No, it's highly relevant. Decarbing is the best course of action because the vast majority of weed purchased does not have almost any THC in it. Because no one cures for that long.
If you had bothered to actually read my first post in this thread you would understand that it is not relevant because I didn't give a blanket recommendation for everyone to forgo heating their bud prior to using in edibles. Had I done so, the fact that it is more common for the ratio of THCA to THC to be high would be relevant. Since I said that (all things being equal of course) by two years most of the THCA converts to THC and most of the THC to CBN, it's obvious most bud should heated. I said it should be, explicitly, not implicitly! You like to try and paint me as having made out that decarboxylating is somehow not necessary for many people. If you'd bothered to fucking read what I said you would realise this isn't the case!
I've looked at the graphs, read the science, and done an extensive amount of experimenting.
Oh yeah I bet you have 8) You are so full of shit. You haven't actually done any reading probably outside websites like Blue light based on your understanding and knowledge shown here.
The likelihood of having weed so old that decarbing would have a negative effect is laughably small. And if it's that degraded by the time you get it, decarbing isn't really the issue.
Yes I know it is less likely. The point I was trying to get across is not how likely it is, because the reader can work that out for themselves based on their own circumstances.
How convenient. Whenever someone argues that decarbing isn't necessary they either can't give any information about their "successful" recipes or they call for huge doses.
What the fuck are you talking about? I melted the chocolate, so whatever temperature chocolate melts at (it's quite low iirc). So work it out yourself. Read what I wrote above in this post. Given the fact I cure for so long it's not surprising I didn't need to decarb beforehand. THC acid will have been lower and THC higher, such that the heating of the chocolate was sufficient.
The people who have done experiments find that weed almost always has tiny amounts of THC and large amounts of THCa.
Yes for relatively fresh weed (I don't necessarily mean weed not dried yet), that is true. I never intended to say otherwise.
They find that heating for specific times at specific temperatures converts the latter.
Look at the graph above.
My own experiments, using different strains, different temperatures, different times, different carriers, and different methods have resulted in 100% success rate when I decarb.
Jesus, when are you going to get that I never said your decarbing would not be successful, especially considering it's not going to be aged for very long.
If you personally grow your own and choose to age it for an absurd amount of time, then I agree you may be able to skip the decarb, or incorporate it into your recipe. For the other 99+% of cannabis users, decarbing is a necessity to making edibles.
I don't grow now but when I did, I would cure my bud for 6-12 months. That is not an absurd amount of time as quite a lot of growers that
do cure their bud for this long find it smokes better, but each to their own. Yes I am aware most growers probably don't cure for that length of time.
Again, yes I know heating before making edibles is necessary for most cannabis users. That why I said this in my first post in this thread...
To decarb your plant material place bud or trip on a baking tray spread out and place into an oven set at 223F (106°C). After 25 mins use in your recipe.
I'll write this in caps for you, I KNOW MOST PEOPLE WILL NEED TO DECARB THEIR WEED PRIOR TO EATING. I NEVER SAID OTHERWISE!
That is why I said with old weed perhaps it might not be necessary and it is a judgement call. A judgement call i.e. the person makes a decision based on their own circumstances according to the facts.
