Commercial Cannabis Product Testing: Fidelity to Labels and Regulations.

Sarah Limbacher, Suneeta Godbole, Julia Wrobel, Duncan I Mackie, Stephen Goldman, Ashley Brooks-Russell
{"title":"Commercial Cannabis Product Testing: Fidelity to Labels and Regulations.","authors":"Sarah Limbacher, Suneeta Godbole, Julia Wrobel, Duncan I Mackie, Stephen Goldman, Ashley Brooks-Russell","doi":"10.1101/2025.03.14.25323943","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In Colorado, regulations for recreational and medical cannabis sales require Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) concentration is printed on all products. Labeled THC concentrations can vary by +/-15% of what is in the product. Studies show THC concentrations recorded on product labels are not always reflective of the THC concentration in the cannabis product and there is evidence consumers make purchasing decisions based on label claims.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>Explore the accuracy of cannabis product labels and differences between THC label accuracy and product type.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Data for this analysis come from a larger observational study of cannabis impairment. N=74 flower, concentrate, and edible product samples from licensed Colorado dispensaries were collected and independently tested for THC concentration.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>This study was conducted in Colorado, in the Denver Metro Area.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Participants in the study voluntarily enrolled and provided one-gram samples of the cannabis they consumed during the study to be independently tested. The cannabis tested for this analysis was donated on a voluntary basis, not all participants chose to donate.</p><p><strong>Measurement: </strong>The main outcomes of interest for this analysis are accuracy of cannabis product labels compared to observed THC content, accuracy in the context of legally allowable variation, and difference between accuracy by product.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Overall, label values were higher than observed values in flower and edible products (p < 0.001) but was not significant for concentrates (p = 0.85). Flower products were observed to be significantly lower on labels versus the 15% legally allowable range (p = 0.04). Concentrate and edible products were not significantly different (p = 0.9 and p = 0.5, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is tension between legally allowable THC concentration claims on cannabis product labels and how consumers purchase cannabis. As cannabis policy evolves, standards and regulations that ensure accurate THC concentrations are reported on product labels are urgently needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":94281,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11952622/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.03.14.25323943","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In Colorado, regulations for recreational and medical cannabis sales require Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) concentration is printed on all products. Labeled THC concentrations can vary by +/-15% of what is in the product. Studies show THC concentrations recorded on product labels are not always reflective of the THC concentration in the cannabis product and there is evidence consumers make purchasing decisions based on label claims.

Aims: Explore the accuracy of cannabis product labels and differences between THC label accuracy and product type.

Design: Data for this analysis come from a larger observational study of cannabis impairment. N=74 flower, concentrate, and edible product samples from licensed Colorado dispensaries were collected and independently tested for THC concentration.

Setting: This study was conducted in Colorado, in the Denver Metro Area.

Participants: Participants in the study voluntarily enrolled and provided one-gram samples of the cannabis they consumed during the study to be independently tested. The cannabis tested for this analysis was donated on a voluntary basis, not all participants chose to donate.

Measurement: The main outcomes of interest for this analysis are accuracy of cannabis product labels compared to observed THC content, accuracy in the context of legally allowable variation, and difference between accuracy by product.

Findings: Overall, label values were higher than observed values in flower and edible products (p < 0.001) but was not significant for concentrates (p = 0.85). Flower products were observed to be significantly lower on labels versus the 15% legally allowable range (p = 0.04). Concentrate and edible products were not significantly different (p = 0.9 and p = 0.5, respectively).

Conclusions: There is tension between legally allowable THC concentration claims on cannabis product labels and how consumers purchase cannabis. As cannabis policy evolves, standards and regulations that ensure accurate THC concentrations are reported on product labels are urgently needed.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信