Our preferred lab partner The Werc Shop explains the ins and outs of how they test marijuana, including a detailed breakdown on why your cannabis might not …
He said 'Cannabis by itself does not contain THC, upton heating the THC is created, this is why you don't get any psychoactive effects of the THC by eating Cannabis' – But when you e.g. bake it in the form of cake/brownies – you heat it up in the oven right? So therefore THC emerges and you should still get the psychoactive effects. Am i wrong? Or does he simply refer to 'if you theoretically eat marihuana just like that you won't get psychoactive effects'?
so if the co2 leaves, just THC is left, that means that that plant is now, that its been heated, an edible? Thats why eating the plant doesn't get you high right, because you're eating THC with carboxylic acid. now that you heat it and the co2 leaves, its now edible.
How many samples can you run in an 8 hour day on one machine? From what I have been reading the best way to test product that will be smoked is GC because the sample is heated similar as when it is smoked. HPLC would be best for the products that are not heated prior to use.
Ok, here is the issue I have with this claim that all the other labs are doing it wrong. The claim might be right, but these guys are saying that this accounts for up to 10 or 15% more thc it sounds like, when in fact their own test resulted in a 1.20% change only. The weight thing is interesting and valid but their explanation isn't the right one. The answer to their conundrum is that some growers bring in only their top apex buds which are much more potent than the other buds. Also, if they used UV-B they can boost up to 5%, and by using a lower pH another 2 to 5%. There are all sorts of tricks and hacks to use and unfortunately, the way the samples are allowed to be taken by the grower is not to the advantage of the patient or customer.
so, I understand the need for correction, if one is stating THCa and THC as a single figure. what I don't understand is how this corrects for picking up a bud and noticing that its 1/3 resin, which you mention in the video. Is THCa not resinous? I understand why it would give a misleading result with total THC, but in THCa's unconverted state, just raw bud, wouldn't a measurement like 30% still mean a bud of 30% resin?
I'm not criticizing, but I've wondered about this before. When people say something is 20% THC, that means that it is at least 20% resin, which is kinda mind blowing. That doesn't even include waxes and such.
So let me get this straight, you test by LC but correct for decarboxylation on a GC? Full analysis on LC does not require manipulation for molecular weights nor should it require correction for decarboyxlation unless you're running your LC column over 100 C??? I would be careful claiming that other labs don't have a good handle on the mathematics of expressing w/w on LC without molecular weight correction. Many methods are validated and reviewed by regulatory authorities praising such quantitation on LC! Maybe you should take off you goggles and redo your math 🙂
WOW! This really shows why there are so many inconsistencies with many of the "certified" labs that are testing these days. So all those other places that are saying their strains boast 26-28% THC are probably inaccurate. HA!
The new experts? I think not!
DerMicha
He said 'Cannabis by itself does not contain THC, upton heating the THC is created, this is why you don't get any psychoactive effects of the THC by eating Cannabis' – But when you e.g. bake it in the form of cake/brownies – you heat it up in the oven right? So therefore THC emerges and you should still get the psychoactive effects. Am i wrong? Or does he simply refer to 'if you theoretically eat marihuana just like that you won't get psychoactive effects'?
thx, could I estimate the same loss on a tlc plate chromatography
so if the co2 leaves, just THC is left, that means that that plant is now, that its been heated, an edible?
Thats why eating the plant doesn't get you high right, because you're eating THC with carboxylic acid. now that you heat it and the co2 leaves, its now edible.
Dude sounds like Dexter from dexters laboratory and he's a scientist
i'm a pharmacist and i'm looking for a job like this .
where do i sign ?
#i_eat_chemistry_for_breakefast
does the thca change when the cannabis is subjected to ethynol and no heat, just cold ?
What a great video I really appreciate that I would have never known thanks guys
Great to see sound science and valid analytical methods being more widely adopted in this area!
Very cool as a computer enthusiast to see an Arduino being used in a lab environment!
Serial.print("Rock On – Keep It Green");
How many samples can you run in an 8 hour day on one machine? From what I have been reading the best way to test product that will be smoked is GC because the sample is heated similar as when it is smoked. HPLC would be best for the products that are not heated prior to use.
what a fun job
Very impressive and Professional.Some of our labs here in Portland need to get their act together.I think they should tests like this,instead of GC.
When the Carboxylic Acid Group is released from the THCA molecule what type of gas is it?
Ok, here is the issue I have with this claim that all the other labs are doing it wrong. The claim might be right, but these guys are saying that this accounts for up to 10 or 15% more thc it sounds like, when in fact their own test resulted in a 1.20% change only. The weight thing is interesting and valid but their explanation isn't the right one. The answer to their conundrum is that some growers bring in only their top apex buds which are much more potent than the other buds. Also, if they used UV-B they can boost up to 5%, and by using a lower pH another 2 to 5%. There are all sorts of tricks and hacks to use and unfortunately, the way the samples are allowed to be taken by the grower is not to the advantage of the patient or customer.
great video, Does anybody try – cdx life canna sensor ?
Which LC system is that?
does lc have any advantages of gc?
so, I understand the need for correction, if one is stating THCa and THC as a single figure. what I don't understand is how this corrects for picking up a bud and noticing that its 1/3 resin, which you mention in the video. Is THCa not resinous? I understand why it would give a misleading result with total THC, but in THCa's unconverted state, just raw bud, wouldn't a measurement like 30% still mean a bud of 30% resin?
I'm not criticizing, but I've wondered about this before. When people say something is 20% THC, that means that it is at least 20% resin, which is kinda mind blowing. That doesn't even include waxes and such.
You guys need a custodian?
So let me get this straight, you test by LC but correct for decarboxylation on a GC? Full analysis on LC does not require manipulation for molecular weights nor should it require correction for decarboyxlation unless you're running your LC column over 100 C??? I would be careful claiming that other labs don't have a good handle on the mathematics of expressing w/w on LC without molecular weight correction. Many methods are validated and reviewed by regulatory authorities praising such quantitation on LC! Maybe you should take off you goggles and redo your math 🙂
How kan I test thc level if needed
Can I get your job ?
It's about weight not mass, 30 g of good bud that's %30 can get 9g's in kief. You're using the percent like its a liquid.
whts proofs shown it poison?
Hello id like to send in some sampls
awesome video thank you!
At 4:13 I thought for a second that you were gonna roll it, lol! 😛
Cool video btw!
WOW! This really shows why there are so many inconsistencies with many of the "certified" labs that are testing these days. So all those other places that are saying their strains boast 26-28% THC are probably inaccurate. HA!