Delta Verde Laboratory uses high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) to determine the level of 7 different key cannabinoids in medical cannabis. Download the Sage Analytics' Guide to Cannabis Potency Testing today. .. Outcomes: Unexpected cannabinoid profiles from familiar strainsEvolution of new . Learn about cannabinoid profiles and thc potency testing methods, then find the instruments you need.
Profile & Testing Cannabinoid Potency
As CBD averages are much lower, they are plotted against the right vertical axis. The primary takeaways from this chart are that average reported Cannabinoid levels are increasing rapidly and that what is being reported as TOTAL has historically been higher than THCmax. This value is reported as an average, per lab, for each of the up to 5 quarters each lab has been servicing the Industry.
When bias appears to exist which is often , it has been overwhelmingly to over-report THC-based potency levels compared to the THCmax standard. Some labs apparently did not receive or understand the recent direction to begin using THCmax Labs B and C … either that or they are staffed by anarchistic types that do not appreciate being told how to do their jobs by a quasi-governmental authority.
This is an odd pattern of results and clearly demonstrates a lack of consistency across labs in what they are reporting. Until recently, there was apparently no clear mandate other than what is suggested by the AHP and good science and objectivity regarding the definition of what, exactly, was required when reporting TOTAL. I am not going to say that here, as I have no intention of driving business to those whose data suggest that they may be inflating the results that they report.
It would increase the confidence of current and potential consumers in the quality of the product offered in regulated stores. It would increase the safety of the product being sold in those regulated stores. There appears to be a vicious circle out there in which labs that report higher potency results and consistently fail to fail product as often as their peers tend to have developed a greater share of the testing market. I am not implying any cause-and-effect here. I do not even know if it has gotten to the other side, or if it ever will.
I welcome your comments and suggestions regarding how best to handle the release of this information with the goal of increasing the validity and consistency of results being reported by our Labs going forward. My purchasing decisions will, in no small part, be based on the lab used to describe the product.
Of course, I have the advantage of having seen my report card. You will, also, if you check back here in a week or two. Jim, well written and detailed. First, this is the most basic of tests.
Many growers have a 10X scope that they carry with them to eyeball what samples are going to the lab for testing. Often times these samples show up at the lab like little holiday gifts sealed in pretty packages. A simple, and I mean very simple, glance at the sample will let you know if you have too many stems or bugs etc.
Simply, Foreign Matter is a test that is as simple as tying your shoes, especially if you wear loafers. You have to try to fail this one. I am not surprised at all by the low failure rates in this category. Secondly, talking about potencies…. Clearly as your analysis points out, there are labs completely over reporting potencies and not using the. This is clearly out of compliance, THC-A must be measured and reported.
Furthermore, what is going on with this obsession with high THC is ridiculous. The results; THC Terpenes are critical to good flower, and yet no one seems to care about terpenes. These terpenes make up the difference between the gorilla panic and a great tasting quality product.
I wanted to stand on my soap box and scream about the importance of testing for terpenes, but sadly I figure why bother. Once terpenes start getting tested, or anything for that matter e. Ho hum, happy holidays. In case the readers are unaware, growers are paid for their product in the wholesale arena by the potencies listed on their lab results. The retailers are very much aware of the lab BS out there.
The only way retailers judge the weed is by that number. Pssssst, indoor growing is very expensive versus outdoor. So what does all of this tell you? It corroborates these data that you have analyzed. If you are honest you are punished. If you are a lab yielding real numbers you are surely on your way out of business, unless enforcement comes to the table. Think about it like this, a 5 lb lot of flower the max lot size by rules is made up of grams.
A lab could be a growers best friend. Character is what you are when no one is looking. There are plenty of characters out there, as evidenced by your data crunch. Thanks again for your efforts to bring these data into the forefront. I hope that we will see real reform in the near future. Skeptical me says see you in Oregon. Ooops, I almost forgot. My vote is for unblinding the lab names.
Only then will we as the public have true transparency. In the traceability system, when entering values for cannabinoid content, labs are given four text input fields as follows:. I tested the sample, computed the results, logged onto the traceability online portal and was met for the first time with the four input fields listed above.
It was at that point I asked myself: Does it include CBD? Fast forward to February of , all of the labs met at the LCB headquarters to discuss upcoming changes to the rules.
What the labs did agree on was that a universal definition would be a service to our industry, and we more-or-less left it to the LCB to pick a definition and enforce it. That would ensure it remains consistent.
We could really use some consistency in this area, too, especially as medical gets wrapped into this same regulation. Those poor labs are going to look terribly inflationary on your graph, even though they are — in fact — honoring the conversion factor. Nick — thank-you for your comments. It is very helpful having this history — and will also help as I put together the final version of my report card. My own has never bothered me like that. I just got back to the computer and was again drawn to the blog to see what comments had posted.
I know that there is a potency policy for calculations, but why bother if no one is looking? This simplest thing here is that there should be reproducibility between labs. The variability make the numbers useless in my opinion, but there are some freakish numbers out there that make me morbidly curious as to what some labs are actually doing, or not doing. First reporting a Second, if this was reviewed and retested and you still came up with As an example, we had a retailer bring us a flower sample with results from a certified lab in Washington that had a high TCC.
They suspected something was up so they brought it to us and we tested it. It actually looked like a glazed doughnut under the microscope. We then ran the flower material on the GC for residual solvents, not potency because that would be non compliant under The flower sample was laden with solvents, indicating that the Sampler had given the Samplee an adulterated sample.
Pssssst……flowers should not have residual solvents, ergo the sample had been dipped in an extract to inflate the potency numbers! Great job, you cheat out there. Simply, these inflated numbers are the bane of the industry.
Inflating numbers to help get the producers more money per gram or looking the other way on microbial fails is just plain despicable. Moreover all it does it propagate the lying. Hopefully the regulatory bodies will start cracking down on the BS.
Does anyone really buy the a flower could have a TTC of Terpenes are what give the flower its smell and taste. In HPLC, a sample is collected from cannabis flower mixed with a solvent such as ethanol. The solution is then pumped at high pressure through a tube. The tube contains a material that attracts some molecules in the sample based on their chemical properties. At the end of the column is a detector. Compounds that are attracted to the material inside the tube will travel slower and reach the detector later.
HPLC detectors typically measure UV light absorbance, which can be associated with specific molecules. When the molecules reach the detector, their relative abundance is measured. Because different cannabinoids, like THC and CBD, travel at different speeds through the column, they will be detected at different times, allowing for characterization of the sample.
Since the values obtained in the laboratory are referred to directly by the consumer for product information, accurate potency testing is imperative. You can run your own DIY chromatography experiment at home using a strip of white construction paper, a black marker you may need to find a specific type that will work well with this experiment , and a glass of water.
Sit the paper strip upright into the glass of water, making sure the marker line is just above the water. The water will travel up the paper and separate the pigments in the marker. Terpenes are more volatile than cannabinoids and require a different method of chromatography for detection.
High volatility means that terpenes evaporate easily and are usually found in a gaseous state, whereas cannabinoids are stable in liquid solution. Due to the volatility of terpenes, a different lab technique is preferred.
However, HPLC has emerged as the dominant technique for measuring cannabinoids. This lack of regulation can lead to discrepancies in potency data and inaccurate cannabinoid data. States are pushing to standardize cannabis testing and ensure that potency values are consistent across laboratories.
If proper testing practices are in place at each laboratory, reported potency data should be similar across the board. Leafly is actively involved in the push to standardize cannabis testing as a member of The Cannabis Alliance , a group designed to promote transparency in the industry. A wide variety of testing should be completed to ensure the safety and quality of cannabis products. Distinct testing methods are used to collect data on terpenes, contamination, and residual solvent levels.
Consistent and accurate testing is important for industry transparency and consumer safety. Unfortunately, there has been controversy surrounding potency testing methods, with suspected inflation of THC concentration in some cases.
Implementing standards for cannabis testing procedures has been challenging, as the requirements vary significantly from state-to-state. Consequently, the industry needs to push for a general, national standard for cannabis testing to ensure accurate potency reporting. Lab testing science Ashley Auerbach Ashley is a Leafly intern researching medical cannabis. She is also a student at the University of Washington studying Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology with a minor in Microbiology.
No, the entire sample must be used. Again, to prevent sample bias. Sampling is a principle problem with cannabis testing as it stands. In WA, the legal sample minimum is only 4 grams for a whole 2. In all other agricultural analysis and beyond , sampling representativeness is a HUGE concern, more than the variability within the lab. Very important point to bring up, thanks! Although, the burning question is if there are significantly different user experiences for different varieties of Cannabis with the same CBD: Also, I run every day.
The endorphins are processed through the cannabinoid receptor system in the body. They feel different if I have smoked the night before. But it feels so much better a mile into it.
Not to detract from your excellent point. I feel more creases in my cranium, wonderful article, information one always wonders about, and have not the means to research… thank you.
Why Does Cannabis Need to be Tested?
Cannabinoid profiling informs patients about the concentration of active cannabinoids in their medicine. medicinal benefits. For this reason, we also test for CBD, CBDA, CBN, and THCA. How do we measure potency? At SC Labs, we. Synfine Research, a Health Canada approved cannabis testing laboratory, Synfine Research tests for the following cannabinoids in standard potency testing . Comparison of Cannabis Testing Methods for Determining Cannabinoid Potency Profiles including THC and CBD. Posted on 24 November.