Suggesting squish is more “full spectrum”?
Well that would be one way to spin it. Another way would be to say that they contain a smaller ratio of the target molecules (Cannabinoids, Terpenes, etc.) relative to the molecules that were not targeted for extraction. Yet another way to put it would be to say they are less pure.
Bear in mind, I am not speaking in absolutes, I am speaking from my own anecdotal experience.
However, not for nothing, I oversee one of the biggest processing labs in Michigan. We process hundreds of thousands of lbs of biomass annually, in Etoh, Hydrocarbon, and Solventless. I read dozens of COA’s daily, and I am looking at a broad swath of data when I make statements like the above.
One would expect the changing the solvent to change the nature of the extract. How many PAIRS of terpene isolates have you compared.
It does, significantly. I feel like you’re only asking that to in an attempt to troll me, but I’ll be genuine in my response. Isobutane dominant blends, for example, produce extremely favorable results for the extraction of ALL target molecules when other parameters are tightly regulated.
Limonene is the only one I can think of off the top of my head, but I certainly imagine there are others.
Yes! Citronellal is another worthy of investigation.
“Highly variable results” could be construed as a failure. One generally aims for repeatable differences
Ok, now you’re being a little nitpicky, but I get it. I am assuming it is for the sake of clarity, and not your ego. The results vary greatly between test groups with varying structure and chirality. They are replicable within test groups.
A most sincere ‘My bad’ is in order, for my linguistic imprecision presenting a lack of clarity on the matter.