sense, it did to me at the time?

It says at half strength it will increase the weight of your product by approximately 40% which simple math says that 1g becomes 1.4g so the commercial growers who use this are going to pocket the difference and still sell the same weights for the same prices.  That means that the original gram is now divided up by 1.4 so buyers of cannabis are getting approximately 71% of the product they should be getting and remember the rule applies to everyone regardless of where they are in the food chain if its the growers doing this to their buds as cannabis is sold by weight at all levels.  So at half strength everyone loses out by around 25% and if you've ever had to buy weed you know its expensive enough.  Could you imagine getting 0.75 instead of 1g for $20 as being the normal street deal? I remember 10-12 years ago getting anywhere from 1.2g to 1.5g for $20 from dealers who only wanted money and while I understand inflation is a bitch and know $20 for a single gram is normal these days which is roughly what it should be to be in line with normal inflation, cellobind though says fuck waiting 10-12 years to make money make up a bucket of out shit and dry your buds even faster for upto 28% extra weight!  I know that would be under average conditions at half strength so lets just say 20% is the minimum people get back from using this stuff thats 1/5 of everything.  Might not be noticeable but its there and makes up 20% of everything by covering every surface so even if it isn't retaining water it has to fundamentally change everything about the way the bud smokes by being all over the buds in the first place.  No true lover of cannabis would do that to their buds but a commercial grower would for the weight gain.  I also highly doubt that commercial growers would sell dry buds as its just not in their nature so who knows what low level buyers are going to end up with quality wise.  I don't know about you but I would never willingly smoke the samples you were given and am thankful I was talked out of testing it on my buds every time I see this thread.

 

Sorry for rant, drugs

[acidrain]

Yeah i see where your coming from, your probably right with what your saying. Still im going to give it a go seeing the sample was for free - Im just way to curious to let this pass up.

[-RiverRat-]

Anyone using this product will do  so to increase yield . The all natural starches , insoluble and soluble fibers will add cardboard if thats what you want but kid yourself not about it preserving your weed as a legimate justification. Just learn to live with the devil the best you can .

 

This stuff takes off then mass market weed will go down another peg,  more the power to botique growers who care about their weed and to the folk who grow their own however. The diference will be all the more obvious.

 

Kinda reminds me of the cereal industry and adding of cellulose (fiber) to their products. IS fiber really the answer to constapation or is it just a great way to value add thier charf ? ......

 

Such as life 

[louise]

It would be nice if one of you guys, who has a bottle of this stuff, could do a test... I don't mean on bud... just a little mixture on shallow tray... allow the water to evaporate off and photograph to show us what is left (if it's just hemps cellulose it should look like paper).

 

I might use it if I was drying whole rose buds for display... but the only layer of paper I want around my canna buds is the joint paper.