RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Thoughts on Rec. 2.0 Regulations and where we are atI agree that's a good start. I hope it's enough to confer an advantage. How many of those strains have been fully evaluated for potential bud and CBD or THC production? My point was that if the genetics boffins' claims are correct about their new "manipulated" strains - 2 to 5 fold higher CBDs yield and higher percentage of water-soluble CBDs than any "natural" genotype - then any grower not connected into that is going to be at a big disadvantage in the long term. Look at the Trait news url I gave before. I am very, very long (suffering) on APH, so don't get my intentions wrong. My retirement depends on them. I'm just pointing out that the science into cannabis seems to be rapidly throwing up new discoveries that perhaps more traditional growers would never have thought possible. APH's success long-term as a grower depends on being at the forefront of the science; I don't see any evidence (commentary by IS, news releases, high-level science staff appointments) that they even know about the new science.