I have to step in here and say a few things about cannabis testing. I am a lurker, and rarely post on any of the forums, but this is something I actually know a bit about. I am a caregiver in CO, and have been testing my meds for about 6 months. I have used RM3, Cannalabs, and Full Spectrum. I have not tried Genovations down in the springs, but have a extreme dislike for mike lee, and really don't want to send business his way.
Also, I have a masters in experimental psychology, and am very familiar from my grad school years of the various testing procedures these labs are using.
I hear so much talk about how testing is not accurate, because different labs give different results. While I agree 100% that the labs results do not compare, but it is NOT true that testing is not accurate. Here is why.
It all really comes down to the method the labs are using to test. In CO we have people doing GC (cannalabs) HPLC (Full Spectrum/Genovations) and TLC (RM3)
GC is gas chromatography. It is the method that Sam Skunk of ICMAG has used for years. It is also what they have used in the past in Canada at the few national hemp labs. It vaporises a sample in order to analyze it, and here lies the problem with GC. The operator must set the temperature at which the sample is vaporized. All of the cannabinoids vaporise at different temperatures. Too cold and some won't vaporise completely, too hot and they will break down. Even worse, the vaporization process is usually not 100% efficient. Depending on the concentration of cannabinoids loading on the machine, the efficacy of conversion can range from 80%-100%. There are very good papers describing the problems of GC and cannabis in the scientific literature. If people are interested I will post them (if I can find them on my harddrive.)
What this mean on a practical level, is GC either over reports or under reports, based on the amount of cannabinoids in a sample. Usually it under reports for bud, and dramatically over reports for concentrates. Also, it can not test for the "ACID" variants of the cannabinoids, making it really useless for edibles. This is exactly what I have seen from cannalabs. My bud tends to test low, and my oil tests way to high.
HPLC (High performance Liquid Chromatography) is in my opinion, and the opinion of most of the current scientific literature, is the way to test all forms of cannabis products. This is what the Dutch use in their cannabis program, and its what World Health Organization says should be used, and is what GW pharma uses. The cannabinoids stay in a liquid form, you get a very accurate picture of the ACID and ACTIVE cannabinoids, and it can test ALL forms of cannabis. Edibles, Bud, concentrates, ect. It does have problems with very dilute forms of cannabis, like the tincture I make, but even then I seem to get reliable results.
The problem is it is much harder to run a HPLC than a GC. The methods are MUCH more complex, tend to take longer to get a result, are more expensive, harder to maintain, and you need far more standards than a GC. This is the reason more people don't use it.
My experience with HPLC via Full Spectrum has been pretty favorable, however there were some issues in the past. When I first started testing with them, it took a very long time to get results. Sometimes a week or more. But they are now down to usually 24 hours, amazing that this happens when you know how labs are run. I also think that on Bud, they were not supper consistant at first, as I would see a harvest vary by as much as 5 or 6%. Recently, I have started to grind my samples before submitting them, and things are much better now, more like 1-2%. But on edibles and concentrates they are the most consistant lab I have used. They are also the only lab to give you results for THCV and CBC, which I have been using to breed a THCV strain. I also like them because there website is easy to use and tracks my results for me. Plus they are cheap, I just bought another 10 tests and it cost me only 350$. Last time I bought 10 it was 600. 65$ seems to be the going price for a test in CO.
TLC, thin layer chromatography, is what RM3 uses. TLC is what the "Cannalytics" test that you can by on line is. Search any of the forums, and you will see how people feel about it. Basically the cannabinoids are placed in a solution and allowed to move up a paper or glass plate. Then the "smears" on the plate are measured. This in my opinion is not a method that should be used for accurate testing of ANYTHING. It is used in science to track a chemical reaction, or a quick and dirty estimate of a concentration, usually out in the field where a true analytical lab is not available. Run to run consistency is very difficult, and there is a lot of room for "operator error" It is laughable that someone is using this method to test cannabis. Its even more funny that people use it, and trust the results.
Here is a good example of a stress test I have conducted on all three labs. I have sent samples of my CBD clone to all three labs, it came back close to my expected Cannalabs and Full spectrum, and almost no (.17%) CBD from RM3. I have heard the same thing from other breeders.
I also tested my BHO with all three. it came back at 72% THC from Cannalabs, 48.6% THC from full spectrum, and 41.5% THC from RM3. I in no way believe the cannalabs number. I do believe the other two.
I think a large part of what is going on with regards to testing is a lot of people do not have the training/education to interrupt the claims and results of the various labs.
Just my thoughts and experiences...
Mr. Lucky
