» Articles » PMID: 37043421

Uncomfortably High: Testing Reveals Inflated THC Potency on Retail Cannabis Labels

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2023 Apr 12
PMID 37043421
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Legal Cannabis products in the United States are required to report THC potency (total THC % by dry weight) on packaging, however concerns have been raised that reported THC potency values are inaccurate. Multiple studies have demonstrated that THC potency is a primary factor in determining pricing for Cannabis flower, so it has an outsized role in the marketplace. Reports of inflated THC potency and "lab shopping" to obtain higher THC potency results have been circulating for some time, but a side-by-side investigation of the reported potency and flower in the package has not previously been conducted. Using HPLC, we analyzed THC potency in 23 samples from 10 dispensaries throughout the Colorado Front Range and compared the results to the THC potency reported on the packaging. Average observed THC potency was 14.98 +/- 2.23%, which is substantially lower than recent reports summarizing dispensary reported THC potency. The average observed THC potency was 23.1% lower than the lowest label reported values and 35.6% lower than the highest label reported values. Overall, ~70% of the samples were more than 15% lower than the THC potency numbers reported on the label, with three samples having only one half of the reported maximum THC potency. Although the exact source of the discrepancies is difficult to determine, a lack of standardized testing protocols, limited regulatory oversight, and financial incentives to market high THC potency likely play a significant role. Given our results it is urgent that steps are taken to increase label accuracy of Cannabis being sold to the public. The lack of accurate reporting of THC potency can have impacts on medical patients controlling dosage, recreational consumers expecting an effect aligned with price, and trust in the industry as a whole. As the legal cannabis market continues to grow, it is essential that the industry moves toward selling products with more accurate labeling.

Citing Articles

Peer-review Blinded Assay Test (P-BAT): a framework for trustless laboratory quality assurance for state-regulated cannabis markets.

Procter S, Baird G, Iannuccilli J J Cannabis Res. 2025; 7(1):4.

PMID: 39833888 PMC: 11748918. DOI: 10.1186/s42238-025-00261-3.


Characterization of the Cannabis sativa glandular trichome epigenome.

Conneely L, Hurgobin B, Ng S, Tamiru-Oli M, Lewsey M BMC Plant Biol. 2024; 24(1):1075.

PMID: 39538149 PMC: 11562870. DOI: 10.1186/s12870-024-05787-x.


Evolution of the substance use landscape: Implications for contingency management.

Goodwin S, Kirby K, Raiff B J Appl Behav Anal. 2024; 58(1):36-55.

PMID: 39193870 PMC: 11803362. DOI: 10.1002/jaba.2911.


Label Accuracy of Legal Oral Cannabis Oil Products in Ontario, Canada.

Doggett A, Fein A, Campbell T, Henriquez N, Busse J, MacKillop J JAMA Netw Open. 2024; 7(6):e2414922.

PMID: 38837163 PMC: 11154152. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.14922.


Human Milk Cannabinoid Concentrations and Associations with Maternal Factors: The Lactation and Cannabis (LAC) Study.

Holdsworth E, Berim A, Gang D, Williams J, Smith C, Caffe B Breastfeed Med. 2024; 19(7):515-524.

PMID: 38695182 PMC: 11695799. DOI: 10.1089/bfm.2024.0021.


References
1.
ElSohly M, Chandra S, Radwan M, Majumdar C, Church J . A Comprehensive Review of Cannabis Potency in the United States in the Last Decade. Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging. 2021; 6(6):603-606. DOI: 10.1016/j.bpsc.2020.12.016. View

2.
McLaren J, Swift W, Dillon P, Allsop S . Cannabis potency and contamination: a review of the literature. Addiction. 2008; 103(7):1100-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02230.x. View

3.
Oldfield K, Ryan J, Doppen M, Kung S, Braithwaite I, Newton-Howes G . A systematic review of the label accuracy of cannabinoid-based products in regulated markets: is what's on the label what's in the product?. Australas Psychiatry. 2020; 29(1):88-96. DOI: 10.1177/1039856220965334. View

4.
Zhu B, Guo H, Cao Y, An R, Shi Y . Perceived Importance of Factors in Cannabis Purchase Decisions: A Best-worst Scaling Experiment. Int J Drug Policy. 2020; 91:102793. PMC: 7704653. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2020.102793. View

5.
Zoorob M . The frequency distribution of reported THC concentrations of legal cannabis flower products increases discontinuously around the 20% THC threshold in Nevada and Washington state. J Cannabis Res. 2021; 3(1):6. PMC: 7958443. DOI: 10.1186/s42238-021-00064-2. View