Anyone ever suspect their dispensary is lying about their product stats?

[1337Dude]

This topic is about weed but doesn't directly pertain to vaporization so I posted it here. If it belongs anywhere else, feel free to move it.

So, as the topic's asking - have you ever suspected a dispensary is lying about the quality of their product?

I've been frequenting a popular dispensary in Seattle for a long time, and noticed that over the course of a year, they've doubled the THC stats on their in-house hash and raised the stats on the weed too. Hash that used to be around 40-50% THC content is now all floating around 80-90%, and I personally never noticed any difference in how high it got me. I further thought about it - and why would they increase the THC content of their products without raising the price? This dispensary I frequent basically is saying their in-house $20 hash is on par with $45 third-party hash (Pure Gold, for example). It doesn't really make any sense to me, unless they just wanted to make it seem like they're some sort of super-dispensary with products that have really high stats relative to all other dispensaries in the area.

I'm not a scientist - I don't have a lab and there's no way I can really test it, so all I can do is talk about it with other people and raise suspicions. Is there any regulation for this sort of thing? Or can any dispensary just make up any stats they want regarding the product they're selling?

What do you guys think?

 

[t-dub]

Is there any regulation for this sort of thing?

Nope. Its caveat emptor all the way. Individual labs that "sign off" on their results have their reputations at stake but that is about it. You also have to consider the methods and apparatus used. Its my understanding that a gas chromatograph actually alters the sample when vaporizing it into a gaseous state for analysis, so liquid chromatography is the new standard, but that kind of equipment costs $$$ and takes specialized knowledge to operate properly.

 

[lwien]

I look at like this. A dispensary is no different than any other kind of retail enterprise. They exist to make a profit by selling you merchandise, so with that in mind it's always best do your research as well as listen to your gut along with giving a lot of weight to the old adage of, if it's too good to be true, it probably isn't.

 

[CarolKing]

I just started going to dispensaries just almost a year ago. Ive never tried growing cannabis so I don't have much knowledge in that area. I only know what I've read or from questions I've asked. Sometimes the folks at the dispensaries don't even know that much. They get their info from Leafly like I do. I've learned a wealth of info on FC. Also just trying different strains and figuring out what works for pain.

Some of the cannabis strain seed companies are suggesting that some of their strains are 30% THC level. I think some misinformation starts there. I have a strain and it's a good one, but I don't believe it's 30% THC and online it's suggested it is. It's called Pitbull.

Doesn't a lot have to do with how a certain plant was grown and if the person growing knows what they are doing? Also growing outside verses inside? It looks like indoor cannabis costs more when I go to the MMJ Farmers Market. The outdoor was cheaper.

 

[Beezleb]

I do not believe that current testing represents accurately the potency and quality of the plant. It is more a science gimmick than a precise tool.

I would prefer to see genetic testing that can assist the breeders in identifying traits and whatnot faster than growing them out. Then perhaps we will see some genuine good come from testings.

 

[GuyLeDuche]

Seems like a WA state problem, our mmj system is the wild west. I was going to a dispensary with 360 Analytical testing results on all flower strains between 27-30%. All loose, airy popcorn buds with no sugar... I puzzled over that one. The testing results are on 360s website, so either they used old tech or some kind of bait and switch is going on. I suspect the latter tbh, it's one of those chain dispensaries, the "north" branch. Shipping off the good, tested bud to the metro store? Idk, the one I go to most now is a branch too, and they have very nice flower. Not sure about forum rules but if people want to name names...?

In short, yes I believe more than a little outright lying is going on, I've bought enough 'tane soup to speak confidently lol. I think BrettMaverick called it " Ronson OG" haha

 

[HomeFree]

I think many (maybe most) dispensaries lie, either on purpose or they are lied to by their vendors.

I found I had to play the field of several dozen dispensaries to even find two decent ones, one top shelf the other budget, but it's a good way to figure out who has the goods, and knowledge of their medicine.

Sucks spending $$$ to play the field instead of buying vape stuff, but if you don't play the field, there is no way to know if you are getting ripped off or not.

 

[Beezleb]

When I select a sample. I do not look at the lab reports at all. Its just too whacky to take serious for me. I choose by the old fashioned method. Looking, smelling and talking a bit about it before selecting.

 

[CarolKing]

Just buy a small amount of something then go back for more if it works best for you. That is probably the best way. The THC levels can be deceiving.

 

[HomeFree]

That's what I do CarolKing. It is kind of costly buying single grams (especially if you do not use much to begin with), but you never know. I got some really great buds for cheap, and some really great looking ones for a lot of money that were actually not very good at all - just looked great, and served very little utility, medically or recreationally.

Right now my strongest strain I have is the ugliest with the least amount of frost and I have had it for a year and a half - hoarding it. I got a gram for $10 and then picked up an eighth after that. Personally I like to see frost with a good nose to them because I know it was grown and cured well, hopefully not machine trimmed or tumbled. I like to see a little bit of sugar leaf wrapping the bud as well. But I don't think many people like that.

Personally I drop total by 2% and then multiply by .7 for a guesstimate as far as how much active THC (so if it is 22% reported, drop to 20%, multiply by .7 for 14% - 2% being for standard deviation of +/- 2%), but there are many clubs I don't trust with numbers at all. Placebo effect is very real and if you tell someone you have some 30% stuff and they use it, they would probably be blown away. Give someone the same buds and say 18% and they likely won't be as amazed.

Especially the ugly looking stuff I have, but actually that stuff blew me away after I got a gram on special, went back saying it was the most potent I had gotten from them in over a year, and the kid acted all proud and said 'All 28%'! SO I checked the analytical sites and all samples of that strain had tested high and were also ugly and missing frost. I keep that stuff for when I need VERY strong medicine, real fast, since I don't dab or any of that kind of stuff.

I am sure some do post true results, and in fact I watch the results on the testing sites to see, and some do match up. What I wonder would be if they would 'enhance' a sample to be more potent?

Also, recently I got some $60/eighth stuff, that looks and smells amazing, tastes great in a vape too, but it is not very potent at all. Got a half oz for the same price from another dispensary, and it is pretty fantastic stuff - more potent than the super top shelf stuff. The taste is not as good, bag appeal is not as good, and there is a little teeny bit of leaf too.

I remember once I was in a club and was overwhelmed and a customer told me all he does is sniff the buds, and select off of smell. Smells seem to be connected to effects for me to some degree, and whether using it recreationally or medicinally, it should still be enjoyable to use.

 

[lwien]

Especially the ugly looking stuff I have, but actually that stuff blew me away after I got a gram on special, went back saying it was the most potent I had gotten from them in over a year, and the kid acted all proud and said 'All 28%'! SO I checked the analytical sites and all samples of that strain had tested high and were also ugly and missing frost. I keep that stuff for when I need VERY strong medicine, real fast, since I don't dab or any of that kind of stuff.

Totally agree. I've had some great looking (all frosty and sparkly) bud that smelled great but was just so-so. I've also had the kind of ugly bud you mention above that was super potent.

It's that whole "book by the cover" thing going' on.....

 

[beeswax]

Hash testing in general I have found to be a complete joke. Some companies slapping ~95% THC on waxes, get real.

 

[Jared]

The good ones don't. I usually try to avoid the bigger more "retail like" dispensaries and go for the mom n' pop shop that really cares about the product that they're selling. Hopefully those kinds of dispensaries exist in places other than CO Springs.

 

[lwien]

The good ones don't. I usually try to avoid the bigger more "retail like" dispensaries and go for the mom n' pop shop that really cares about the product that they're selling. Hopefully those kinds of dispensaries exist in places other than CO Springs.

My go-to dispensary is neither "retail like" or a "mom & pop" but rather reminds me of sterile medical facility. It's defiantly not geared toward the recreational user.

 

[Puffers]

Maybe it's just me but I think these ~30% thc ratings on flower is fucking ridiculous.

It's fairly common knowledge that the majority of the thc and psychoactives are a contained in the trichomes. How the fuck can you get a bud and say that 30% of its weight is just one psychoactive compound contained in the frost on its exterior veg matter.

I don't trust most ratings in general though and take all of them with a grain of salt.

 

[Skeena]

I find it hard to trust strain names between dispensaries. Some just use a name because it sounds good.

 

[PAZ]

Nope. Its caveat emptor all the way. Individual labs that "sign off" on their results have their reputations at stake but that is about it. You also have to consider the methods and apparatus used. Its my understanding that a gas chromatograph actually alters the sample when vaporizing it into a gaseous state for analysis, so liquid chromatography is the new standard, but that kind of equipment costs $$$ and takes specialized knowledge to operate properly.

I'm in Chem eng, GC doesn't alter the sample by vaporizing it. There are sometimes small side reactions, but they're usually minimized by matrix matching and ensuring proper calibration. The only time there would be some altering of the sample is if it wasn't a volatile sample, in which case HPLC would obviously be the more ideal method.

HPLC is more commonly used in industry though because it's easier to operate and because it has a wider applicable range. GC uses small samples that can be volatized (ul/ug).

I wasn't sure what method was preferable, but I would've guessed they both work. Anyways, here's a good article on it:

http://www.freedomisgreen.com/cannabis-laboratories-the-testing-landscape-in-america/

Edit: I forgot to hit on a few other points. I believe that both HPLC and GC costs are similar (~$20 000 for a smaller scale machine). As for the operation of them it is actually very easy as everything is operated via software. The optimizing of the software as well as the analyzing of the results will need a technician that has been properly taught, but I would say it's similar to a mechanic in terms of difficulty of operating and understanding the process.

 

[CarolKing]

I just bought a strain today that I thought was GrapeApe but it tastes like Girl Scout Cookie. I bought it through a dispensary but it was like a Farmers Market for Cannabis. It's a very good strain but I'm disappointed because I thought I was getting something else. I bought 7 grams. I saw the Girl Scout Cookie there that they were selling. Not sure if the wrong strain got in the jar or what the hell happened. I'm not disappointed in the strength, just the taste. I know @ataxian you'd be happy about that.

I know most of the U.S either have lousy med mj laws or none at all. Sorry for the whining. Most of course isn't legal but a few. Need to spread the wave.

 

[psycro]

Maybe it's just me but I think these ~30% thc ratings on flower is fucking ridiculous.

It's fairly common knowledge that the majority of the thc and psychoactives are a contained in the trichomes. How the fuck can you get a bud and say that 30% of its weight is just one psychoactive compound contained in the frost on its exterior veg matter.

I don't trust most ratings in general though and take all of them with a grain of salt.

In my understanding the 30 percent THC refer to the total amount of cannabinoids (in the trichomes etc) and not the total weight of the material.

 

[bluenavey00]

Maybe it's just me but I think these ~30% thc ratings on flower is fucking ridiculous.

It's fairly common knowledge that the majority of the thc and psychoactives are a contained in the trichomes. How the fuck can you get a bud and say that 30% of its weight is just one psychoactive compound contained in the frost on its exterior veg matter.

I don't trust most ratings in general though and take all of them with a grain of salt.

As far as I know THC isn't contained on just the outside of the plant, but throughout it.

 

[Winegums]

Visible trichomes on the outside are often a false indicator of potency. I've found the the majority of the trichomes are in the middle of the bud.

I haven't bought from a dispensary but I hope that sensible BC comes through with legalization so that I can in the future.

 

[grokit]

Makes sense, since the inside of the bud used to be the outside of the bud

 

[Winegums]

Makes sense, since the inside of the bud used to be the outside of the bud

You'll have to explain that better... How could the bud get turned inside out?

Unless what you buy has been reduced to tiny nugs?

I get nice full buds where you have to pull them off the stem. Only then can you see the yellow kief at the heart of the bud.

 

[GuyLeDuche]

I think the idea being the bud doesn't grow like a balloon, with the outside always being the outside, it grows like coral with layers of growth piling up on top of each other.

*an obvious oversimplification, coral dies to grow lol

 

[grokit]

bud doesn't grow like a balloon, with the outside always being the outside

Exactly, anybody that's ever grown a flower of any type knows this.