LAbs and their results????

I'm planning on a double blind test of the labs doing tests. I get the feeling reading results on canlytics and ironlabs that it's apples and oranges assays. The highest score for a sample on ironlabs is around 20.9% (total %). The highest at cannalytics is 28.9(total %) in the search I did and their listings, to me, are harder to search. I have heard many people say "oh well (fill in the lab you DONT use here) inflates the results so I don't use them anymore" few times. I have heard of some pretty high numbers floating around too but the head doesn't always match the printout, dig? so before I get it all started I was hoping to get thoughts questions experiences, whatever from everyone regarding both places. This would be my first use of cannalytics so good info would be who near jackson accepts samples (I have an ironlabs vendor I use right by home already) and how that process works. Has anyone tried this? My samples will be labeled with alphanumeric jibberish to help out the labs in not knowing what the hell is what and I will also vid document the collection and labeling (on my jars to take to the lab pick up place) of the samples in case we get some wild variance. I expect 1-2% variaton and I think in these small numbers we're working with that's generous. I like to do 2-4 samples a harvest anyway to see changes over time in harvest with the numbers. I think I will use my widow harvest in feb and work for a sample for each lab from the same bud for 8, 8.5 and 9 week harvests. Any guesses on how this will go? Of course the results will be posted here but I'm thinking I will work in some of this to my grow journal as well. Thanks for reading
CORRECTION ON CANNALYTICS!!!!! Figuring out their site a little more I found a fucking silly % of 43.1 on a plant material....I think I found my front runner for bullshitter of the year! plant material, not concentrate either.

You do realize that 43.1% was caviar right? Aka nug rolled in bho and then kief...

Rare D MI said:

You do realize that 43.1% was caviar right? Aka nug rolled in bho and then kief...

Click to expand...

I thought that was a fucking plant name; why put that in the plant material section? I still see a median5% bump from one lab to the next as the top end. caviar huh? Thanks for tip-I can't be the only guy fooled by that.

Yeah, it's a retarded product to begin with in my opinion. But cannalytics is shady. I don't trust their numbers. I have seen too much bomb deathstar test at 20-24%, I can't believe 1 person on 1 occasion around here somehow bumped up the same clone 3.5%. I just made deathstar wax last month and had it tested by applied annalytics up at g3c, it tested at 54.95% thc. I have a hard time believing someone got that strain to be more than half as potent as bho. Typically I've noticed bho with concentrate it by 2 1/2-3x.

funny you mention deathstar, I tried some of that deathstar and thought my brain would melt but it did not and it got me thinking

Just burned a bowl of C&T's Ice hash I think I may need a nap ...

So there's no standard procedure for this analysis? Formal testing labs generally abide by an ASTM standard. I'm sure there's no ASTM for testing weed, but I would think there must be a standard in place that could be used.

TheMan13 said:

Just burned a bowl of C&T's Ice hash I think I may need a nap ...

Click to expand...

I gave some to a vendor at that market and he went outside for a minute, came back...sat down....had a hotdog...had a nap in his chair and then packed up and left. All within about 90 minutes LOL. Hope u like it. 17% total on the plant material test thru ironlabs. not enough for me-I'm looking for the rare ones.

Rrog: one difference in test I see just from websites and talking to ironlabs is that heat is used in the ironlabs procedure while the cannalytics claims no heat and therefore no decarboxylation. ironlabs says their way is more true to life usage numbers as they decarb and the use of heat is more like the likely consumption method that will be used. cannalytics I haven't contacted directly nor talked to anyone about the different methods of testing and their procedures yet. I think they all need to get their shit together and get a standard but until that time I am left to my own testing of the testers. some people's kids...... you know?

cannlabs in Denver is a great place. Not sure how popular they are but that's all my buddies out there use.

So just for the sake of asking what lab is your best bet for accurate info in Michigan?

none they all have an agenda--

Hmmm... Anyone know what equipment these "labs" use? Maybe we need a decent lab set up. I like labs...

I bet in the next year, 2 tops; there will be compassion clubs (dispensaries if you wanna be a dick about it) that will have invested in the equipment training and staff. I just have this feeling.....

I don't remember exactly the equipment specifics but the "labs" seem more than happy to tell you on the websites and in the free tour they will give pospect members if you're serious Rrog and got money to burn I've heard huge ranges from multiple sources from 20K to 1 mil and up. Not claiming any real knowledge here jsut what I have gotten from conversations.

Clearly there's a lot of BS being put forth (not you C&T). CO2 extracts that are simply BHO. Labs giving higher results in exchange for cash. What a bunch of BS.

I'd also say these costs associated are also BS. Let's face it. If someone could get a $3k Gas Chromatograph, they'd likely tell everyone it was tens of thousands just to keep others from getting the same idea.

If you want an accurate comparison between labs you need to give each one a bud sample separated side by side from the same cola. Samples tested tested from different parts of the plant (like top buds vs bottom buds) will get varied results.

Come on guys if you want actuate evaluation of how potent your bud is then quit fooling with those labs , just pack up a zip of your best and send it to me down here in Florida , I can tell how potent it is just by looking at the eyes of my 7 year old neighbor kid , this kind of testing can not be faked ,

Huel Perkins said:

If you want an accurate comparison between labs you need to give each one a bud sample separated side by side from the same cola. Samples tested tested from different parts of the plant (like top buds vs bottom buds) will get varied results.

Click to expand...

that's the plan, and to do it on video incase someone gets pissy about it.

NEEDMMASAP said:

Come on guys if you want actuate evaluation of how potent your bud is then quit fooling with those labs , just pack up a zip of your best and send it to me down here in Florida , I can tell how potent it is just by looking at the eyes of my 7 year old neighbor kid , this kind of testing can not be faked ,

Click to expand...

LOL, I like you're style.

Sure is a need for standardization. Maybe even testing and compliance

FWIW most of these companies are rolling with GC tests, and don't have nearly the accuracy that an HPLC does for instance. I know someone that runs an HPLC and they have literally only seen one or two strains in thousands that break the 20 % mark.