Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Disclosure:

The statements in this forum have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration and are generated by non-professional writers. Any products described are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

Website Disclosure:

This forum contains general information about diet, health and nutrition. The information is not advice and is not a substitute for advice from a healthcare professional.

Indoor vs. Outdoor, is science finally weighing in?

Discussion in 'Seasoned Marijuana Users' started by smokeforall, Feb 1, 2013.

  1. #1 smokeforall, Feb 1, 2013
    I have always had a strong preference toward sungrown weed. I have smoked all kinds of great indoor and outdoor weed, and plenty of mediocre or worse indoor and oudoor, but my intuition and experience has always told me that oudoor is the best.

    I constantly get all these people trying to sell me weed thinking I'm going to get a boner when they say it's hydro. I haven't been able to get through to them. They look at me like I'm an idiot when I say I prefer sungrown.

    Science may be starting to validate my position. If what the researchers on this video say is true, then it is scientific proof that outdoor weed is superior to indoor weed. They state they have found that outdoor weed produces terpenes that are not found in indoor grown weed. They also state that the cannabinoid profile is more diverse in outdoor cannabis.

    If you want to see some information about terpenes check out the videos I posted at:

    http://forum.grasscity.com/seasoned...0%-thc-vs-indica-20%-thc-they-arent-same.html

    In the video below they discuss the scientific basis for the superiority of sungrown pot.

    SC Labs: Advantages of Outdoor Growing - YouTube!
     
  2. #2 Billygo, Feb 1, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 1, 2013
    What about sun grown hydroponics, outside or in greenhouse, or indoor under sun light :)
     
  3. #3 BadKittySmiles, Feb 1, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 1, 2013


    Good topic :) Unfortunately, this doesn't exactly prove anything, at all, especially considering some indoor plants produce terpene/profiles that others do not, and vice-versa, along with outdoor plants which produce phytochemicals that other outdoor plants do not.


    The first link doesn't have anything to do with sun-grown or not, it only suggests that THC content also doesn't have 'full control' in terms of potency or effect, which is true, but that doesn't prove one is 'better' than the other environmentally.

    Why?:

    Because, besides the fact it was a thread solely discussing the differences between indica and sativa, in a very limited way at that, and it was not discussing indoor or outdoor phytochemical profiles, there are also over 80 known cannabinoids in cannabis in addition to all the other phytochemicals it contains, and they are all produced in varying quantities from one plant to the next, so even if the THC content is the same between two completely different plants, all those other cannabinoids, as well as all the other phytochmeicals (including over 120 known terpenes) will register all across the board, and this varying phytochemical cocktail regulates the experience provided by cannabis, and again, this is regardless whether or not the cannabis was grown indoors, or out... both environments will produce plants with varying phytochemical contents.


    Just because indoor grows are sometimes more potent than those plants grown outdoors, and vice versa, that doesn't necessarily mean that growing indoors produces the most potent weed. And the same goes for the statements made in the OP.


    Even within the two environments, indoor and out, just as Billy suggested above there are LOADS of variables. A newer or inexperienced grower with limited knowledge on growing, light cycles, feed and care, certainly does have a much easier time with mother nature doing most of the work for him, for instance, than he would growing indoors. In which case his outdoor crops would very likely be more flavorful and potent than his indoor. :)



    This difference from one plant to the next, would only be 'proof', if all cannabis plants were identical. Or if in that youtube video, they at least shared a little something about the genetics they used, how they grew the plants, and how they studied, tested and analyzed their results. :)

    People have done both with clones, they've had more or less success growing both indoors and out, and have made claims for both sides of the argument.



    It's also worth mentioning that the people in that video are only sharing limited anecdotal evidence, based on their own limited experiences. So keep that in mind when I mention that the above info, I've provided, comes from years of additional research and personal experience beyond what they have, from someone with MUCH more diverse growing experience, in a larger variety of climates and environments (spanning several continents), than all those panelists claim to have had combined. ;)




    Now, that's just to be certain you understand a little more about what we're discussing. :)


    With all that being said, I would be willing to believe it if any real evidence or studies had ever been produced, especially considering some people believe that cannabis glandular material is a defense mechanism against UVs where mountainous regions in higher elevations have evolved high-THC-content plants, but again as we mentioned above, THC content can often have oddly little to do with the experience provided by the cannabis, and that aside, the above anecdotal evidence provided in the OP didn't really come close to even suggesting that one may or may not be more potent than the other, or why (and in fact they resorted to using the natural phytochemical differences between plants, strains, and even phenotypes within a strain, as a tool to further that argument, and resorting to such tactics, as logical as it may seem that mother nature could produce greater potency, to be honest only makes it more difficult to take the concept seriously).



    Just my two cents ;)
     
  4. #4 Billygo, Feb 1, 2013
    They probably look at you like an idiot because hydroponics is the medium its grown in, and has nothing to do with the light source. It could have been grown hydroponically outdoors under 100% natural light, or even in a green house hydroponic set up, again using sun light as opposed to artificial.
     
  5. #5 smokeforall, Feb 1, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2013

    Let me address your points one by one. You say "unfortunately this doesn't prove anything". Where do I say anywhere that there is proof. The original title of the thread includes,"is science finally weighing in?". I am asking a question, not asserting a truth. In the body of my post I state science MAY be starting to validate my position (emphasis added), and IF what the researchers are saying is true (emphasis added again), then it is scientific evidence is that outdoor is superior.

    You say my first link doesn't have anything to do with sungrown or not. If you read my post it says that the first link is information on terpenes. I included this as I stated that outdoor weed may produce terpenes that indoor weed doesn't, and I thought some people may not know about terpenes. I never stated that it had anything to do with sungrown or not.

    I take my first statement back. I am not going to address all your points. You didn't take the time to read my post accurately, or alternately, decided to make a post misrepresenting what I said so I'm just going to let our posts stand, and whatever dude.

    I was just trying to bring up a topic for discussion.
     
  6. #6 smokeforall, Feb 1, 2013
    It is times like this I really, really wish I was a ham hock.
     
  7. #7 BadKittySmiles, Feb 1, 2013

    I'm sorry if my post somehow seemed to upset you, I didn't intend for it to :)


    All I did was answer your question, and state why... that is, no, science hasn't weighed in, and for the reasons I stated.

    Terpenes vary from plant to plant, indoor or out, and the anecdotal evidence we saw in that video came from people claiming less than three and four years of personal experience, in fewer than a handful of different environments... there are many, many individual growers, including myself, who have had much more experience than theirs combined, both in and out of the medical community, including lab testing, and I have yet to see anything on or off paper that indicates that either environment is superior, it's simply too reliant on grower variables, we have no studies, and even the information provided by individuals suggesting that indoor is, or isn't more potent than outdoor (yes, the supposed 'fact' that indoor is conclusively 'more potent', comes up all the time as well, especially in countries late in the game trying to push prohibition who suggest cannabis is stronger now than ever before due to the increased control we have over the environment and their feed) has been much too limited, for anyone to come to any kind of conclusion one way, or the other. That's all. :)


    I did read your original post, and even had the courtesy to take the time to follow both of your links, and I didn't belittle you in any way in my reply, so I'm sorry if that doesn't merit a respectful conversation on your part, but so be it. :)
     
  8. #8 smokeforall, Feb 1, 2013

    My main question really was targeted toward light source. Sun vs. man-made light. In regards to sungrown hydro, my opinion is that as cannabis has evolved and thrived for millenia in soil. I just don't think a man-made liquid nutrient can be as good for cannabis than the soil media that is has thrived in for millenia.

    As far as indoor with sun. That is similar or the same greenhouse with sun. I think it's great. The sun provides a huge majority of the energy that sustains life on earth. Life began and evolved to this point (earth is 4-5 billion years old) under sunlight. Do you really believe that lights made by man so they could they could see the street at night will grow plants better than the sun? This is a rhetorical question. I am not saying that you asserted that man-made light is better
     
  9. #9 smokeforall, Feb 1, 2013

    The reason they look at me like I'm an idiot is because they believe 100% that indoor weed is better. Nothing more, nothing less. This is a pervasive bias. A larger number of people think that outdoor weed can't be as good as indoor. I just want start a discussion
     
  10. #10 Borgarden, Feb 1, 2013
    I've had really good indoor weed in the past back when i was a major stoner, then at the odd party with friends someone would bring some bush (outdoor) stuff, and i'd be on my ass.

    As long as you have good genetics and excellent soil quality, your gonna get a good product. I personally enjoy the taste and high of a good outdoor the most.
     
  11. #11 smokeforall, Feb 1, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2013

    If all you did was weigh in on my question, you did a very bad job. Science IS starting to weigh in on the question. There is obviously no consensus, as this field of research is in its' infancy. You may scoff at only 3 years of research, but that's really all there is at this point.

    I was upset and didn't feel like responding to the entirety of your post was because the attitude of your post was dismissive and condescending. For instance, you state,

    "It's also worth mentioning that the people in that video are only sharing limited anecdotal evidence, based on their own limited experiences. So keep that in mind when I mention that the above info, I've provided, comes from years of additional research and personal experience beyond what they have, from someone with MUCH more diverse growing experience, in a larger variety of climates and environments (spanning several continents), than all those panelists claim to have had combined."

    You just out of the blue, without any evidence to support your assertion, you state that your sources are MUCH better (your emphasis) than what is on the video. Let me state first that I in no way ever vouched for anything that anybody stated in any of the videos I posted. I will repeat, I was simply trying to start a discussion. I felt that what they were talking about was interesting and pertinent to my topic, you think they're full of shit. That's fine.

    You may know everything, I don't. I think you need may need to think a little bit before you go spouting off.

    Please, please dear God, let me be a ham hock.
     
  12. #12 Billygo, Feb 1, 2013
    I see.
    I find personally that cannabis grown indoors is majority of the time grown better than outdoor.
    Though I've definitely smoked a lot of high quality cannabis which was grown soully outdoors, vise versa with indoors aswell obviously.
     
  13. #13 lucky6s, Feb 1, 2013
    Surely outdoor takes longer to grow because its getting something indoor doesnt get? Hydro feels more synthetic and doesnt do it long enough... I smoke one bowl of outdoor it can last all day where as i need 3+ bowls with dro. I defently down with both tho but i prefer outdoors slow cooked goodness. Actually its kinda like indoor is fast food quick easy gets the job done! Outdoor is like a homemade sunday roast... Warm, tasty and so fufilling lol
     
  14. #14 smokeforall, Feb 1, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2013

    Hey Billygo, I find that most people have the same experience. Many people do not have access to really good outdoor weed. I will have to plead ignorance for Australia in regards to the outdoor growing scene, but I'm pretty sure you guys get a lot of sun, so there must be some fine sungrown out your way.

    I would like to say that, with virtually no scientific evidence to support it, I feel deep in my heart that full spectrum God given sunlight has to be better food for any plant than narrow spectrum man made bulbs. Not only my heart tells me but my brain. Life evolved on earth over billions of years in sunlight. Cannabis has been cultivated for about 5000 years and has grown wild for who knows how much longer. Man has grown plants inside for a few decades. It just doesn't make sense to me that plants grown in a man made nutrient liquid inside under narrow spectrum lighting could be better than plants grown in soil under sunlight.

    Just try to imagine, if you were kept inside your entire life under a light bulb, and not given food, like what people have evolved on, but some liquid nutrient formula. Do you think you would be as healthy as someone who lived in sunlight and ate organic foods?

    If you goal is to simply producing a commodity that has a high perceived value and can be sold at high price indoors can be a good way to go at this point in the current legal climate or simply growing climat. It may the only option for many people and that is fine. I think, or maybe hope, that the legalization wave will be able to bring about the type of research so that we may be able to answer the questions we are asking.

    Really the original question needs to be expanded to address both recreational and medical. With the recreational use, it's cool to be able talk about this or that in pot does this or that, but really pot is not going to get any, or very much, better if you're looking to get high.

    As for medicinal applications, we may find that certain substances the cannabis plant produces have very profound pharmacological effects but are only produced in very small amounts naturally. CBD is a molecule we know now that fits that profile. I postulate that it is possible that further research could uncover other useful substances that are produced in very small amounts that plants could be coaxed into producing in larger amounts, possibly only INDOORS, possibly, I conjecture, by manipulating light frequencies as well as nutrients. This may be the real future of indoor growing.

    Indoor growing for recreational use will always have it's place, as not everywhere is suited to growing outdoors, but I just believe that the best cannabis for smoking always has and always will be grown outside.

    Peace and good smoke to all
     
  15. #15 Billygo, Feb 1, 2013
    Yeah Australia has plenty of high quality outdoor weed, in a few months time majority will harvest for the season and the market will be invaded with outdoor grown weed, known mainly down here as "bush".

    There's plenty of high quality outdoor, I've always just preferred indoors, properly because you can control all aspects of the grow a lot easier, easier to maintain In terms of pesticide and wildlife, and finally the climate where I live can be very wet and windy even during summer.
     

Share This Page