Is anyone able to read a lab report and tell me if thc % is able to be determined by the tests they did ? Also little info on means and methods if possible would be appreciated . I got charged with a first degree cds charge in nj for cannabis but it’s mostly hemp and idk how to read the states lab results need help please
Post the report
4 Likes
………
1 Like
Img
Img
Doesn’t read as hemp to me…
Why do you imagine it was?
Wishful thinking?!?
Actual CoA?
I’m seeing 100 + edibles, of which 24 were sampled not sure what else.
I’ll probably look harder at it when I’m not on my phone…at some point.
3 Likes
you appear to be analysis N19-4200
page 1 => 4 list the samples:
page 1) 6 samples weighing from 0.7 to 8.6kg that were “NFA” (not fucking analyzed). then 4, 50is gram edibles and what I assume is a combined sample “hyper”.
page 2) more ~50g edibles run on GC/MS
page 3) more ~50g edibles run on GC/MS
page 4) has a couple of ounces of “vegetation”. samples 12-1 and 12-2
page 15 tells us about gummy packages/samples 7-1=> 7-4, states that items 1-5, 11 & 13 (then) 6,8,10 & 14 were NOT analyzed. but doesn’t state what they are. also mentions pills in sample 9.
page 16 goes into how they sampled 7-1 and 7-2. 95% confidence.
page 17 is their edibles prep. which seems reasonable.
three unlabeled pages with QC data that looks good.
page 84 goes into one of those four edible samples. detects THCV, D9 THC,CBD (I believe), GBG and CBN. gives quality of DB match and relative abundance. 81% of detected/ID’d mass was THC.
Page 85 is their “drug mix” standard. tramadol=> Furanyl fentanyl
there is more to it, but I’m bored…and you’re missing lots of pages.
5 Likes
A man of your stature… bored…
this could get dangerous
3 Likes
squirrel…
4 Likes
Yes there are like fifty more pages just thought it was all the same cuz they tested each bag ty for responding… the question is have they results in here that tell the % of thc content ? T again
Yes very wishful thinking 
not hemp you say ?? I’m shocked lol ty for responding . I left out fifty pages too . Any indication of thc %
1 Like
GC/MSD or gas chromatography/mass spectrometer detection is more than able to both quantify and identify whatever you have there.
An LC or GC separates compounds via interactions between the mobile phase and a stationary phase. All it sees is how long there is between the time you inject it and when it elutes (comes out). These interactions are not specific and as a result you can get coelution. This is when multiple chemicals exit the column at the same time.
Adding a mass spectrometer as a secondary detector allows you to send any one of those peaks (and no others) to the MS detector. The detector in turn detects the actual molecular weights of the compounds in that peak. Even if there are multiple compounds coming out at the same time they can BOTH differentiate (molecular weight) and quantify (ion count) all the species present. If the spectrometer is high enough resolution you can differentiate isotope of individual elements.
Since the detector is highly sensitive this analysis can be reliably done on very small amounts of substances.
6 Likes
no. you left those pages out. which is why I got bored. not enough data to make draw conclusions, so no longer amusing.
I see ONE “mostly THC” I don’t see quantitation, or enough data to figure out quantitation. So I got no clue.
you’re hoping your average 50g (50,000mg) gummy has less than 150mg THC, but you don’t have 20x that in CBD in there, and you expect the judge to buy that a gummy with almost no CBD in it is “hemp” because it’s only got 100mg of THC in there?
that definition is what makes a plant hemp. you can then extract that hemp. whether or not you can then chemically modify to get D8 or D9 and still remain “hemp” is an open question. one you’re not going to land on the right side of without a lot of help (if that’s what you’ve got in there).
whoever told you that the weight of the THC/ weight of the gummy is what makes the item hemp never had to prove that in court. I hear a lot of folks flying that way. I have not seen (nor to be honest looked for) any legal precedent that supports this view.
it absolutely works for clones/seeds, and you’ll find text to support that around here if you look.
I’m not a lawyer, nor do play one on the internet, I also don’t have any experience with GC/MS data (lots of GC/FID). However, I don’t see the judge or jury buying that “gummies” meet the definition of hemp (they read as THC edibles), nor that the D9 THC in them was from hemp.
the cannabinoid ratio (on the only sample I saw/listed one for) is a little weird, but if this offense is 4 years old, I’m just gonna say they were made with trap distilled D9, not a hemp derived high D9 conversion mixed with mother liquor to disguise the fact.
I could absolutely be wrong on all counts.
4 Likes
So are you able to determine exactly how much delta 9 thc it contains just by reading these reports ? All the other factors aside is there enough data that shows it’s thc content or purity or whatever the term is ? Ty vm for responding I really appreciate you guys
I agree with you 100% on all
Counts Im just trying to figure out if this reports data is enough to come to a definitive conclusion that there is X amount of thc present . Luckily the legalese defined in my states statute codes doesn’t take anything else into consideration … but ty for your response I appreciate it vm vm :). U da man
Yes. They can tell how much d9 is there. Using a standard will tell which peak on the chromatogram is d9 and integrating the area under the peak will tell how much.
3 Likes
What you’ve posted? Not that I can see.
But you’ve posted only a fraction of the report…
2 Likes
Would be better indeed.
1 Like