dumb % question
- Thread starter CR250M
- Start date
shredder
Well-Known Member
If you use 75% as a high end rosin number from premium buds then by sampling lesser quality buds lower your estimates accordingly.
Whatever system you use stay consistent so the numbers are relevant to you even if they're off a little.
I generally use 60 to 75% for my homegrown bud rosin. 75% mostly for hash rosin. 60% for average strength bud rosin.
Thick Vape
In the Ballpark
And there are labs that offer you a better result if you want or per se, as higher %ages sell...
1800
Well-Known Member
I wouldn't put a lot of faith in their results, I wasn't able to find any accreditation (that's what makes a laboratory legit vs. being just some guy in a basement) on their website and they are selling gimmick devices.
Their "mini-HPLC kit" is a mix of dumb design and exploitation of the less scientifically inclined people. It's like telling you they are selling a mini car and in reality you get a carriage.
Accredited labs or "Hey we have XYZ machine, super accurate, super cheap" labs?
Thick Vape
In the Ballpark
I have worked in a (not cannabis specific) lab in europe a while ago and from what I saw even for accredited labs there are ways to tweak the results.
I have seen 1 official SOP from 1 european country for measuring THC a couple of years ago and I would think the results must be at least questionable with this SOP.
I thought to get proper procedures accredited is pretty time consuming, et least in europe.
America is a different pair of shoes and labs can pop up far easier that over here.
If I were to let a lab test things I would want to know what procedures and protocols they follow and if they are official. And if you want to be sure you have to give samples to several labs.
I heard they made alot of progress with machines that work with laser and/or ir/uv/light absorption and reflection for measuring THC percentages. But they ain't cheap! (yet)
And yes you are absolutely right! To run a GC or HPLC is very costly, so you won't get readings at 5$ or so.
If I remember right 1 simple GC test costed us 50$ or more to run in our (not specialised) lab.
Very cheap lab tests are most likely fake or faulty.
Last edited:
Ah yea unfortunately we are in a fully illegal area of the world so any accredited labs etc wont touch your product without a gov license (which basically doesnt exist unless you are big pharma, the government or both (GW pharma for example))
The mini hplc is what they take around to shows and do quick tests for people, i was lucky enough to send our stuff to their lab in holland where im sure they have better kit. Weve certainly had enough results to confirm acurate testing of cannabanoids. No pesticides or metals testings are available though.
I also know the guys personally and they are good people, what they offer may be nowhere whats available stateside but for us in this black market its invaluable and frankly theres is literally no other option for us.
Thick Vape
In the Ballpark
Ah yes I forgot. They can get relatively accurate 1-2% precise readings with simple TLC and very good reading equipment in a good lab. They have this in holland for example and it should be more affordable, but slow and not good for a show.
The above SOP problem I mentioned was independent of the test machine. To homogenise the sample they milled it for 20 minutes! Don't ask me where the resin is going to stick after this time and if and how they get it out of the mill! And I would think it could be possible to partially decarboxylate milling 20 minutes at high speed, depending on the mill. So I cannot imagine correct results from this SOP.
Edit: But it might be handy to get a THC reading below 0.3%
Last edited:
1800
Well-Known Member
ThickVape: You mean SOP as in the method/analytical procedure? Some methods are quite hmm, I won't say dodgy but suboptimal (chemistry wise). Surely there are ways to tweak the results (easy one - just entering a lower mass will yield more % w/w) but if you get caught that basically means closing down the lab.
Proper accrediatation takes time but people shouldn't trust labs without accreditation.
Milling is a standard procedure when testing cannabis flower but 20 minutes is way too much. In theory they should have tested if the milling procedure affects yield but know knows. However this more about being incompetent than being a fraud
davesmith, I trust they are goood people but with Mini HPLC they are preying on people who know nothing about HPLC. Again, car and carriage comparison.
As far as I know (accredited) testing laboratories in Europe are using a legal loophole when offering drug/cannabis testing. If a client sends a sample you do not know if it contains THC above the legal limit. When you test the sample, you get the results which you send to the client but since the THC is above the legal limit you confiscate the sample (and then there is a whole procedure of documenting how much/when it arrived/when it was tested/etc and then disposing it).
I know of at least one EU lab that accepts samples from everywhere although for non-EU countries customs can be tricky sometimes.
Proper accrediatation takes time but people shouldn't trust labs without accreditation.
Milling is a standard procedure when testing cannabis flower but 20 minutes is way too much. In theory they should have tested if the milling procedure affects yield but know knows. However this more about being incompetent than being a fraud
davesmith, I trust they are goood people but with Mini HPLC they are preying on people who know nothing about HPLC. Again, car and carriage comparison.
As far as I know (accredited) testing laboratories in Europe are using a legal loophole when offering drug/cannabis testing. If a client sends a sample you do not know if it contains THC above the legal limit. When you test the sample, you get the results which you send to the client but since the THC is above the legal limit you confiscate the sample (and then there is a whole procedure of documenting how much/when it arrived/when it was tested/etc and then disposing it).
I know of at least one EU lab that accepts samples from everywhere although for non-EU countries customs can be tricky sometimes.
1800
Well-Known Member
Let's say more like around 5-10%.
1% HPLC result deviation within labs is considered very good. TLC is good for comparing "is this stronger than this one" and getting a general idea (5/10/15%) but it's not precise.
Thick Vape
In the Ballpark
Yes SOP as Standard Operating Procedure.
https://www.camag.com They offer TLC (Thin Layer Chromatography) and HPTLC (HighPrecisionTLC) that can get amazing precision for TLC.
But I agree with what you say.
In europe for most things you do several parallel tests and 4 eyes principle and stuff to assure correctness. It is very difficult to tweak stuff.
And yes, if they catch you tweaking intentionally your lab gets shut down.
But sometimes some SOP's can be questionable and were validated a long time ago or from incompetent people in the field.
In europe for example there is an organisation that controls all plant medicines. They tell you how you have to test and for what. It is a book with a couple of tomes and thousands of plants and recipes. And gets a new edition every year or two. I bet there might be a recipe or two that get verified by someone who does not have all the inside knowledge necessary. Lot of SOP were old also. They often use solvents for analysis that should be replaced by something else for health reasons nowadays. But yeah it is just dangerous for the lab people or the environment if they work unsafe.
https://www.camag.com They offer TLC (Thin Layer Chromatography) and HPTLC (HighPrecisionTLC) that can get amazing precision for TLC.
But I agree with what you say.
In europe for most things you do several parallel tests and 4 eyes principle and stuff to assure correctness. It is very difficult to tweak stuff.
And yes, if they catch you tweaking intentionally your lab gets shut down.
But sometimes some SOP's can be questionable and were validated a long time ago or from incompetent people in the field.
In europe for example there is an organisation that controls all plant medicines. They tell you how you have to test and for what. It is a book with a couple of tomes and thousands of plants and recipes. And gets a new edition every year or two. I bet there might be a recipe or two that get verified by someone who does not have all the inside knowledge necessary. Lot of SOP were old also. They often use solvents for analysis that should be replaced by something else for health reasons nowadays. But yeah it is just dangerous for the lab people or the environment if they work unsafe.
1800
Well-Known Member
Agreed, pharmacopoeia methods can be quite bad. Most labs will develop their own methods (generally it's milling, weighting, ultrasound extraction with acidified methanol, filtering and then HPLC analysis with an acid-acetonitrile gradient) or their own variations of the published methods.