What's new

Cannabis strain tests at : 37.28 percent thc will the anni be upped?

M

MedResearcher

Member
Veteran
It looks really frosty, great bag appeal for sure.


Myself, I have to join the side of the skeptics. I don't think anyone fudged the numbers on purpose, or that there was even a mistake since they tested it 4x. I do think, labs use different protocols.


Saw a video where a lab retested some flower. One lab had it near 30%, the second lab had it at 18%. I could think of numerous different things that could easily skew samples in either direction, for instance is the stem included or removed? Is the sample taken randomly from a large population, or is a small sample hand chosen from a large population.


I just think its suspect that the record was around 22-23% for so long, then with some form of legalization and marketing campaigns we went to 30%... 35% now almost 40%. I just have my doubts that in 10-15 years, the breeding has almost doubled hash production. Especially when you consider the small populations most breeders are working with now.


I do think with the genetic marker assisted selection we will see some really amazing genes start to surface, but this was a little fast and fueled by recreational marketing imo. I heard that pretty much the stores will not buy rec supply if it doesn't at least test over a certain %. So if labs start switching protocol to one that gives higher numbers, that makes everyone happy, I am sure nobody complains.


Either way, nice frosty flower. Makes me want to pop some of these GG4 hybrid seeds that are laying around.

Mr^^
 
C

clearheaded

Active member
seems like the 35% cannibinoids is sorta max... may see a few % extra but prob pretty close to its carrying capacity. can be 25%THC and 10% cbd or 20%thc 10%cbd and 5% cbg. or just 35% of pretty much only thc. of course slight variation as dif molecules have dif mass so % mass of the bud will have a little difference. but in and around there.

That being said smoking a 22% cultivar with mad terps and 30% bland var I get better buzz off 22% one. Also to me I find little differnce when smoking 18% or 29% stuff. if its hard to smoke ie harsh prob smoke little less or not breath in as hard or if tastes good and smooth prob get alot higher as smoking more off a 17% cultivar. 35% probably good thing for hash makers as get more yield but other then that not huge of a deal other then bragging rights i guess.

if want pure thc add some marinol or some clear distilite. :) def a feat of the grower as obv you are dialed in!!
 
Last edited:
MJPassion

MJPassion

Observer
ICMag Donor
Veteran
That number is laughable at best.

If that number were for total cannabinoids, it might be believable but just straight THC... not a chance!!

ROTFLMMFAO!!!
 
T

thal

Member
I wish they had posted results. My guess is that number is a combination of THC-A and THC, instead of THC-A converted to THC + THC.
 
burningfire

burningfire

Well-known member
Veteran
as others have pointed out it's bullshit, so many labs are in it for the money and will attach any good number to any sample.



https://www.thestranger.com/weed/20...-has-failed-to-keep-bad-weed-out-of-pot-shops


". In one instance, Peak Analytics had tested a sample of Blue Dream at 37.2 percent THC—an exceedingly high number for flower—but could not provide auditors with any information behind the figure."



another quote from the article


"This summer, for example, Bellingham-based cannabis-testing lab Peak Analytics was suspended after an audit found that it was using poor testing practices that failed to accurately conduct microbial analysis during a sample test. The lab was unable to appropriately conduct a coliform test, which tests pot for microbes like salmonella, E. coli, and mold, which can make people sick."
 
wvkindbud38

wvkindbud38

Elite Growers Club
Veteran
I'd have to think these numbers are for a crowd that's not been around the block a few yrs....anything north of 22-25ish I'd really have to see/smoke. Like somebody said what is different the last 20yrs. These are basically the same strains crossed different ways/give different names and it's like this weed was just dropped down from the heavens....BS. You can keep crossing and changing names but there's only so many REAL strains. You can cross these strains with whatever you want but I don't see 40%....I hope I'm wrong ....fuck the more THC and stronger it is the better I'd think. I'd like to see 50% THC. I wonder if you test a plant from 10yr ago that was 22% in this lab that's got this 38% stuff....what would the plant from 10yr 22% test as.....gotta be the lab or testing method is new. The stuff that was 20% yrs ago is probably gonna be 35+ now ????? Just my opinion hopefully I'm wrong....I like a lot of THC !!!!!!
 
Medfinder

Medfinder

Chemon 91
i posted this only because it shows the hard work of breeders here who have given the worlds most precious genetics to others and recieved no credit from the main stream cannabis business community.


as far as testing accurate samples? i don't have any clues.

haven't tested any of my crosses yet
 
Tonygreen

Tonygreen

Active member
ICMag Donor
Veteran
If they are such a highly regarded lab why the shitty test analysis? I saw their pic on instagram. Says 37.28 thc. Why isn't it broken down into thc A results? Same cut supposedly tested at 31 at a cup?? Sounds like funny business in Oregon to sell flowers in an over saturated market.
 
Stickybred420

Stickybred420

Member
tweed (Canadian liscensed producer) has been putting out 30% strains since the start of the game....but its very obvious they just fudge the numbers. pretty sure they just dust their flowers with keif before they test them. they had 34% afghan kush one time and while that can be a sticky cultivar, i just don't think it gets that high.


they were the only lp that claimed to have strain selections over 30%


Broken coast (which i consider the best lp) has a pink kush cut that's 24.4% thc and visually frosty. it sits you the fuck down, trippy overpowering couchlock stone every time. pretty nice terps (3-4%) (for government weed)


tweed sells the same strain but tested at 36% yet it smokes like its 12% and has zero terps. very few trichs on the bud.


its like standing outside and looking someone dead in the eye and telling them that the sky is green and that's an undisputable fact.
 
T

thal

Member
burningfire said:
as others have pointed out it's bullshit, so many labs are in it for the money and will attach any good number to any sample.



https://www.thestranger.com/weed/20...-has-failed-to-keep-bad-weed-out-of-pot-shops


". In one instance, Peak Analytics had tested a sample of Blue Dream at 37.2 percent THC—an exceedingly high number for flower—but could not provide auditors with any information behind the figure."



another quote from the article


"This summer, for example, Bellingham-based cannabis-testing lab Peak Analytics was suspended after an audit found that it was using poor testing practices that failed to accurately conduct microbial analysis during a sample test. The lab was unable to appropriately conduct a coliform test, which tests pot for microbes like salmonella, E. coli, and mold, which can make people sick."
Click to expand...


I'm sure some labs suck, and some are pay to play, but the lab that I use is ISO certified. If their results aren't accurate than I don't know whose results would be accurate, and they've tested some of my strains at 37% THC A.

RW3pD3P.png
 
burningfire

burningfire

Well-known member
Veteran
thal said:
I'm sure some labs suck, and some are pay to play, but the lab that I use is ISO certified. If their results aren't accurate than I don't know whose results would be accurate, and they've tested some of my strains at 37% THC A.

View Image
Click to expand...




I think the whole system needs to be reworked, I don't want to claim anything about your sample but if you had it tested at another lab I'm almost certain you would get different results. There's a normal margin of variance between tests, from what I've read 20% seems to be the ceiling.



Peak Analytics lab, the lab found guilty of fudging data and not reporting on contaminants proudly displays that they are ISO certified on their website.
 
T

thal

Member
burningfire said:
I think the whole system needs to be reworked, I don't want to claim anything about your sample but if you had it tested at another lab I'm almost certain you would get different results. There's a normal margin of variance between tests, from what I've read 20% seems to be the ceiling.



Peak Analytics lab, the lab found guilty of fudging data and not reporting on contaminants proudly displays that they are ISO certified on their website.
Click to expand...

I have had the strain tested per state requirements. That means 4 baseline tests followed by one additional test per quarter. It's been over 30% consistently.

Our samples are comprised of 8, randomly selected, half gram samples.

That is my strongest strain, but I have roughly 15 strains that have tested over 30% THC-A. I'm confident in this labs ability. They meet all of the state testing requirements and have top notch equipment.

Out of the roughly 60 strains that I'm growing only 5 or 10, including my dedicated CBD strains, test under 20%.
 
Ringodoggie

Ringodoggie

Well-known member
Premium user
ISO 9001 certification has absolutely nothing to do with a companies performance or the accuracy of their testing procedures. It's little more than a "Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval" for businesses. Fucking joke, actually. I owned 3 companies that were all ISO 9001. Again, a fucking joke.


And, to the OP... it's ante, not anni. Ever play poker. :) Can a mod fix that or do I need to call the spelling police and report this thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top