Batch: 2025-09
Review posted September 2025
Review posted — September 2025
1 community review
Rating: 6.5/10
Review: Community feedback is mixed — some positives, but not universally praised. On physical quality, reviewers mention dense, resinous flower structure, smooth smoke/vapor, and milder-than-expected potency. Sensory notes include a pronounced earthy/herbal/kush aroma and similar character on the palate. For effects, patients commonly report uplifting daytime effects, and possible appetite or nausea support. Issues flagged in discussion include Underwhelming quality, and Quality disappointment.
Positives
- Strong terpene profile
- Effective for symptoms
- Smooth smoke/vapor
Issues
- Underwhelming quality
- Quality disappointment
Summarised from community discussion — not a direct quote.
