BS Detector

This week I pic up a HP 6890 Agilent Gas Chromatograph which the first step of testing medicine and the studies I want to do to either cement or dismiss a lot of information. In addition it can be used to find out who is full of shit and always bragging about how there stuff is the shit. Question is once I get it up and running who would compete in such a contest? Who would put their "reputation" or "ego" on the line? After all it is easy to talk when no one can compare.

I also hope to start a secret shopper situation to find out if the testing done is accurate; I must say if it is a reputable source I can not imagine them exaggerating. However, I also know there is no way some of the medicine on the shelves could possibly be making the numbers by just looking at the pre-mature buds. BLOOM I fear may not like the results of such a secret shopper situations I have yet to see anything from them or others they supply worth a crap.

Currently all I will have is the GC and not a LC (liquid chromatograph). While it is used it is still VERY EXPENSIVE and I have a lot more money I have to spend to complete the tools necessary to test this material. GC heats the material to release the gas which some percentage points will be slightly off due to ignition although it is still a good measurement. The liquid chromatograph which is my next mission is actually a better test machine as the extraction process does not heat the material instead the compounds are released through extraction and injection of the vapors; it also allows for testing of edibles. Nor will I be able to test for chemical such as pesticides at this time that is another machine I will acquire later as I said these toys are very expensive.

Here is breakdown of the latest GC and the standard by which the industry uses to test and analyze https://www.chem.agilent.com/Library/Support/Documents/a15283.pdf

I will be using techniques that are standard to the industry and will provide documentation as to how the test was accomplished. Here are a few from a not so technical article when compared to the really nerd articles. http://www.intechopen.com/download/get/type/pdfs/id/31531

I am concerned that if there are no checks in a system of measurements then how does one know someone did not fudge the results. I only want what is best for the patient and if there is no official check in the system I will step up for my own amusement, entertainment, and curiosity find out the truth and convey it to the patients. Besides what ever money I can generate from other types of testing not related to MJ will help another patient with free medicine.

what area are you in?

Results will only be as valid as the QC you are using. I assume you know this as you are spending a lot of money for this project.
I would be interested in how this works out for you.
Cannabis testing is non-existent in So. AZ.
Will you be licensed with ADHS, or are you roughing it on your own?

Sounds like a good project. I would live to test....just to see

Not to be negative but what makes you believe your results will be accurate? What experience or credentials do you have? You say in your post gas alters the percentages so you will be getting altered percentages also. How do altered percentages discredit altered percentages? Sounds like more misinformation to me.

You posted links to the specification manual for the initial instrument set-up, and a study.
What method will you use? EPA 600?
What standard will you use for cannabis? Calibration verification?
We use a LC MS in our lab for organic analysis.

As for the post about the gas altering the percentages; this is an industry situation, and not a reflection on personified.
The test has a specific range for qualifying and quantifying the results. All lab analysis have analytical ranges of acceptability.

"We use a LC MS in our lab for organic analysis." Nice, what lab do you work for?

I know it's an industry situation. You think it's going to help the industry if this unqualified individual goes out and buys a machine and starts pumping out stats? Anyway you look at it it's a bad idea. GC sucks even when it's in good hands let alone someone who is clueless.

It can't be any worse than AZ med testing, they are off by as much as 50% regularly. There is a dispensary up north that has the hplc, and is infusing all of their edibles with micrograms of cbd.. Their highest test came out at around 20% thc, he told me very few samples if any ever break the 20 mark.

I probably wouldn't waste my money on a gc, but maybe you have a bit of it laying around to spend. AZ med testing is a giant shit stain that just reflects on our med scene as a whole.. a pathetic pile of poop.

Hey hacker which dispensary up north has hplc and is infusing cbd? Sounds killer just curious.

Dude, we don't know that he is unqualified. He hasn't responded since we posted. Give the guy a chance to respond.
The lab I work for is licensed by the state, has frequent external audits from ADHS, and has QAQC program that oversees internal audits.
I know this because I audited them internally. Our lab had a pristine record for organic analysis that is well documented for achieving consistently good results with LC.
And one of the chemists is VERY interested in bringing that expertise to cannabis testing.
Both of us could bring our expertise to the table here in Tucson. 20+ yrs experience each.
Sorry, I won't name the lab on this forum.

aisach said:

Dude, we don't know that he is unqualified. He hasn't responded since we posted. Give the guy a chance to respond.
The lab I work for is licensed by the state, has frequent external audits from ADHS, and has QAQC program that oversees internal audits.
I know this because I audited them internally. Our lab had a pristine record for organic analysis that is well documented for achieving consistently good results with LC.
And one of the chemists is VERY interested in bringing that expertise to cannabis testing.
Both of us could bring our expertise to the table here in Tucson. 20+ yrs experience each.
Sorry, I won't name the lab on this forum.

Click to expand...

There likely isn't a large enough market in Southern AZ yet to sustain a lab that only worked with cannabis. Though, if you already have a lab and equipment available, what's stopping your lab from adding it as a service?

We are a municiple lab, not a private lab. Read in govt. (99.9% are internal process samples)

We are hoping to hookup with a start up that can obtain licensure.
The market is growing here.
The last dispensary that I talked to was tired of shipping and paying the $45 per strain, per grow. etc
Not sure if the startup folks were thinking of restricting their analysis to cannabis.

It's important to protect yourself and your lab so I understand. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't any type of scientific research or analysis of cannabis technically illegal? Which puts a lab like yours, with more at stake, in a postion where you would be risking alot just to test cannabis? If it wasn't illegal you could allow people to walk through your front door and drop off samples for testing. But you can't do that right? At least not yet.

aisach said:

We are a municiple lab, not a private lab. Read in govt. (99.9% are internal process samples)

We are hoping to hookup with a start up that can obtain licensure.
The market is growing here.
The last dispensary that I talked to was tired of shipping and paying the $45 per strain, per grow. etc
Not sure if the startup folks were thinking of restricting their analysis to cannabis.

Click to expand...

oh there is a need, no doubt there, just in if there is enough to sustain a cannabis only lab. i know someone in tucson who makes edibles that was seriously looking for a chemist to partner with, funding in hand... don't think he ever found anyone and said it was looking like he'd need 8k a month just to cover everything. good luck. i know id love to have people who know their shit down here too, but id guess there would be better chance of success competing against azmedtest and just doing what they are failing at. since tucson pretty much zoned out decent sized grows, there are only a few small ones here anyway and what, 1 kitchen?

Yeh, it's pretty dismal down here.
A lab could get a relatively cheap license to test other analytes on the GC/LC to offset the cost.
Or take a loss till the market grows here. Labs are an expensive business.
Some of the Organic Standards are over $100 a pop. Usually, they need more than one standard to run the test.
Turn-around time could be many days. 7d for extraction, and 30-40d to finish the analysis.
To make it cost-effective, you wouldn't be able to run the test unless you had a certain number of samples.
If it was me, I'd advertise at the local smoke shops to pick up business.
Sell a sample kit that could be sealed, labeled, and mailed in.
If its legal in Phoenix, it must be legal here, if you get a license from the state.

We've offered primary cannabinoid (THC, CBD, CBN) numbers by GC for some time to breeders. Established chromatographers with graduate coursework in chromatography, private lab, years of R&D experience. SE Valley.

GODSIZE said:

Not to be negative but what makes you believe your results will be accurate? What experience or credentials do you have? You say in your post gas alters the percentages so you will be getting altered percentages also. How do altered percentages discredit altered percentages? Sounds like more misinformation to me.

Click to expand...

Well I will give you your answer in two fold. One is the machine is the top of the line pretty bullet proof. Secondly my credentials are I am very educated and this machine is not that hard to operate. The keys to success is to follow standards set by the industry as it is pretty straight forward. Which to be truthful is the reason I belive the results they are getting from the dispensaries. What I may not believe is that the tests are all ways for the plant we are looking at.


Think of a GC as a really fancy fuel injection system with a super sensitive emissions tester. Really no difference if I just follow people before me like (Müller et al., 1999) the steps are spelled out. In particular the ones for GC-FID as that is the current configuration.

If you look at the US patent you will see things like the tubes they used the gas as well as other filters injection times and pre heat times. Basically the industry has standard steps to follow for a variety of tests. Not really rocket sciences more like chemistry and attention to detail.


This is the main reason I will document everything when I do this. So that I may satisfy skeptics as your self. I in this case am looking forward to skeptics as a way to learn things I did not think of and keep me honest as well.


Altered percent does not stop consistency of output. GC is a standard LC is an even better standard take a chance and watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEz8HMOE7OE especially 2:47

GOOD QUESTION!! Let me know if I have answered it to your satisfaction.

Tucson Az the Old Pueblo outskirts area

AWESOME a nerd to keep me in check!!! A quick paste answer I am sure you will understand.

Column:
15 m x 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm;
Phase:
5% Diphenyl – 95% Dimethylpolysiloxane
Carrier:
Hydrogen, 1.1 ml/min, constant flow
Injector:
Split/splitless, 280°C
Split ratio:
20:1
Oven:
2 min at 200°C, 10°C/min 200-240°C, 2 min at 240°C
Detector:
FID 300°C, H
2
35 ml/min, Air 350 ml/min
Internal standard:
Tribenzylamine (TBA) in ethanol (0.5mg/ml)
Injection:
1.5 μl, Split
Elution order:
CBD, THC, CBN
Sample preparation
Two hundred mg of dry and homogenized herbal cannabis (see section 5.4.2) are
extracted with 20 ml internal standard (ISTD) solution (see below) for 15 minutes
in an ultrasonic bath. Due to the higher THC concentration in cannabis resin, only
100 mg resin is needed. If the sample is liquid cannabis (cannabis oil), a weight of

about 50 mg is sufficient.

This machine is for ME I am not really looking to market my services just answer a lot of my own questions and maybe pick up a little clink. I got stuff I want to test at ever stage of development and quailfy and quantify my information. Mostly if I can confirm or dismiss information about bad testing then every one wins.

I am also going to test for brick levels with a refactor meter which I have yet to see any one do. I think it is just as applicable here. Why? I think it will dispel the idea once and for all that hydro/soiless can produce as good as real dirt. Salt additives? NO FREAKING WAY!!!!