TexasCHLforum.com

jb2012 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 2:01 pm

philip964 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 9:32 am

WildBill wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 9:08 am

philip964 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2019 9:53 pm https://www.click2houston.com/news/crim ... lf-freeway

228 pounds of pot. 70 pounds of THC gummies found during traffic stop on Gulf freeway.

I guess they will spend the $400 for the outside testing.

Interesting no penalties for personal use amounts will increase pressure on suppliers like this.

I'd be interested in seeing the test results for the gummies to see if they are really THC.
It seems that who ever makes these would have to run tests of their ingredients to get the proper strength.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeadams/ ... ck-market/

The gummies could have anything in them including fentanyl.

Apparently this is a problem, there is no quality control on illegal drugs. Thus with this hemp change we may see more use of Pot with no quality controls, so accidental overdoses or other issues could occur.

There is no such thing as a marijuana “overdose”.

Not a fatal overdose.
https://www.drugrehab.com/addiction/dru ... /overdose/

RoyGBiv wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 1:30 pm

Rob72 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 11:52 am

RoyGBiv wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2019 10:21 am
I LOL'd at this bit....

Stout said it can cost between $500,000 and $600,000 for a lab to purchase the equipment needed to test concentration levels. He said it then takes between nine and 12 months of validation and accreditation before a lab is certified to test for THC concentration levels.

Back in the day I ran a drugs of abuse testing facility. Unless costs have skyrocketed (they haven't), one set of equipment to "determine" (not "test") concentration of THC in a sample should cost less than $100,000 (~75K plus supplies). Except maybe if you're a government purchasing entity. LOL.

ETA: https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/86R/b ... 01325F.htm
The language pertaining to Consumable Hemp is down near the bottom.

NIDA or SAMHSA certified? Medico-legal certification is substantially different than simply presence/absence standards.

NIDA.

You can buy an Agilent GC/MS for about $75k, last time I checked.

I especially enjoyed buying material to make standards. <$10 for 50 grams of pure cocaine. From a catalog, like buying from Sears.
Of course you needed a license for it... but... still was amusing.

In addition to analytical instruments, there is a lot of infrastructure required to certify and maintain the lab.
I can believe an initial cost of $500K for setting up the lab. Also you need a trained staff to manage the lab, chemists,
technicians, computers, etc. That could easily cost $400K per year.

The Annoyed Man wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2019 8:42 pmOne of the mistakes that Colorado made in implementing their new weed law was in failing to first develop a blood testing system or roadside sobriety tester like a breathalyzer that would return quick and usable results for THC levels in impaired motorists.

Much easier said than done. Alcohol is a fairly simple chemical to test, while THC is much more complex. In addition, THC stays in the blood stream for days or weeks, while the impairment lasts for only hours.
They also stated that there wasn't enough data to see if there is a tread that correlated legalization of marijuana with traffic deaths. See link https://www.denverpost.com/2017/08/25/c ... atalities/

Getting off topic a little, a couple years ago in Harris County there was a lab that HPD used to calibrate their alcohol breathalyzers. Periodic calibration is required for all measuring devices to verify their accuracy.
It turns out that the contractor took the testers to their office, filled out some paperwork, and put calibration stickers on the instruments without testing them. The DA had to go back and dismiss the cases of every
DUI case that used the testers as evidence.

It's a complicated subject, in time, there will be some methods to improve the current process.

philip964 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2019 9:53 pm https://www.click2houston.com/news/crim ... lf-freeway

228 pounds of pot. 70 pounds of THC gummies found during traffic stop on Gulf freeway.

I guess they will spend the $400 for the outside testing.

Interesting no penalties for personal use amounts will increase pressure on suppliers like this.

I'd be interested in seeing the test results for the gummies to see if they are really THC.
It seems that who ever makes these would have to run tests of their ingredients to get the proper strength.

03Lightningrocks wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:41 pm I am not a lawyer but I believe the purity can matter on a federal level charge.

I would hope so, but I am not a lawyer either, so I don't know.

03Lightningrocks wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:20 pm

WildBill wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2019 3:52 pm If I understand what they are saying this is very disturbing.
I hope that I am wrong, but the way I read it is that someone could be arrested for having a kilogram of Italian Seasoning that had a
few grams of marijuana mixed in with it because the test would show "positive" for THC, but couldn't tell how much.

Funny thing is that they are only required to test a part(very small) sample of the marijuana, so if they happen to get a sample of the actual marijuana for the test, it sounds like the entire amount is assumed to be the proper concentration?

That was how it has been. It still is for all other illegal drugs. Purity has never been the issue. For instance a person arrested for having a one pound container of talcum powder with a minute amount of actual cocaine in it would be charged with possession of one pound of cocaine.

It reads like the actual concentration of THC in the hemp now has to be tested in a marijuana arrest.

Not testing and documenting the purity can lead to all kinds of problems with evidence tampering and diversion of drugs back onto the street.
Also cross contamination from one sample to another could result in wrong test results. I am really surprised that Texas labs are not already equipped to
perform this analysis.

03Lightningrocks wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:20 pm Funny thing is that they are only required to test a part(very small) sample of the marijuana, so if they happen to get a sample of the actual marijuana
for the test, it sounds like the entire amount is assumed to be the proper concentration? It reads like the actual concentration of THC in the hemp now
has to be tested in a marijuana arrest.

Exactly!

If I understand what they are saying this is very disturbing.
I hope that I am wrong, but the way I read it is that someone could be arrested for having a kilogram of Italian Seasoning that had a
few grams of marijuana mixed in with it because the test would show "positive" for THC, but couldn't tell how much.