What in the actual fuck is going on with Missouri testing labs??? They are absolutely clueless.
I’ve only been here 3 months and already have seen:
COAs for rosin saying there’s methanol present (we don’t have methanol on site)
Getting ND test results for pesticides on bulk batches of disty, then putting it in carts and the carts failing for PBO or Paclo.
THCa showing up in our distillate COAs and edibles made with distillate… (I know this is possible, but the THCa only ever shows up on the COAs of one of the labs here. ND on any other labs’ COAs. And I know how to decarb/distill).
We’ve seen toulene and xylenes on concentrate COAs (none on site)
Just got a COA saying there is chloroform and acetonitrile in our concentrate. It was within passable limits, but still…wtf. again, neither one of these are anywhere on site
We tested a batch of sauce (edible, not concentrate) with one lab, it came back at 84mg/unit, we added distillate to the same exact batch to get it up to 100mg/unit, honmogenized, sent it back to the same lab, they reported it have 0mg THC. Sent to a second lab and got 102mg/ unit…
Fucking three week turnaround times for standard testing.
Zero consistency between labs. COAs will be vastly different depending on what lab you send stuff to.
No orthogonal methods to verify results.
Anyone else in the MO market having issues with labs?? This is getting ridiculous. What the fuck is going on???
Sounds like totally normal things that happen with new labs.
Ask them to do laboratory investigations. Go out and do a supplier audit of the lab, make sure they are meeting your expectations for GLP.
Have you already done these things? If you haven’t - how is your quality management system working?
Seems like you have customer complaints - but I’m not sure which lab you picked, your quality agreement with that lab, or if you went out and saw their processes and confirmed they are sufficient to meet your needs.
For instance - cross contamination of samples is a real thing, unless people are actively putting systems in place to prevent it. If you go out for a supplier/vendor audit - you’ll see how they handle samples and then know if they are handled appropriately to prevent cross contamination.
For Methanol contamination - depending on the KIND of instrument they are using, methanol can be a byproduct of their test method. They should know this and they should be running blanks and adjusting for this accordingly.
So - start with supplier/vendor audit. Confirm the lab is validated to do the work you are asking them to do with the matrix you are asking them to test. And then if THEY ARE - ask for a laboratory investigation into your specific issues.
Sounds like you are using more than one lab (why?) and it sounds like you are having different issues from different labs.
Turnaround times are dependent on availability - sounds like someone else has a business opportunity to win your business.
We have a PhD organic chemist here (who also did analytical work for the FDA) who has gone to see a couple labs (the ones that will let us at least… and there’s only like 6 labs total), he’s asked for chromatographs to show peaks and inquire about verification of those peaks and was told they “couldn’t” send him the chromatographs and/or that they don’t use orthogonal methods to verify.
He agrees that he thinks their sample prep methods are a big part off the problem… but the people operating these labs can’t even provide answers to the questions he asks most of the time.
Yep, our chemist said the same thing… same with the acetonitrile.
We are trying multiple labs because we are trying to find one that shows any kind of consistency, but have yet to find one.
They aren’t obligated to provide us any sort of explanation, let us audit them, let us see their facilities, or even share chromatographs so it’s been difficult for us to get any sort of answers to these same questions you are asking. There is zero accountability or repercussions for bad practice and that’s the part that makes it hard. I’ve heard similar accounts from other Licensees here and the state refuses to even look into it. It’s bad.
They are obligated to do all of these things if they are 17025 accreditted.
And you can require that someone receiving your business allow for supplier audits and documentation of laboratory investigations.
No one is forcing you to use a specific lab. If none of the labs are accredited yet (isn’t that a MO requirement…) that’s a whole different conversation.
If you can’t get it from them - and they are accredited, reach out to their accrediting body and request that they follow these very basic GLP quality policies. <3
I don’t know if the state doesn’t care - I’ve found that states do care and are always willing to accept specific science based complaints. Last time I chatted with MO (~ 6 months ago) they were very willing to receive this information to help tighten up business practices in the state.
They’re required to be ISO 17025 accredited. We haven’t reached out to any accrediting bodies yet.
There’s only been one lab to oblige and share anything with us and let us come see their lab so that’s the one we have been sending most of our business to. But that’s the same lab saying there was trace amounts of chloroform, xylenes, and toulene in some of our concentrates.
They are the same lab who failed us for PBO on carts that came from clean disty… they later admitted this was a mistake on them after our chemist asked them to use an orthogonal method and it shoed that the peak was not actually PBO. So we have had a bit of cooperation from them at least.
The state apparently has a looong list of complaints but is yet to do anything about it. Sure, they say they are willing to receive this information, but their actions (or lack thereof) suggest otherwise.
Maybe it’s just a slow process for them to get shit figured out, but man it’s frustrating. I had to come here to vent lol.
We’re seeing the same thing here in MO…10+% deviation on potencies between different labs on the same distillate. Have also experienced the presence of methanol (we have none on site either), as well as the chloroform and acetonitrile (neither of those on site, either). You aren’t alone - we are hoping to see more consistent and reliable results here as well.
It’s fuckin wild, man. The fact that multiple people are seeing methanol and acetonitrile in concentrates and don’t even have it on site says a lot… Especially because those are both commonly used as carrier solvents in analytical labs. Sounds like they aren’t cleaning their equipment thoroughly or just poorly prepping samples.
Sounds to me like theyre using HPLC seeing false peaks and not verifying the anomalous peaks via mass spec. Happened for years here in CO before things got dialed.
We have used several MO labs with some okay some poor results. Have have given same batch different shipments and different results at the same lab. Testing is really a joke and extremely frustrating and expensive joke
Our chemist said the same thing and that’s exactly what they are doing. He has straight up asked multiple labs if they are verifying the results via mass spec and they tell him no… Except for one lab, which is where we send most of our stuff…
And they are the same ones who failed us for pbo on multiple disty tests. our chemist asked em to verify on mass spec, they did and realized it wasn’t pbo. They were transparent with us and told us they fucked up on the failed pbo tests, so I give them props for that. But it’s crazy to me they aren’t required to verify results. Especially when they are having hundreds of thousands of dollars of product being destroyed across the state because of these labs mistakes.
If it were me, I would quantify how much these false positive test results are affecting your potential revenue streams. Then make a case to spend some CAPEX and get in-house analytics. It’s a long road, but at least you’ll have people you trust running your analyses.
It really is… Yeah, in-house analytics would be a huge help. Unfortunately, the state certified testing labs get the last word. Whatever results they report are what decides whether we pass or fail. Even if our in-house analytics say it’s clean.
Hell, we have had the labs do an R&D test for us on several batches (R&D tests “don’t count” toward compliance. so you can fail those and still have a chance to remediate to get to a passing compliance test, which frees the product up for sale), and the R&D comes back clean, then we send the same exact batch to the same lab for compliance testing and it fails lol. Even though the initial R&D was ND. Never seen anything like it.
This exact problem is why it’s so beneficial to have in house analytics. Of course with the cost of the necessary equipment it’s much easier said than done. I imagine you guys will travel a similar road to the one we took, lots of conversations with labs, finding ones that will be transparent, and then continuing to hold them accountable. Hopefully competition will push a couple labs to rise to the top. I remember walking into Cannalabs in Denver in like 2016 and they had just fired the whole lab, everyone left, didn’t even lock the doors lol. I just walked in like, “Wtf is going on around here” poor receptionist was on her way out just said, “They fired us all”. Turned out they were taking money for passing tests and boosting potency numbers.
True but I don’t believe precedent has been set yet suing a lab. Chemistry is chemistry and if your mass spec can prove they were wrong and that their judgment cost you revenue, I’d imagine you win that case. THough, total speculation
not if you’ve got GCMS and (a decent lawyer and) they’ve got HPLC…
knowing the answer before taking the “you must pass this” state mandated test is never a bad idea…
I was sooo spoiled by my first cannabis analytical lab. I’d known and worked with the chemist for 10 years, and we worked together to get him up and running. Seeing that go down in flames 'cause of his partners politics really sucked.
