Years ago, Alka
Seltzer had an ad campaign in which people proclaimed "I can't believe I ate the
whole thing." That came to mind last summer when I read about a
college student who died in Colorado after eating
more than recommended, "an entire
marijuana cookie." As an aside, I cannot think of a single time I have
ever eaten a partial cookie, and several times I have eaten an entire box
(those Girl Scouts are out to get me!). Perhaps expecting anyone to eat a
partial cookie is not realistic?
There is
scientific progress in the marijuana debate recently though. Much has been said
about the strength of marijuana in the modern marketplace. I have touched on
the subject in Marijuana
May be a Problem and Measuring
Marijuana Intoxication. Essentially,
there are challenges presented by marijuana consumption that are not currently
presented by alcohol. This struggle to determine strength will be an issue for
those who smoke it and those who eat it.
Recently Fox
News reported on a new
process for measuring edible content, and it illustrates the ingenuity that
perhaps we take for granted. The success and innovation we see from science is
truly amazing sometimes.
The fact remains
that marijuana is illegal. Some states have elected not to criminalize its
possession (within limits in some cases) under state law. This year, Florida
joined the path to that posture with medical cannabis, passing HB 307.
But marijuana
remains illegal under federal law. That gets confusing, because the federal
government has proclaimed that it will not enforce these particular laws. Physicians
who believe in its properties cannot prescribe it due to the unenforced federal
prohibitions, which remain the law and thus could lead to prosecution later,
should an administration elect to enforce the law in the future.
And thus,
marijuana exists in our society in a murky grey-area of semi-acceptance. But
don't necessarily look for the Food and Drug Administration to play a huge role
in dealing with marijuana safety anytime soon. Late last year, the Food
and Drug Administration apparently
recommended changing the Schedule I categorization of marijuana. Some outlets
suggest that the Drug
Enforcement Agency may make a Schedule change this year. This trend suggests
that the conundrum of testing and disclosing strength of cannabis may become
increasingly important.
Fox reported
recently that "the murky laws surrounding the world of cannabis laced
goodies means that those who eat them often have no idea how much marijuana
they are really consuming." This is not a complication isolated to
marijuana. We are faced with a vast
volume of label claims on our
grocer's shelves. Label claims may be made through loopholes or "blatantly
false or misleading claims," according to USA
Today. And, that is on the foods/ingredients the FDA is addressing. At the
current time, label expressions about cannabis may or may not meet FDA
standards.
The essential
ingredient for a "high" is the cannabidiol that comes from marijuana.
The volume present in a product is of interest to the user. So far, the practice
has been to use a "high performance liquid chromatograph" or
"HPLC" (as an aside, remember My Cousin Vinny, discussing the
"dual column gas chromatograph" used to test the tire rubber? The
prosecutor asks "does that thing come turbo-charged?" The state's
witness, deadpan, "only on the floor model." Priceless).
Fox reports that
a more accurate method of measurement has recently come to the marijuana edible
business though. Critics complain that the previous state-of-the-art practices
of using the chromatograph leads to highly inconsistent results. In fact,
"producers of cannabis edibles complain that if they send off their
product to three different labs for analysis, they get three different
results." Sure that is a problem for the producers, but in the end, the
problem is really for the people who ingest the product. For them, knowing the
strength might be critical (eat the whole cookie and it could potentially kill
you).
So the American
Chemical Society has been working on a solution. They concluded that the
"HPLCs don’t actually give accurate readings for food stuffs;" In
fact these machines "were never designed for you to inject a cookie into
them." Apparently, the issue is that the "sugars, starches and fats
will wreak havoc on HPLC equipment." The machines are not designed to deal
with these compounds and as a result do not deal with them consistently.
The new process
recently announced starts by freezing food like marijuana cookies or
gummy-bears using dry ice or liquid nitrogen. Then sand is introduced into the
food and the whole mixture is ground up. This creates "a homogeneous
sample." Scientists are calling this process "flash
chromatography." Using it, "scientists were able separate the various
chemical components of the sample." This is then analyzed by the HPLC.
The scientists
claim this methodology "could yield far more accurate and reliable
measurements of THC and/or CBD levels in an edible product than was previously
possible.” Their research has been determined "accurate" with
"gummy bears, brownies, cookies and certain topical lotions." The
article does not explain how "accurate" is measured.
Having admitted
that the old method ("inject a cookie into" the chromatograph) does
not produce accurate results, one wonders what method is used as a standard,
against which this new method is measured for accuracy. Hopefully
"accurate" means both that the results are now replicable; to be
"accurate," one would hope that three samples to three labs should
produce significantly similar if not identical results. Hopefully
"accurate" means that the content is really reflected so that
overdose is preventable.
But, this new
method is seen as an important breakthrough with "far reaching
implications for dispensary standards." The article suggests that
legalization of marijuana is an eventuality that will spread across the
country. In the evolution of marijuana availability, "for both
recreational and medical purposes," accurate information about strength
and probable impairment is seen as critical.
Just as we have
become tuned to interpreting our food labels to understand fat, carbohydrates,
sugar, sodium and more, this will be an education. Perhaps it is more critical
however, as illustrated by outcomes already associated with marijuana overuse?
