Our lab is stating that we have the presence of HexaHydroCannabinol in our cartridge distillate, which is contributing to low THC results. This distillate has already been made through our VTA then tested, mixed with terpenes and tested again. It shows up after the distillate has been mixed with terpenes and it seems to occur when we mix our cartridges with a particular brand of terpenes. The lab does not test for it specifically so it does not show up in our COA. Anyone have any ideas on how it is being made? What it is? How to make it stop?


Hydrogenation, except under specific circumstances, requires a metal catalyst.

I’m inclined to think your lab is incorrect in their quantification. I absolutely could be wrong though. Tried getting it tested somewhere else?

@Photon_noir ?

Edit: Here’s a PDF. http://www.cannmedevents.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Mark-Scialdone-CannMed-2017.pdf


What all types of THC and other cannabinoids are on the test list?

THCa, delta9 THC, delta8 THC, THCVa, THCV, CBDa, CBD, CBDV, CBN, CBGa, CBG, CBC. Thank you for responding.


Can I see a copy of the test results? Or what is the CBC content?

Hope a picture is ok.


Heres the source distillate test for comparison.

1 Like

Well, it’s weird that the CBD went down without any Δ8 being detected, but the difference is not statistically significant. It looks like you definitely made some Δ10 isomers of THC, since they show up as CBC in most tests. Some of it also went to CBN.

I can see the CBN due to it being heated twice to mix terpenes and to get their test. Is there a reason the same source distillate mixed with two different terpene companies would show the hexahydrocannabinol in one and not the other? Something in that particular brands terpenes? Something in their process?

I don’t see any reason as yet to believe there is any HHC in these.

May I ask what would be an indicator that you would be looking for?

Take whatever results you get from these “labs” with a grain of salt. I did some really in-depth research on testing procedures, different types of equipment and training and competency of various staff around the country and here in CA earlier this year… Margins of error are all over the place 3-7% on average with some labs doing about as much testing and analytical interpreting as a diviner does when reading tea leaves.

1 Like

The actual compound. There is nothing here to make the conclusion that the THC ring was saturated.

Absolutely, I’m sure I could test the same thing two different days in a row and get different results. I’m in Nevada and use a known reputable lab, PHD signs off on each one and Nevada has made regulations to standardize testing methods among labs. It seems almost too coincidental that they mentioned it was present in 2 batches made with 2 different source distillates but only common variable was that brand of terpenes. It’s also the first times it’s happened and we’ve had distillate made with these terpenes before and never had this happen. @Photon_noir they wont post any cannabinoids not on that list (what Nevada requires) so it appears as a lower THC %, if they did it would be added to the overall like the delta 8 would be.

1 Like

The thing is, HHC is not a typical product of distillation, heating in air, mixing in terpenes, or any other common operation. Isomers of THC are common products of improper treatment, as is CBN, but not HHC. The saturation reaction requires hydrogen gas and usually a metal catalyst, so you cannot assume it is a product.

If all you did was mix in terpenes with heating in air, it is perfectly reasonable to see lower cannabinoid numbers by simple dilution of the distillate with terpenes, and higher CBN due to the heating in air. I figured that was completely obvious, though.


Knowing that certain terpenes effectively are cannabinoids, isn’t it possible that the analytical chemist, not knowing you added terpenes, is identifying these similar peaks as being HHC? Or is the lab aware of the difference between samples?

If I remember correctly, it’s b-caryophyllene that is such a similar terpenoid that it actually acts on CB2 receptors.

1 Like

I’m sure they are aware since its named after the “strain” and we test it as cartridge distillate. I’ve noticed differences between terpene companies. Some burn off more than others, some apparently produce a synthetic cannabinoid. Probably just keep going with it and see if it happens again, try to gain some more data. If it becomes an issue we will just stop using that company.

Oh Photon, still in denial about your water tek making HHC. Still trying to pass it off as isomerization, huh?

It’s glaringly obvious you have never done any hydrogenation, let alone familiar with its nuances.

You do not need H2 in a cylinder(gas). There are a plethora of ways to approach a hydrogenation, and generate H2(g) while reducing the double bond. For example:

ZN + 2 HCl = ZNCl2 + H2

Add a little of your oh so secret activated carbon to the pot, and bam you have a perfect matrix for a hydrogenation.

How can this happen in cannabis? Many, many, many, many ways. Keep in mind we are dealing with botanical substances where a simple extraction could dissolve potentially thousands of compounds. Oh, but where could the metals possibly come from? Chelated nutrients for starters. Where would the acid come from you say? Your super secret $5,000 activated carbon, duh! LMAO, “it’s just delta-8 everyone” We call that an anecdote.

Another scenario: Crop gets PM. What do growers do many times? Sulfur of course!! Then, when they harvest what do they do? Spray it down with dilute H202!(thanks Mr. Cervantes) So, what could that give us?


Hmm, sulfuric acid in the presence of a plethora of metal catalysts with a little carbon added in to increase the reaction rate by providing a matrix for the catalyst, boil it for hours at hundreds of degrees, and gee I couldn’t possibly imagine how hydrogenation could happen.

Do I need to provide more scenarios for you? You should know that the lab the OP is referencing has done the mass spec work, and it is indeed HHC. But feel free to keep pushing your false narrative to cover your ass. It $eem$ to $till be working for you. Don’t let me piss on your circle jerk.


I think we all appreciate the knowledge you are dropping. I love the idea of “naturally” occurring reactions.

However, please be respectful!


Well the name should make it clear he’s a troll. But this is not without substance. As I showed in the d10 thread, badly degraded distillate I tested created at least three major degradation products, none of which was d8, and none of which eluted as CBC. So the argument that every case of lost potency = d10 = “CBC” is just not a sufficient answer. Clearly things are being spit out other than just positional isomers. The idea that every single column and hplc method has d10 coeluting with CBC also seems extremely dubious; the structures of the two are very different. So I would not be surprised is HHC is one of many unidentified products.