Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
trichcycler

Free Lab Testing For Patients?

Recommended Posts

you're gong in a circle friend.so , if a reader cannot pronounce the word phenylketurnurics, or doesn't know what they are, or how they may or may not effet them personally, we should do away with labeling.. cwazy

Not a circle. A very straight line actually. And that straight line says that lab results should be supported by QA/QC data, and results should actually have an application and meaning and ability to be compared to known exposure limits, as needed.

 

For instance, if you send me a sample of meds for analysis for eagle 20 and I send you a 1-page report saying , " nope we didn't find eagle 20" what good does that do you?

 

Have you seen a lab report that actually discusses the ramifications and limitations of the results?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what are you guys all arguing about anyway?

Whether malmute can determine a complete cannabinoid profile with his nose and most importantly whether or not this information has any useful meaning or just novelty.

 

This jar has been open for 20 hours.  You smell that?  That is the smell of CBD degrading to CBN... (i know CBD doesn't degrade to CBN but i've heard two dudes(experts) on here state it does...)

Edited by garyfisher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a circle. A very straight line actually. And that straight line says that lab results should be supported by QA/QC data, and results should actually have an application and meaning and ability to be compared to known exposure limits, as needed.

 

For instance, if you send me a sample of meds for analysis for eagle 20 and I send you a 1-page report saying , " nope we didn't find eagle 20" what good does that do you?

 

Have you seen a lab report that actually discusses the ramifications and limitations of the results?

highlander.  I agree.  Every lab should provide this information.  Noone is arguing they shouldn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not just those two items, but the entire handling of the report all the way to the point where it is displayed on the dispensary website, and when you go in to get the actual product. None of it is to be trusted all the way along the chain. It is merely a sales tool at each point, and each transfer of the information and the product makes the report even more meaningless.

 

I see too many "bad" reports though to think it is a sales tool. The reports have had the opposite effect for me in that I have now deteremined the 24% strains often do less than a 16% depending on relief need.

 

The underlined, to me is akin to the hyperbole as those who insist everything must be tested. Pragmatism is the middle ground of pessimism and optimism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

highlander. I agree. Every lab should provide this information. Noone is arguing they shouldn't.

 

I'm just surprised I've never seen it.

 

I just looked at a sample report on iron labs website. One page with a pretty picture and no discussion of methodology, or QA/QC data.

 

Yet you look at websites for environmental and metallurgical labs, and they have everything available, including SOPs, certifications etc.

Edited by Highlander

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found the video here:

 

 

Do you find it credible?

Ugh. That woman and her outfit. I wish Zach still owned Cannalytics. He was a stand up guy and a true friend to the community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found the video here:

 

 

Do you find it credible?

 

Not in the slightest.

 

 

I get it, YesMichigan, you say it is better than nothing, I say even if it were perfect it's not meaningful, and even free, would not be in demand.

 

The demand comes when the state mandates it, see previously posted video from lab owner.

 

I don't think you are paying proper homage to the consumer, Zapatosunidos. Connoisseurs love this type of information and I've heard it referenced often to bud tenders in my brief time at a Center. Just as beer drinkers love knowing they are drinking 10% beer the cannabis consumer market desires the same information. At least I think so because it is human nature to know if one is quantifiable as "better" than something else.

 

Video from lab owner is awful and I'll tell you you're right every time you say the HB is dirty dirty dirty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They can pay for the testing now, and they don't. They used to be able to get it free from a variety of labs, but still didn't. I see that as a lack of demand.

 

The dispensary bill definitely created a demand by imposing mandatory testing, however. There are several labs preparing to get down to business that nobody has even heard of yet. They anticipate a goldmine with no risk under new legislation.

 

In the example that started all of this it was free and I envisioned a c.g. to patient scenario and not a dispensary just based on costs. Competition amongst dispensaries will create its own demand for testing I predict. You disagree and time will tell. Medium Shield's pizza with two toppings for whoever is more correct in two years.

 

This is us communicating. This is us agreeing completely. This really doesn't have anything to do with an honest lab assistant doing his/her best to get an honest result with the equipment he/she has to work with and providing me with that data so I can use it to make an "informed" decision. Am I less or more informed than a person who reads a magazine's ratings on which dishwasher lasts the longest?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zap,

 

I now understand you are not discounting lab results, only their usefulness to us.

Instead you say that even if the lab results were perfect they would be useless to us as patients.

Can you better explain this please?

 

thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

grass, much like the level of sugar in a soda, it doesnt tell you if the soda will taste good or not.

 

specific levels of cannabinoids in marijuana have not been shown anywhere as far as i've seen to be useful for any particular disease. but of course i am open to hearing reports of that, if anyone has anything to share?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

like sativex, its prescribed as needed. its 1:1 ratio thc:cbd but that fact alone really doesnt tell you anything, since everyones bodies and ability to absorb and metabolize thc is different.

 

SATIVEX®

is a solution supplied in small vials asa buccal spray. The patient takes the

spray, directed under the tongue or inside of the cheeks, cautiously establishing the best dose for reducing their pain through titration up to a tolerated dose.

of course theres a minimum amount to show theraputic use, i think in the cbd epilepsy study it was 3mg/kg

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7413719

but is that a number they just pulled out of a hat?

i wonder if it was based on the old pharmacopia actually? have to look that up.

 

yes, in fact thats 100% accurate.

http://antiquecannabisbook.com/Appendix/USP1916.htm

 

out entire medical establishment is basing the doses on a HUNDRED YEAR OLD document. and its based on how much weed they gave a dog before the dog started acting stoned. wow i feel safer already that we are basing medical decisions on stoned dogs from before 1900. before thc was discovered, before the endocannabinoid system was discovered, before all of that.

 

Cannabis, made into a fluidextract in which one hundred mils represent one hundred grammes of the drug, when assayed biologically, produces incoordination when administered to dogs in a dose of not more than 0.03 mil of fluidextract per kilogramme of body weight." U. S.

Edited by t-pain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

grass, much like the level of sugar in a soda, it doesnt tell you if the soda will taste good or not.

 

specific levels of cannabinoids in marijuana have not been shown anywhere as far as i've seen to be useful for any particular disease. but of course i am open to hearing reports of that, if anyone has anything to share?

 

It works by several different mechanisms and many of them have been quantified and clarified.

 

I would say many of us "ol' timers" can tell many things from from a look and a whiff and determine the likely compounds found in that particular strain.  Been doing it for years.  Once you understand the main 24 distinctive landraces, it is rather easy to narrow down what to expect from what. 

 

 Much of this research has been done it just isn't well known or read.

 

So,... yea.  Many mechanisms are known.

according to malmute, we know this information already, even though I have repeatedly requested him to share it with the rest of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't think that a bill that mandates testing increases demand for the service overall? I think that is why the labs started lobbying in the first place, because the demand for their services was low on a voluntary basis. Don't you think labs are gearing up for this new enforced market? I can tell you that I know of a handful of new ones even, and they are all private at this time. I assume another person somewhere else in the state knows a few more labs set to open, and another person a few more, etc. They are banking on a market increased through the regulation of dispensaries with mandatory testing.

I'll be honest,  I haven't reviewed the bill.  Will it mandate malmute test his meds before going to his patients?  Doubt it.  It will create a demand for service for people who wish to use it.  Dont want to use the service?  Don't sell your meds to a dispensary. I would say Colorado has a heavily regulated market and when I was there none of the meds were tested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't think that a bill that mandates testing increases demand for the service overall? I think that is why the labs started lobbying in the first place, because the demand for their services was low on a voluntary basis. Don't you think labs are gearing up for this new enforced market? I can tell you that I know of a handful of new ones even, and they are all private at this time. I assume another person somewhere else in the state knows a few more labs set to open, and another person a few more, etc. They are banking on a market increased through the regulation of dispensaries with mandatory testing.

It is referred to as MEDICAL marijuana.  If you guys want to take the medical out then don't have your chit tested.  Do you think for a substance to be accepted by the medical community it wouldn't need to be quantified?  We live in USA.  Every medicine is quantified with rigorous SOP/QC. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and all other edible things sold in the usa are tested for mold and ecoli etc. although there is a disgustingly large limit on how much poop the fda allows in foods as a "safe level" ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why wouldn't you want your tinctures or medibles tested?  How can you determine proper dosage by purchasing an amber bottle filled with some sort of oil?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There it is the prohibitionist's mantra. And that is my assertion. Patients do not need this "science" to know that marijuana works for them, and to try to mandate it is a disservice to all involved.

No.  They certainly don't.  But they also don't know why this caregivers blue dream worked great for seizures and another caregivers blue dream made them feel sick with no medical benefit.  Without this data, you cannot compare CAUSE and EFFECT. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think anything made as a foodstuff should be tested for mold and poop and ecoli and all that.

 

especially after seeing people use (new and used) washing machines to extract the cannabinoids from the plant matter.

Edited by t-pain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd have to ask those that use unlabeled/untested tinctures and medibles now. If it works for them they can't have it unless it is tested to the State's satisfaction?

As a consumer, wouldn't you want to know if the 8oz bottle for $80 has  5grams of active ingredient compared to the 16oz bottle which has 1 gram of active ingredient for $80?  Both bottles cost the same.  Which do you purchase not knowing the concentrations?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And there I'd have to say again that not only can the result not be trusted from current establishments, but also that the patient is unlikely to be able to properly interpret a lab report and discern the real reason it didn't work.

Do you think it was possible if regulations were passed containing a Standard Operating Procedure and using known chemical standards (http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/catalog/product/fluka/56296?lang=en&region=US) that these results could be meaningful and repeatable? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...