|
We Update
Daily!
Custom Search
Chris S. Kenoyer. Owner &
MMJ Patient,
Medical Activist,
Online Patients Advocate,
Online News Journalist
My
Personal Medical Bio
Follow Us Now On Twitter
@MedicalMMJMan
Email Us Here
olpwebs@yahoo.com
Or
Email Us Securely Here
olpwebs@Safe-mail.net
TV
News Or Press Contact Info
The Website Audio &
Multimedia
Content!
Is Best
Viewed With Internet Explorer Browser!
********************************
Advertise Here
On OnlinePot
Rates As Low As $50 a Year
24/7 365 Days A Year
Of Sales!
********************************
OnlinePot Free Newsletter
The
Latest In MMJ News
Legal
Disclaimer
Guest Book
To translate text or
a web page go
to:
Language Tools
Google
Translations
Website
Submissions & News
Reports
Are Always
Gladly
Accepted Here.
Is CBD? A Possible
Cure For
Breast Cancer?
And All The Other
Many
Forms & Types
Of Cancer?
Learn
More About " CBD" Here
Cancer Cured:
A Cannabis Story
Website Navigational Links
*******************************************
Main
Start Page 2
*******************************************
Parody's
Cartoons US
Government Grown Pot,
Term Papers,
School
Reports, & Thesis's On
Marijuana & Cannabis
*******************************************
Amsterdam
A to Z
*******************************************
Canadian
Marijuana
Websites
*******************************************
Church's
& Pot Cannabis
*******************************************
Co-Ops, Clinics, Dispensary's
******************************************
Marijuana
Doctors & Clinics
*******************************************
Pot
Cooking Recipes
*******************************************
Drug
Testing A To Z
*******************************************
Pot Games
*******************************************
100's
Of Marijuana Grow Guides
*******************************************
Latest
Marijuana News Reports
*******************************************
Hash A- Z
*******************************************
Cannabis
Legal Info, Drug
Lawyers, State, Federal Laws,
State
& Supreme Court Rulings
*******************************************
POW's
Of The MMJ
War!
*******************************************
Other
Marijuana Websites
Websites
Link
Exchange!
*******************************************
Medical
Marijuana
Studies,
Research
Report's, Medical
Cannabis Clinic Study's
*******************************************
Avoiding Online MOM
Scammers
Newly
Re-Updated Info!
*******************************************
The Politics Of
Contraband
Medical Marijuana In The Mail?
*******************************************
The
Hall Of Shame Section
The Online MOM Scammers
*******************************************
Online MOM's Providers Ads
*******************************************
Politicians
&
Voters Rights
*******************************************
Medical
Marijuana, Strains
*******************************************
The OG
Marijuana Strain Guide
*******************************************
800+
FAQ Growing Questions
*******************************************
Marijuana & Pot Songs
Just Updated!
*******************************************
Patients
Spiritual
Guidance,
Free Online
Crisis Help Center
*******************************************
Online
Marijuana Seed Banks
*******************************************
Maximum Security
Section
Just Updated!
Hushmail.com Security Alert!
*******************************************
Traveling
Tips, Guides, B & B's
*******************************************
Vaporizers
A To Z
*******************************************
Online Pot Video's & Movies
*******************************************
Visit Our Sister Websites!
www.OLPInternetRadio.com
The
Reefer Madness
Teaching Museum.org
Listen Right Here Online!
To Original 1930-1950's
Reefer Madness Propaganda
Radio
Shows And Programs
Before TV
There Were "Radio Stars"
Maine
Patients Coalition.org
The
Reefer Madness Teaching Museum.org
1999-2011 Copyright ©
All Rights Reserved.
No part of this site maybe used or
reproduced in whole or in part
without
the written consent of the
Copyright
Owner Chris Kenoyer
www.onlinepot.org
OnlinePot assumes no legal
liability
for
any products, or
information or
news
posted, services
offered,
Or
any contests or give away's offered.
| |
California Medical Cannabis
Marijuana Potency
Testing Project
From Dale Gieringer, Ph.D.
California NORML,
2215-R Market St. Suite 278
San Francisco CA 94114
tel: (415) 563-5858
E-mail: canorml@igc.apc.org
Return
Back To Main Medical Reports Page
Given the rapidly growing use of medical cannabis for
a wide variety of indications and the manifold different underground
sources currently supplying patients, there is a natural interest in
investigating the potency, purity, and chemical content of the available
supplies of medical cannabis. While the availability of medical cannabis
has increased in the wake of the passage of California's Proposition 215
and other state medical marijuana initiatives, scientific research on
its content remains frustrated by the continued federal ban on medical
cannabis research.
In an effort to cast light in this obscure area, a
research project was undertaken by a group of us, including researchers,
growers, and medical cannabis buyers' clubs, with support from
California NORML and MAPS, to analyze samples of medical cannabis from
various patients' cooperatives and providers around the country. This
effort proved to be a lesson in the difficulties and uncertainties of
cannabis research in a society where freedom of pharmacological research
has been stifled by an effectively totalitarian drug bureaucracy.
From the outset, our project was frustrated by a lack of access to
qualified research labs with expertise in analysis of cannabis. The
leading research lab in the country declined to do business with us for
fear of compromising government contracts, while the other likely
candidates were all foreign and thus not legally accessible to us
because of DEA regulations. In the end, we were fortunate to obtain the
services of a laboratory that had the requisite DEA license and
equipment (a gas chromatograph mass spectrometer, or GCMS), but no prior
experience in cannabis analysisin fact, its primary business was drug
urinalysis! The analysis of our samples was accordingly a learning
process for both the lab and ourselves.
Our original aim had been to obtain a broad-spectrum quantitative
analysis of as many of the 60-plus naturally occurring cannabinoids as
possible, in the hope of detecting differences that might produce
differing therapeutic effects among the samples. To our disappointment,
however, our lab could obtain laboratory standards only for the three
most common cannabinoids, delta-9-THC, cannabidiol (CBD), and cannabinol
(CBN).
A total of 47 different samples of medical cannabis were submitted by
over a half dozen different providers and patients' cooperatives ranging
from California to the East Coast. Included were 42 samples of
sinsemilla bud, three samples of hashish or resin; one liquid sample of
a milk-based cannabis drink ("Mother's Milk"), and one capsule
of an oral whole leaf preparation.
Upon analysis by GCMS, the potency of the 42 sinsemilla samples was
determined to range from 10.2% to 31.6% THC, with a mean of 19.4%. These
results were surprisingly high, given that the average potency of
marijuana in the U.S. has been typically estimated at around 3% to 4% by
NIDA, with higher grade sinsemilla ranging towards 10% - 15%. The
highest potency recorded came from a sample of hashish, which registered
68.6%. Yet even a sample of Mexican commercial grade registered a
surprisingly high 11%, twice what we had expected. All of this cast a
troubling shadow of doubt on our test results, although it appeared
likely that we were dealing with highly potent varieties.
In contrast, the CBD levels observed were surprisingly low. Only four
of the sinsemilla samples had more than 0.3% CBD, and 35 of them had
only trace amounts (<0.1%). However, one sample had an astoundingly
high CBD content of 28.0% (plus 11.6% THC). Another registered 5.6% CBD
and 13.4% THC. Aside from these two anomalies, the CBD results were
frankly disappointing, as we had hoped to discover significant
variations in the content of the samples, with accompanying variations
in medical activity. Because CBD is suspected to have peculiar efficacy
for control of muscle spasms and for damping anxiety and "panic
reactions" caused by THC, we had hypothesized that certain patients
would tend to prefer high-CBD varieties. In fact, however, it appears
that few patients are ever exposed to high-CBD cannabis. Unfortunately,
we were unable to procure additional specimens of the high-CBD varieties
for further testing.
As for CBN, the majority of samples showed only trace amounts. The
highest level detected was 1.4%, and only one other sample tested above
1%. CBN is a breakdown product of THC, so high CBN levels are expected
in old, degraded samples. This was confirmed by the fact that one of the
samples above 1% CBN was known to be a year old. The prevalence of low
CBN in the samples was evidence that most available medical cannabis
tends to be fresh and well-preserved. Otherwise, these results were of
limited interest, as there are few if any known medical effects of CBN.
Another disappointing surprise was the failure to detect more than
trace levels of THC or CBD in the liquid "Mother's Milk"
sample. Upon further investigation, the lab determined that this was
because it is impossible to extract cannabinoids from fat-based liquids
using standard methanol extraction techniques. Consulting with other
researchers, we found that there is no known method for isolating THC
from fat-based liquids.
Later, we located a lab that claimed to have developed a secret,
proprietary method for extracting cannabinoids from fat. With
considerable difficulty, we arranged to have the lab test the Mother's
Milk. To our disappointment, however, once again only trace amounts of
THC and CBD were detected. Just to make sure, one of us swallowed a
sample of the Mother's Milk (which by now had spent several months in
the freezer) and found it to be delightfully potent. Evidently, the
lab's technique had failed. It appears that further advances in testing
technology will be needed in order to properly analyze fat-based oral
cannabis products such as Mother's milk, bhang, ghee, and possibly baked
goods such as brownies.
Table: THC and CBD Test Results
(Round 1 vs. Rounds 2 and 3)
|
|
1st Round |
|
2nd Round |
|
3rd Round
(New Lab) |
| Name of Sample |
THC -1 |
CBD-1 |
THC-2 |
CBD-2 |
THC-3 |
CBD-3 |
| High CBD |
11.6% |
28.0% |
4.0% |
16.2% |
2.8% |
8.8% |
| Sinsemilla BB 006 |
25.2 |
<.1 |
18.2 |
<.1 |
14.9 |
<.1 |
| Sinsemilla BB 008 |
27.4 |
<.1 |
35.1 |
<.1 |
21.0 |
0.07 |
| Sinsemilla MR001 |
18.0 |
<.1 |
11.7 |
<.1 |
|
| Sinsemilla BB 009 |
10.2 |
1.3 |
7.6 |
2.8 |
|
| Sinsemilla SCJ |
14.2 |
<.1 |
14.1 |
<.1 |
|
| Sinsemilla BB 007 |
21.1 |
<.1 |
|
|
12.8
| <.1 |
| Sinsemilla Tri 501 |
27.2 |
<.1 |
|
|
20.0
| <.1 |
| Sinsemilla BB 010 |
18.0 |
0.3 |
|
|
8.7
| <.1 |
| Sinsemilla BB 004 |
18.6 |
<.1 |
|
|
13.0 |
<.1 |
| Sinsemilla AQ |
23.7 |
<.1 |
|
|
17.6 |
<.1 |
| Hashish |
68.6 |
0.1 |
|
|
44.0 |
<.1 |
| Mother's Milk |
<.1 |
<.1 |
|
|
<.1 |
|
| NIDA Leaf |
|
|
3.9% |
<.1 |
|
|
| Low-grade Leaf |
|
|
2.1 |
<.1 |
|
|
|
The extraordinarily high THC potency in the sinsemilla samples raised
troubling doubts about the reliability of the test results. The lab
director expressed concern about the sample preparation, saying that he
had noted a tendency for the oils to separate from the rest of the
liquid during extraction. We therefore decided to re-submit some of the
samples for a second round of testing. We selected six samples,
including the one with anomalously high CBD. As a check, we added two
new samples with presumably low potency: a sample of low-grade leaf, and
some of the government's own marijuana, grown for NIDA, whose potency is
known to be in the 2.9 - 3.9 % range.
In the second round of testing, the average THC potency for the seven
samples declined slightly to 15.1% from 17.8% in the first round. For
the six low-CBD samples, second-round potencies varied between 65% and
128% of their first-round values (see table). The high CBD sample
registered a precipitous decline of 60 - 65% in both THC and CBD,
bolstering suspicions of some kind of irregularity in the sample. NIDA's
marijuana came in at 3.9%, at the high end of its expected range, and
the low-grade shake came in at 2%. One sinsemilla sample registered a
record 35% on re-testing.
The second round of testing failed to dispel our uncertainty about
the results. Overall, the trend of the data seemed to confirm our
suspicions that the first round results had been systematically too
high. However, the wide variation in individual test results between the
two rounds undermined confidence in any firm conclusions. While it
seemed reasonable to infer that we were dealing with some genuinely
potent cannabis, the high-range results for NIDA's pot suggested that
the second round might still be too high.
After some months of head-scratching, we stumbled upon the
opportunity to re-check our test results via a circuitous route to a
second lab. This lab, recognized for its expertise in cannabis potency
testing, was the same one that tested the Mother's Milk. In addition to
the Mother's Milk, we submitted seven sinsemilla samples, the high-CBD
sample, and the high-potency hashish. The potencies were uniformly lower
in the third round than the first, by proportions ranging from 25 - 50%.
All of this clearly implied that our first round test results had been
systematically on the high side. Still, the average potency of the seven
sinsemilla samples was an impressive 15.4%, four or five times greater
than NIDA's marijuana.
From this, we can safely conclude that the marijuana currently being
provided by underground cannabis clubs is far superior in quality to
that currently provided by NIDA to the eight legal medical marijuana
patients. Due to its higher THC content, patients need consume only a
fraction of the harmful, non-medically-active tars and gases in cannabis
smoke in order to achieve the same effective dose. This is of course
especially significant in light of the recent Institute of Medicine
report, which singled out smoking as the major adverse health hazard of
medical marijuana. Aside from THC, we could find no significant presence
of the other tested cannabinoids, CBN and CBD, except in one or two
anomalous samples. There is thus little evidence that patients are
currently making use of differing varieties of cannabis to treat
different medical conditions, although it is possible that other,
untested cannabinoids remain lurking in the background. Finally, our
experience shows that laboratory measurements of cannabinoid content can
vary widely from test to test and lab to lab, and are entirely
undependable in the case of fat-based cannabis liquids.
LAST PARAGRAPH REVISED 12/2/02
Later, we located a lab that claimed to have developed a proprietary
method for extracting cannabinoids from fat. With considerable
difficulty, we arranged to have the lab test the Mother's Milk. At
first, we were disappointed when it reported what seemed to be
negligible traces of THC, only 50 parts per million (0.0050%) by weight.
On further consideration, however, we realized that this was a
reasonable concentration for a comestible product, since the weight of a
one cup serving of milk (about 250 grams) was much greater than that of
one cigarette (<1 gram). This works out to 12.5 milligrams of THC per
cup, equivalent to two and a half standard 5 mg Marinol capsules.
|
Return
Back To Main Medical Reports Page
|
Button Ad
Spaces 
