Mettrum claims 28.57% THC (Super Lemon Haze)

I think they're more concerned with mites/issues than THC levels, but I could be mistaken.
Requiring THC levels is good practice, but my understanding is that the options cover different ways of testing any food/drugs for contaminants or issues.

QA people here would know far better of course.

j0yr1d3 said:

So different pharmacopoeia means different testing methods which means different results? I thought they wanted standardization and all that other bullshit, wouldn't they agree on 1 testing method? Since the THC/CBD levels basically mean shit now since Tilray's 22% might actually be better than Mettrum's 28% or whatever based on how it was tested. I guess patients are supposed to make informed decisions on bullshit %'s now too.

Click to expand...

Hit the nail on the head with the issue of letting them choose which pharmacopoeia to select their testing methods from. This does NOT lead to standardization. It'd be bloody nice if we as patients who are now just learning this pharmacopoeia nonsense had a method of testing these % claims. That way a patient can not only check the claimed % for any validity, but it would allow for comparisons between companies who essentially carry the same product. I believe that some of the current LP's know there isn't a readily available and cost effective means to do so for patients. So that once again brings us back to having to take their word for it. And as some of the currently listed LP's have demonstrated, that should not be done, based on actions they have displayed thus far.

How hard is it to make them comply to a standardized means of testing before any of this was implemented? The answer is that it would not have been. Clearly another oversight on HC's part. Imagine if other industries were not standardized? Who would know if 85 octane gas was actually 85? Or that a cellphone battery actually had a capacity of 3200mAH lets say. So why is it that other medicines are so tightly standardized in their dosages and ingredients? Playing dumb isn't going to work anymore for HC when both sides of this new program are being dicked.

as well…thc % is not always indicative of the mood altering characteristics of a particular plant

example…if you have the right pheno type of haze x nl5…there will be no way it will have as much thc % as say

stardawg…BUT may make you loose bladder coordination

and think there are spacemen out side[slight exaggeration]

The way these tests are done is standardized. It's believable. I've seen un-freakin-believable SLH in my time that I wouldn't be surprised to learn tested that high. Old mother sativa is also correct about THC being not the main driver of effect.

Just saw the pics, not the best lookin SLH I've seen... that's for sure.

Test SOP is fairly consistent throughout the books, what differs is procedural matters on the actual people/labs doing the work. ie. did they decarboxylate properly, is their HPLC up to spec, etc. etc.

so is it better to assay the THC-Acid quantities before they start decarboxylation process ??

OGEvilgenius said:

The way these tests are done is standardized. It's believable. I've seen un-freakin-believable SLH in my time that I wouldn't be surprised to learn tested that high. Old mother sativa is also correct about THC being not the main driver of effect.

Click to expand...

The methods are standardized, yes. Are all LP's using the same method? Doubtful. This is where it can become confusing to a patient, especially those less knowledgeable who just go by THC%. Can SLH test high? Absolutely. But it has not ever tested that high on record if we look at different results in the US' scene from dispensaries to the various cups held there. Genetics do have limitations, just like people. Until you start breeding. Also, terpenes play a vital role in differing effects as do some of the lesser know cannabinoids, even among differing phenotypes of the same varietal

So,I was only able to get a 50% discount off my next order since I refused to send the product back. Better than nothing but still unacceptable. I don't see how they can expect patients to mail back bunk meds through Canada post when they can't even ensure their own shipments from BC that they had approval for made it to them. I even offered to send a video of me destroying the product so they knew I wasn't out to scam them and that wasn't good enough. Unfortunately I don't feel comfortable mailing weed across the country so I guess that's the best I'm gonna get.

symptum said:

So,I was only able to get a 50% discount off my next order since I refused to send the product back. Better than nothing but still unacceptable. I don't see how they can expect patients to mail back bunk meds through Canada post when they can't even ensure their own shipments from BC that they had approval for made it to them. I even offered to send a video of me destroying the product so they knew I wasn't out to scam them and that wasn't good enough. Unfortunately I don't feel comfortable mailing weed across the country so I guess that's the best I'm gonna get.

Click to expand...

Sorry to hear symptum. Did these LP's not foresee patients possibly sending back or refusing what they produce? They must have thought they were gonna hit this one out of the park and figured they didn't need to implement return policies and procedures. You should ask them what HC says to do in the case of a return. I'm curious what their protocol is on the matter. Glad they're offering you a 50% discount, better than nothing but still unacceptable given your opinion of their product. Sounds like a refund or "store" credit would be the logical options at any other place of business.

Don't you just love the whole mail order system where you have to pay before even seeing the product you're purchasing? GIVE US YOUR MONEY and we might send you something that could be used as medicine, maybe. If it doesn't work oh well, the black market doesn't give refunds either.

CalyxCrusher said:

Sorry to hear symptum. Did these LP's not foresee patients possibly sending back or refusing what they produce? They must have thought they were gonna hit this one out of the park and figured they didn't need to implement return policies and procedures. You should ask them what HC says to do in the case of a return. I'm curious what their protocol is on the matter. Glad they're offering you a 50% discount, better than nothing but still unacceptable given your opinion of their product. Sounds like a refund or "store" credit would be the logical options at any other place of business.

Click to expand...

They are playing the infomercial game. The products price is cheap so people will just call it a write off since it'll take way more time and money to send it back then what you paid for it.

cannadan said:

so is it better to assay the THC-Acid quantities before they start decarboxylation process ??

Click to expand...

Well, yes and no, it depends what you want to know. If it's the total potential you'd like to know then testing for the THC-A number would be ok. But then we'd need to have a verifiable (standardized) test ratio for how much THC is expected from THC-A. If we know that number then testing THC-A and comparing to the THC derived would give us a measure of the effectiveness of our method and then we could say that our THC numbers are accurate or not.

CalyxCrusher said:

The methods are standardized, yes. Are all LP's using the same method? Doubtful. This is where it can become confusing to a patient, especially those less knowledgeable who just go by THC%. Can SLH test high? Absolutely. But it has not ever tested that high on record if we look at different results in the US' scene from dispensaries to the various cups held there. Genetics do have limitations, just like people. Until you start breeding. Also, terpenes play a vital role in differing effects as do some of the lesser know cannabinoids, even among differing phenotypes of the same varietal

Click to expand...

They're obviously lying about their results.

OGEvilgenius said:

They're obviously lying about their results.

Click to expand...

Absolutely, without a doubt something doesn't add up

Agracan said:

Test SOP is fairly consistent throughout the books, what differs is procedural matters on the actual people/labs doing the work. ie. did they decarboxylate properly, is their HPLC up to spec, etc. etc.

Click to expand...

As a lab tech, I can tell you that individual technique possessed by individual analysts will yield individual results. They have to be within certain limitations, hence standard operating procedures, but the results will differ.

And what is being used as the standard? You can't assay something without having something to reference and correct to. I am extremely curious about the answer to that question.

WHATFG said:

And what is being used as the standard? You can't assay something without having something to reference and correct to. I am extremely curious about the answer to that question.

Click to expand...

That's exactly my point about THC-A. However, in the case of THC and CBD you can reference to samples from Aldrich or similar dealers.

WHATFG said:

And what is being used as the standard? You can't assay something without having something to reference and correct to. I am extremely curious about the answer to that question.

Click to expand...

My understanding was 10% moisture little leaf material. At least labs in the United States. They have to be doing liquid instead of gas to get numbers that high as well I'd wager.

So anyone that's stuck with Mettrum, I suggest you finish curing your mess at home. They didn't become fantastic after I did but at least it doesn't taste like grass clippings anymore.