Gorilla Glue #4

[TickleMyBalls]

When you are testing for potency, THCA is irrelevant. And it converts into more than just D9 THC. So when the ultimate goal is finding out d9 thc, why even use a test that calculates THCA? Maybe because that method produces higher numbers due to the process. Only people ingesting raw THCA, are people juicing cannabis, anyone else is using a form that THCA has already been converted into D9, D8, CBD, CBN, CBG, etc..

 

[Dan Kone]

When you are testing for potency, THCA is irrelevant.

Sorry, it's not. That thc-a eventually becomes d9-thc when you apply heat to it. Unless you're eating the concentrate, it's very relevant.

And it converts into more than just D9 THC. So when the ultimate goal is finding out d9 thc, why even use a test that calculates THCA?

Because the thc-a is what is present in the concentrates. The D9-thc numbers tell you specifically how much thc you've already activated, they do not tell you how much thc you'll activate when you inhale the concentrate. You're converting the thc-a as you apply heat to it, converting it from thc-a into d9-thc.

The more thc-a that is present, the more you have available to convert into d9-thc when you apply heat an inhale.

Maybe because that method produces higher numbers due to the process.

Or maybe because when you touch thc-a to a hot nail it converts into d9-thc.

Only people ingesting raw THCA, are people juicing cannabis, anyone else is using a form that THCA has already been converted into D9, D8, CBD, CBN, CBG, etc..

Right, but you're ignoring the fact that the thc-a is converted into d9-thc the moment you dab it. It's not going to come up in a test as d9-thc because it isn't d9-thc yet. However once you apply heat to it while dabbing it will convert.

 

[Seaf0ur]

This is much more relevant....

 

[TickleMyBalls]

Sorry, it's not. That thc-a eventually becomes d9-thc when you apply heat to it. Unless you're eating the concentrate, it's very relevant.



Because the thc-a is what is present in the concentrates. The D9-thc numbers tell you specifically how much thc you've already activated, they do not tell you how much thc you'll activate when you inhale the concentrate. You're converting the thc-a as you apply heat to it, converting it from thc-a into d9-thc.

The more thc-a that is present, the more you have available to convert into d9-thc when you apply heat an inhale.



Or maybe because when you touch thc-a to a hot nail it converts into d9-thc.



Right, but you're ignoring the fact that the thc-a is converted into d9-thc the moment you dab it. It's not going to come up in a test as d9-thc because it isn't d9-thc yet. However once you apply heat to it while dabbing it will convert.

Why do you keep mentioning concentrates? I'm talking about anything combusted or vaporized. GC test HEATS the sample to simulate dabbing or smoking or vaporizing or whatever you want to call it. Which is more accurate to what we are doing.

This conversation is not just about concentrates, it's about why HPLC testing is not needed and isn't as accurate to determine potency in samples of flower or concentrates, as GC.

All you did in your argument is point out what HPLC does, not explain why you would use a method that calculates THCA in the first place, instead of one that gives you the Delta-9 numbers?

 

[TickleMyBalls]

Sorry to be off topic so much, but one more post, addressing the terpenes... Here is a flower test... Add the peaks up. About 13% or so on that one.

 

[Huel Perkins]

Yes you do.

Because the thc-a hasn't converted yet but it will when you add heat to it. So when you dab you aren't inhaling thc-a, you're inhaling the d9 thc that was in the extract along with the thc-a that just just converted to d9 when you applied heat to it.

Both are d9-thc when you inhale them. That's why you add those numbers together. Make sense?

No you don't...

Some of the actual THC present in the sample (concentrate or flowers) will convert to CBN when decarbed, also not all THCA will convert into Delta9 THC when decarbed. There are no formulas or math that will get you truely accurate results....

 

[dank.frank]

You know what gives 100% accurate results...

MY LUNGS...

Send all your samples this way, gentlemen...





dank.Frank

 

[zamzia]

You know what gives 100% accurate results...

MY LUNGS...

Send all your samples this way, gentlemen...





dank.Frank

 

[OvergrowDaWorld]

Nice story but,
You sure you didn't take something else or maybe the J was laced if you were "tripping balls"

No It wasnt laced.
This isnt the only time Ive had weed that sent me into the next level of being high.
It was probably sativa dom or something. Very psychadelic high.
There hasnt been many times Ive smoked weed that strong. But when I do, I certainly appreciate it.
So I guess the GG4 isnt that kinda high. Cauze if that has ever been your experience, you would know exactly what Im talking about. Keep smoking. Youll find that high eventually. I think it comes from landrace sativa hybrids like Panama Red or something to that effect.

GG#4 @ Day 35 ~

 

[Dan Kone]

Why do you keep mentioning concentrates? I'm talking about anything combusted or vaporized. GC test HEATS the sample to simulate dabbing or smoking or vaporizing or whatever you want to call it. Which is more accurate to what we are doing.

This conversation is not just about concentrates, it's about why HPLC testing is not needed and isn't as accurate to determine potency in samples of flower or concentrates, as GC.

All you did in your argument is point out what HPLC does, not explain why you would use a method that calculates THCA in the first place, instead of one that gives you the Delta-9 numbers?

Pretty simple. GC doesn't give you as accurate of a distinguishment between thc-a and d9-thc. The d9-thc number as a separate number from thc-a is useful because it shows you how badly you screwed up a flower or extract in terms of heat. Optimal is more thc-a and as little d9-thc as possible.

So if you keep thc-a and d9-thc as separate numbers your d9-thc number high that means somewhere along the line your flowers/concentrates experienced too much heat and you likely lost terpenes.

 

[Dan Kone]

No you don't...

Some of the actual THC present in the sample (concentrate or flowers) will convert to CBN when decarbed, also not all THCA will convert into Delta9 THC when decarbed. There are no formulas or math that will get you truely accurate results....

No, but they will get you approximate results, which is significantly more useful than no data what so ever. When you decarb you get approximately 87-88% of your total thc. Slightly more of the thc-a will convert to d9, and yes, some of the d9 will convert to cbn, but it's a small number.

 

[TheDank23]

Well... I guess i've joined the glue crew

Gorilla Glue #4 S1 2 weeks from seed

 

[10ftGanja]

Da Kine!

 

[SPG.]

Nc1 DF

"yes bring to my taste buds"

 

[Lifebreather]

Here's my replacement glue a few days into 12/12.

I'll update it periodically. Thanks for the opportunity to run a healthy glue, brother. You know who you are.

 

[Huel Perkins]

No, but they will get you approximate results, which is significantly more useful than no data what so ever. When you decarb you get approximately 87-88% of your total thc. Slightly more of the thc-a will convert to d9, and yes, some of the d9 will convert to cbn, but it's a small number.

So you agree...

 

[bamboogardner]

Here's my replacement glue a few days into 12/12.

You got replacements for the dud's? Lucky You. I was the first in line at San Bernardino waiting to buy the Glue, and am still waiting for the replacements. -(

 

[Mikenite69]

7-23-14 gorilla glue#4

7-23-14 gorilla glue#4

Here is my gorilla glue girl just starting to stretch she is already having troubles holding her lower lateral branches up as you can see. Tomorrow trellis or bamboo will be put up..

Also sorry about the shit pictures it was bright outside and this thing is a headge my iphone couldn't get the whole plant in the pictures and to top it off she is about my height right now. I'll get better pics as the season pushes on. You can see by the last pic the lower branches sagging already.

 

[Hammerhead]

This is old but will give you some good info..


How Accurate Is Cannabis Potency Testing? California NORML and Project CBD release the results of the first "Ring Test" to assess the accuracy of analytical laboratories
Mixed findings show strengths and problems among analytic testing services.



In the winter of 2010/11, California NORML and Project CBD initiated a "Ring Test" to assess the accuracy of the numerous analytical cannabis testing laboratories that have recently emerged to serve medical marijuana collectives, breeders, growers and patients.
Results of the study, which was coauthored by California NORML director Dale Gieringer and Dutch scientist Dr. Arno Hazekamp, are reported in the Autumn 2011 issue of O'Shaughnessy's, the Journal of Cannabis in Clinical practice on pages 17-18, posted at:
http://www.canorml.org/RingTestOShaughnessys_Aut11.pdf
"We embarked on a parallel study of cannabis testing labs to shed light on a significant, unresolved issue within the fledgling medical marijuana industry in California and other states," says Gieringer, "We wanted to know how reliable is the information provided by analytical cannabis labs? Are they adequately serving the needs of medical marijuana patients and providers?"
Ten cannabis labs in two states agreed to participate in an anonymous, side-by-side study to assess the accuracy and precision of their collective work. The participating labs employed a variety of analytical techniques and instrumentation to conduct their analysis.
Six samples drawn from the same sources were tested by each lab: four herbal samples, including one CBD-rich strain, and two tinctures (alcohol extracts).




Results of the Ring Test
- In most cases, lab results were consistent to within plus or minus 20% on replicate samples (and often within 10%). For example, a sample with 10% average THC content might range from 8% to 12% in different tests. This is similar to the accuracy of the government's potency testing program run by NIDA's lab in Mississippi, as well as comparable government-regulated industries such as environmental testing. Conclusion: The precision and proficiency of a majority of cannabis testing labs compared favorably to other analytical testing industries.




- While a majority of labs performed within acceptable limits, some reported results that deviated substantially from the average, with unacceptable deviations of more than 25% from the mean. Three of the ten labs performed unacceptably on half of the tests. Conclusion: Not all cannabis testing labs are performing up to par; consumers are well advised to check the reputations and professional experience of labs they work with, and to arrange backup tests from more than one lab where accuracy is essential.


- Both gas chromatography (GC) and liquid chromatography (LC) instrumentation yielded accurate results in testing of raw cannabis samples, with comparable and acceptable repeatability for identical samples. Conclusion: Both GC and LC instrumentation should be considered reliable for cannabis potency analysis.
- In the case of the tinctures (alcohol extracts), there were significant discrepancies in the results found by different labs, with GC generally reporting significantly higher potencies than LC. This made it impossible to reliably estimate the actual potency of the original samples. Conclusion: More work is required to assess the accuracy of current methods for testing cannabis tinctures, edibles and other extracts.

- No analytical testing lab demonstrated precision that supports reporting cannabinoid results to two decimal places. By unnecessarily reporting results to the one-hundredth percentile, some labs created an unrealistic illusion of precision that raises false expectations regarding the degree to which accuracy is possible, given the 20% variation observed. Conclusion: Labs should re-evaluate the precision level at which results are reported.




The Project CBD / CA NORML Ring Test report is accompanied by a list of ten questions that patients and providers might want to ask when choosing to work with an analytical testing lab.
"Analytical labs provide an important service for the medical marijuana community," says Sarah Russo, Project CBD's outreach coordinator. "We hope that cannabis labs, while competing for market share, will cooperate to improve their methods and maintain a high performance standard. Medical marijuana patients and providers would be well served by labs that share information and assist each other in a collegial manner

 

[t99]

Hazekamp? Where do I sign up?
Thanks for the info PF!