 is pleased to announce the addition of Anthony Macherone to its editorial advisory board (EAB).

Dr. Macherone currently holds a dual appointment as a Senior Scientist with Agilent Technologies and a Visiting Professor at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. His recent work in the exposome has explored associations between organochlorine pesticide exposures and diabetes in migrant populations participating in the LOPLIPOP and MASALA Cohorts. Macherone co-edited the book 

Unraveling the Exposome: A Practical View

 with contributions from recognized experts around the world. In 2015, he established an Exposomics Interest Group within the American Society for Mass Spectrometry (ASMS), which has led to a full program at the annual ASMS meeting. In November 2018, Dr. Macherone co-coordinated the first two-day New York City Exposome Symposium at the New York Academy of Medicine where 155 researchers from eight different countries were in attendance. In 2020, he co-chaired a four-day symposium entitled “Unravelling the Exposome” at the January ASMS Sanibel Conference. Over the past several years, he and his colleagues have extended the exposome paradigm to explore honeybee health and collapse disorders. This research has identified a putative mechanism associated with Nosema ceranae infection and dysregulated biological pathways associated with specific biomarkers.
	
	Since November 2016, Dr. Macherone has also led a team of scientists in the development of analytical methodologies to support research, safety and quality control for the emerging cannabis and hemp fields in U.S. states, Canada, and several other countries in Latin America and the European Union. Future work will use exposomics to evaluate potential associations with cannabis exposures and phenotypes.

 Editorial Advisory Board please visist: 

www.cannabissciencetech.com/cannabis-science-and-technology-editorial-advisory-board

Articles

Cannabis Science and Technology® is pleased to announce the addition of Anthony Macherone to its editorial advisory board (EAB).

Anthony Macherone Joins Cannabis Science and Technology®’s Editorial Advisory Board

, a multimedia platform that focuses on educating the legal cannabis industry about the science and technology of analytical testing, quality control, extraction, and cultivation, recently won third place in the “Best Interview or Profile of Someone in Your Industry” category during the 41st Annual SIPAwards virtual ceremony on June 2.

 has been recognized as a finalist in the 2020 SIPAwards,” said Mike Hennessy Jr., president and CEO of MJH Life Sciences™, parent company of 

. “This amazing recognition clearly demonstrates that we are producing top-notch content that caters to our audience, and we are grateful for this opportunity to showcase our work.”

Dr. Sue Sisley: Advocating for Medical Cannabis Research, Patients, and Reform

” highlights the pioneering research in the U.S. medical cannabis industry that Dr. Sue Sisley has been conducting, as well as her fight for quality cannabis samples to conduct her clinical trials. Sisley’s research has focused on veterans, professional athletes, post-traumatic stress disorder, pain management, and opioid addiction.

Since 1978, the SIPAwards have recognized excellence in editorial, marketing and product success in the specialized information industry. This year, the awards ceremony celebrated niche publishing excellence throughout the industry with 27 categories.

Annual awards program recognizes excellence in editorial, marketing, and product success in the specialized information industry.

Cannabis Science and Technology® Named 2020 SIPAwards Finalist 

A multinational, pharmaceutical-grade medical cannabis and hemp extracts company, Clever Leaves, was recently granted a good agricultural and collecting practices (GACP) certification by the Control Union Medical Cannabis Standard (CUMCS) for meeting their guidelines for consistency and quality in the cultivation and harvest of medicinal cannabis (1).

CUMCS’s standards offer general technical guidance for obtaining high-quality medicinal plant materials for the sustainable production of herbal items categorized as medicinal products. With the GACP certification, Clever Leaves is able to show that they operate under CUMCS procedures, cultivating crops that are free of heavy metals and agrochemicals as well as protocols for biodiversity safety in pharmaceutical manufacturing.

In Clever Leaves press release the company stated (1): “The CUMCS certification standard is based on GACP guidelines of The World Health Organization (WHO), the GACP Guidelines of the European Medicines Agency, Guidelines of the Dutch Government for Cannabis for Medical Use, and the International Standard for Good Agriculture Practice.”

“GACP certification reflects Clever Leaves’ ability to produce pharmaceutical-grade cannabis as well as our adherence to stringent operational standards,” said Kyle Detwiler, the CEO of Clever Leaves (1). “Achieving internationally-recognized quality guidelines will enable us to bring value at every touch point of the supply chain.”

With the GACP certification, Clever Leaves will be able to export pharmaceutical-grade cannabis products to international markets.

https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2020/06/04/2043528/0/en/Clever-Leaves-Granted-Good-Agricultural-and-Collecting-Practices-GACP-Certification.html

A multinational, pharmaceutical-grade medical cannabis and hemp extracts company, Clever Leaves, was recently granted a good agricultural and collecting practices (GACP) certification by the Control Union Medical Cannabis Standard (CUMCS) for meeting their guidelines for consistency and quality in the cultivation and harvest of medicinal cannabis.

GACP Certification Awarded to Internationally-Based Extracts Company

Personal protective equipment (PPE) has been a difficult item to track down during the COVID-19 global pandemic. Extract Consultants, a provider of terpenes, flavors, and effects blends that are specifically designed for the tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and hemp industries, recently saw the need and urgency for PPE materials in their Denver communities.

In May, Extract Consultants published a press release informing the public that they had donated 700 KN95 masks to Denver Health’s Ernest E. Moore Shock Trauma Center, which is reportedly one of the highest volume trauma centers in the nation, managing trauma cases from Colorado and six neighboring states. Extract Consultants said they were honored to donate masks to this facility in their press release (1).

“Treating COVID-19 patients while safely providing ongoing medical care for other conditions requires Denver Health to think creatively, act fast and take extraordinary measures at great but necessary expense,” said Linda Ford, Denver Health Executive Director (2). “Extract Consultants’ generous contribution of face masks makes that a reality.”

Their thoughtful gesture did not end with PPE donations. With the COVID-19 pandemic, many are out of work and unable to provide for their families. Extract Consultants provided a financial contribution to the Food Bank of the Rockies, which will contribute to approximately 12,000 meals to its Denver communities facing food insecurities (2). The Food Bank of the Rockies is the largest private hunger-relief organization in Colorado and Wyoming.

“This crisis has brought to bear the ever-present need for goodwill and generosity in our local community,” said Extract Consultants President Maxwell Brown (2). “We’re grateful to be able to support these vital organizations serving the most vulnerable here in Denver.”

From Extract Consultant’s press release, the company commented further on the amount of donations and other assistances being performed by other cannabis establishments (1): “We continue to be awed by the incredible acts of compassion and generosity shown by those within and without our industry. We are all truly in this together.” Businesses in the cannabis industry continue to pursue ways on how to aid each other and their communities to get through these difficult times (3,4).

https://extractconsultants.com/blogs/extract-consultants/supporting-our-community

https://www.bevnet.com/news/supplier-news/2020/extract-consultants-donates-masks-and-meals-for-covid-19-relief-efforts-in-denver/

https://www.cannabissciencetech.com/news/cannabis-businesses-offering-aid-covid-19-fight

https://www.cannabissciencetech.com/news/how-covid-19-has-impacted-cannabis-industry

Cannabis Industry Continues to Provide Aid to Communities in Need Amid COVID-19 Pandemic

Perry Johnson Registrars Food Safety, Inc. (PJRFSI) recently announced in a press release recently that they have become the first certification body to be granted accreditation in the United States for cannabis certification by the ANSI National Accreditation Board (ANAB). (1)

The cannabis certification standard developed by PJRFSI are good manufacturing practice (GMP) and good agricultural practice (GAP) schemes that aim to assist those working in the cannabis industry-namely, cannabis growers, manufacturers, and retailers. The certification standards will help cannabis companies meet state-by-state requirements.

The PJRFSI standard is intended to supply outlines for cannabis cultivation, retail practices nationwide, and product manufacture. In the press release (1), PJRFSI noted what they hoped to achieve with their history-making certification: “With the release and accreditation of their standard, PJRFSI hopes to simplify and unite the United States cannabis industry for the benefit of everyone from grower to producer to end user.”

  “The team at Perry Johnson Registrars Food Safety Inc. is incredibly excited to be the first company in the United States to achieve formal accreditation for our Cannabis and Hemp Certification Program,” said PJRFSI President Terry Boboige and Accreditation Manager Lauren Maloney in the press release (1). “We believe this nationally-recognized program will help the budding cannabis and hemp industries to strengthen, legitimize, and separate themselves from companies that do not have formal certification. Certification to this standard will forever help enhance companies’ image, credibility, and reliability. Accredited certification exemplifies to the public that certified organizations who supply cannabis and hemp products and services have internal safety systems that can inspire confidence.”

Through this cannabis certification, PJRFSI aids the cannabis industry with more room for growth and opportunities. For more about their announcement and cannabis certification standard, please visit 

https://www.pjrfsi.com/downloads/Cannabis-Accreditation.pdf

Perry Johnson Registrars Food Safety, Inc. (PJRFSI) recently announced in a press release recently that they have become the first certification body to be granted accreditation in the United States for cannabis certification by the ANSI National Accreditation Board (ANAB).

Perry Johnson Registrars Food Safety, Inc. Granted Accreditation for Cannabis Certification Standard

Click to view the May digital edition of Cannabis Science and Technology.

May 2020 Digital Edition - Cannabis Science and Technology Vol. 3. No. 4

is the President and Founder, jCanna, Inc. and Cannabis Science Conference. He is also a contributing editor for Cannabis Science & Technology.

Here, we interview two individuals that made a significant impact moving cannabis science forward. Dr. Scott Kuzdzal of Shimadzu Scientific Instruments and Melissa Fauth of Fritsch USA Milling are early pioneers that helped their companies become successful in the new cannabis market fraught with stigma, misunderstanding, and criticism. In this article, they share their stories, challenges, and lessons learned, but also offer advice to those looking for success in a complex market.

You are recognized by many as a pioneer in the cannabis science industry. Can you please share the story of how you first got involved in cannabis science?
Melissa Fauth:

 Thank you, being connected to contributing to the cannabis industry has been a personal privilege and unique business opportunity for me. About six years ago, I had begun researching the medicine and scientific momentum in key areas of the US and world. Making connections with several researchers and industry leaders allowed me to learn more. These discussions led to sharing of important goals, challenges, and solutions that would be meaningful contributions to their work. These professionals were tasked with increasing demand for high quality analysis and processing techniques, but were met with a lack of resources to prepare the materials up stream. Working with these folks to identify the most ideal sample preparation instruments through Fritsch led me to find Shimadzu, where I connected with Scott Kuzdzal and was later introduced to you, Josh.
	


 In short, it was a team effort. Two expert salespeople at Shimadzu, Paul Winkler and Will Bankert, were selling analytical solutions to cannabis quality control (QC) laboratories and they invited marketing managers to visit laboratories, dispensaries, and grow operations in Oregon. We had an epiphany while visiting Ken Kovash’s (GI GROW) cultivation site and learning about his personalized cannabinomics approach. Our marketing department worked expeditiously to develop materials to support their efforts. We also worked to standardize our product offerings and even simplify interfaces. Our Shimadzu North American Innovation Center and LC Product Group developed the Cannabis Analyzer for Potency to streamline potency analysis. Dr. Bob Clifford applied his expertise in food and consumer markets to guide our efforts, and Maureen Quaranta’s team (our MARCOM Group) created a very strong web and trade show presence in the cannabis market. It has also been tremendously rewarding working with the Cannabis Science Conference as a founding sponsor and exhibitor to identify new applications opportunities and learn different perspectives on the market.

Looking back, there must have been many obstacles and criticisms that you faced for working in a stigmatized and misunderstood market. What challenges did you face and how did you overcome them? What inspired you to keep moving forward? 
Fauth:

 While many faced obstacles within their organizations, our German parent company owners were supportive. They were open and willing to consider how our 100 years of experience could contribute to the industry. They trusted in the initiative to support science and education through the Cannabis Science Conference and the leadership behind it. As a newly launched US operation, our budget was limited but we took a leap because of the belief and advocacy of this new conference to connect the world.

The true challenge was the nature of the cannabis material itself. The restrictive nature of cannabis created an inability to perform our internal proof of concept testing, which is done as part of everyday business in the global laboratory. Fritsch Milling and Sizing works extensively- in all industries-with just about any tangible material. Although we had experience in food, pharma, agriculture, and US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) laboratories, the attributes of this plant were truly unique and behaved differently. We had to gain the practical, hands-on experience with our instruments in laboratories and cannabis processing operations. To overcome these challenges, we became creative, developed partnerships, and tested new methods and engineering in the field. In these months and subsequent years to follow, our commitment to cannabis-specific instrument optimizations and continuous improvement has been solidified. Those we have met fuel what we learn through scientific approach in this collaborative, energizing society. I can remember being mesmerized by Dr. Dedi Meiri and his genetic research discussions and then by Tracy Ryan, a mom and pioneer in pediatric cannabis advocacy, and her sweet little girl Sophie-who was excited to show me her blinking shoes as she danced-and so many more. You don’t forget these moments, these real-life stories of strength and determination. The passion for advocacy grows with each new relationship, each personal story of triumph, hardship, overcoming obstacles, and with seeing dedication of those who strive to bring health, wellness, comfort, compassion, and a cure to those most in need. When you can connect with, feel, and see the impact that a business operation can contribute to others-through its strengths-it provides an opportunity for everyone to win and to do it together. It’s doing the right thing, for the right reason, with the right people.

 There was no shortage of obstacles. The stigma around cannabis was much greater a decade ago, and we had an extremely difficult time developing new applications and refining our products because of the Class I status of cannabis on the Federal Controlled Substances Act. We really had to focus efforts regionally, but share developments globally. Also, cannabis science was a new field that touched on everything from life science, nutraceuticals, food and beverage, clinical, and environmental markets. As such it required much more collaboration and sharing than other emerging markets. There are a lot of companies overselling the capabilities of their products into cannabis science markets, and I believe many of these companies are misleading their customers with deceptive marketing tactics. At Shimadzu we have a much larger portfolio of instruments and we work tirelessly to ensure that our methods are accurate and reliable, and that these methods will make our customers successful.

I am inspired and motivated by cannabis patients. Sophie Ryan, Rylie Maedler, and many, many others have a very special blend of courage and enthusiasm. It is a true honor to know them, as well as to know that laboratory testing and cannabis research ultimately helps all patients.

What advice do you have for others who are still trying to either position their products in the cannabis science market or are struggling to be successful in doing so?

 You have to be all in, immersed in learning, understanding, committed, and striving to make a difference because it’s part of your mission. There are plenty of companies that will put a label or sticker on their product for industry marketing purposes, but don’t invest in or become connected to making discoveries and advances within it. The sincerity and mission that you follow in this industry are valued when you can deliver beneficial solutions to improve the work of others. Your work, experience, and success will be driven by and connected to all those that you support and reflected by their success with your contributions. Stigma and misinformation still exist, but it’s up to you to educate and drive the advocacy required to advance the resources available to industry professionals.  

 Do not focus on the stigma, focus on the fact that you are helping improve the quality of products available to consumers and patients. Take the time to get connected to the amazing people in the cannabis industry-people like Dr. Sue Sisley, Tracy Ryan, “Amazon” John Easterling, Dr. Dedi Meiri, Dr. Ethan Russo, Reggie Gaudino, Stormy Simon, Bibiana Rojas, Carrie Kirk, Janie Maedler, Ken Kovash, Melissa Fauth, and Jack Henion. Their hearts are in the right place and they have so much experience to share. Also, be patient. If you are in the cannabis industry to make millions of dollars overnight, I wish you luck. Like any industry, fortune favors those with experience, dedication, and drive; those who are willing to overcome setback after setback yet keep moving forward.

Can you share one or two lessons learned along the path to becoming a leader in the cannabis science market?
Fauth:

 Although it hasn’t been easy, the effort and challenge have been worth it. Mistakes and failures are OK . . . they are hard to experience, but are essential to success. My journey has been, and still is, winding along this path with many folks alongside me. In the end, people make all the difference.

 I have learned that cannabis science is still in its infancy and cannabis and hemp markets will grow exponentially over the coming years. It is encouraging to see new academic programs devoted to medical cannabis and I believe many incredible breakthroughs lie ahead. Many students training in cannabis science will shape the future of medicine, so please take some time to share your knowledge and experiences with these students. I have also learned that there is a need to move away from “one size fits all” pharmaceutical approaches to more natural, whole plant medicine approaches. We have far too many synthetics in our lives and it is simply time to get back to nature.

 is President of Fritsch USA Milling. Since 1920, Fritsch has engineered and manufactured milling/grinding systems for agricultural, food, and pharmaceutical applications.

received his doctorate in analytical chemistry from the University of California at Riverside and served as Director of Toxicology and Therapeutic Drug Monitoring at Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions. He is currently the Vice President of Marketing at Shimadzu Scientific Instruments.

 is the columnist and editor of “Cannabis Crossroads” and a contributing editor to 

 magazine. Crossney is also the president and CEO of CSC Events. Direct correspondence to: 

Dr. Scott Kuzdzal and Melissa Fauth share their stories, challenges, and lessons learned, offering advice to those looking for success in a complex market.

Early Cannabis Science Industry Pioneers Share Their Stories, Challenges, Advice, and Lessons Learned

The concept of significant figures tells us, given the amount of error in a measurement, which numbers in a reading are meaningful and which are not. This is vitally important when determining whether low level values are real, for comparing readings over time, and for comparing results across laboratories and instruments. In a recent trend, cannabis laboratory customers are demanding more decimal places in the readings they are paying for, and third party laboratories have unfortunately obliged. I will show why those extra decimal places may be meaningless, and how to use significant figures to discern the true meaning of your cannabis analysis measurements.

In the first installment of this column (1), I stated that two of its purposes are to introduce the basic concepts of cannabis analysis to people new to the field, and to discuss current issues in the cannabis analysis universe. Since that time, I have done not enough of the former, and perhaps too much of the latter. But this is because there have been a lot of things to discuss given the state of cannabis analysis, the constant change in regulations, and the newness of the field. It is now time to rectify things and discuss one of the most basic topics in chemistry: significant figures, or significant digits as some call it. It was my intention to cover this topic earlier, but of course other issues got in the way.

What has prompted this column is two observations. I work for a company that makes cannabis and hemp analyzers (2). Recently I have had customers asking me for more “data points” in the readings our instruments make. Additionally, I have seen potency readings on certificates of analysis (COAs) from third party cannabis analysis laboratories suddenly go from having two decimal places to having four decimal places. This is concerning because cannabis businesses are coming to conclusions and making business decisions based on those decimal places, when it turns out that those extra decimal places are probably meaningless and flawed business decisions may be made as a result. Hence the need for this column on significant figures.

My first brush with significant figures was in a Chemistry 101 course my freshman year of college. I am old enough that handheld calculators were a novelty when I took that course, and I had a trusty Texas Instruments TI-30 calculator, for which I paid the princely sum of $30. It reported numbers to nine decimal places and by golly I just knew that had to be correct. Thus,  I recorded my answers to my assignment with that many digits in it. That assignment came back from my professor with red ink all over it and a very poor grade. My mistake had been to ignore significant figures.

At its base, significant figures take into account that scientific measurements have error associated with them. We talked about accuracy, precision, systematic error, and random error in a previous column (3). Briefly, precision is a measure of reproducibility, accuracy is a measure of how far away you are from the true value, and random error is error from a combination of sources whose sign and value vary randomly. When a reading has a known margin of error, the value is reported as a number with a ± next to it. For example, when a pollster reports the percentage of people that support candidate X for president, they will report it for example as 43 ±3%. This means that 43% of the people polled support candidate X, and the error is ±3%. What the margin of error, or “error bar” as some of us scientists call it, means is that the true value of the reading, the true number of people who support candidate X, is somewhere between 40% and 46%. For example, sometimes accuracies are quoted at a “95% confidence limit.” This means that we are 95% confident that the true value falls within the error bar for that measurement. Thus, a total tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) reading of 0.5% with a 95% confidence level of ±0.05% means we are 95% confident that the true value lies between 0.45% and 0.55%.

The use of error bars is illustrated in Figure 1. (See upper right for Figure 1, click to enlarge.)

The figure is a plot of two quantities versus each other, the blue vertical lines represent the error bars in each individual measurement. The dotted line denotes the fact that the error bars for X = 5 and X = 10 overlap. This is important because it means the true value for either measurement falls in a common range, and that the two measurements are not statistically different from each other. For example, if two hemp samples are measured with total THC values of 0.3 ± 0.1 wt.% and 0.35 ± 0.1 wt.%, the two readings would not be significantly different from each other since their error bars overlap. In this case the true value for both readings falls between the lowest and highest values for the two error bars, which means the true value falls between 0.2% and 0.45%, making it difficult to tell whether this sample is above or below the 0.3% total THC federal limit for hemp (4).

In addition to when comparing values to each other, margin of error and significant figures come into play when reporting values. Let’s say for the sake of argument that a COA for a hemp biomass sample states that the weight percent total THC measurement is 0.3142 ±0.05%. The third and fourth decimal places in these readings correspond to values of 0.004 and 0.0002. Note that these two values are less than the margin of error! The third and fourth decimal places here are said to be insignificant and should not be reported. This is the mistake I made in my freshman chemistry assignment. The purpose of the margin of error is to tell us how much confidence we have in our measurements. In this case where the third and fourth decimal place values are less than the margin of error, we have no confidence in these values and hence they are meaningless. Here the reading should be reported as 0.31 ±0.05%.

As another example, I have sitting on my desk a COA for a hemp biomass sample from a reputable, state-licensed, International Organization for Standardization (ISO)-certified third party cannabis testing laboratory. Column 1 reports the weight percent of cannabidiolic acid (CBDA) in a hemp biomass sample as 14.5828 and column 2 reports the margin of error as ±0.05%. What’s wrong with this picture? As above, the error is in the second decimal place, the third and fourth decimal places are meaningless, and the value should be reported as 14.58 ±0.05%. The COA, by printing the margin of error in column 2, proves that the number of decimal places printed in column 1 is incorrect. Come on people, we can do better than this! Any laboratory director who has taken a freshman chemistry course should know about significant figures so there are no excuses here. Just because your customers ask for more decimal places does not mean you have to report them, particularly because the extra decimal places are insignificant and useless for making business decisions.

A Practical Implication of Significant Figures

Growing hemp in the US was legalized with the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill (5). The bill states, in its current interpretation as promulgated by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) in its Interim Final Rule issued on October 29, 2019 (4), that legal hemp may not contain more than 0.3% by dry weight total THC. After the Farm Bill was passed there was great confusion about how to enforce that number. Some states read it literally and any value above 0.3000 was considered illegal. Other states took significant figures and margin of error into account and said that hemp up to 0.4% total THC was OK. This inconsistent enforcement is part of the hemp testing insanity I have written about in previous columns (6,7).

Here is the crux of the matter. If a hemp sample tests at 0.31% total THC, but the error is ±0.05%, this means that the true value of the reading is anywhere from 0.26% to 0.36%, straddling the 0.3% legal limit. Is this hemp crop legal or illegal? Is it fair to destroy a hemp farmer’s livelihood based on judgement of the accuracy in the hundredths decimal place?

Fortunately, the USDA’s Interim Final Rule has finally given us some guidance on this (4). The rule defines an “acceptable hemp THC level” which takes into account significant figures and margin of error. According to the rule (4), to calculate the acceptable hemp THC level as measured on a given instrument, take 0.3 wt.% total THC and add the margin of error to it. Thus, if the total THC margin of error on an instrument is ±0.05%, the acceptable hemp THC level as measured on that instrument is 0.35%. This means that any hemp sample reading from this instrument at or below 0.35% is legal, whereas any reading over this reading is illegal.

One of my complaints as to how the rule is written is that it rewards inaccurate readings. The rule did not establish any minimum acceptable margin of error. Thus, if faced with the choice of using an instrument with an accuracy of ±0.1% total THC versus ±0.05% total THC, one might be tempted to use the former because it gives a higher probability of passing your sample, particularly if it is a little hot.

I discussed the trend of cannabis laboratories reporting measured values to more and more decimal places. Significant figures determine how to report measured values taking into account the margin of error. We discussed how to properly compare and report values with the correct number of significant figures. This is important because cannabis businesses and regulators need the best quality data possible to make business and law enforcement decisions.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/10/31/2019-23749/establishment-of-a-domestic-hemp-production-program

115th United States Congress, Senate Bill S.2667, Hemp Farming Act of 2018.	

B.C. Smith, Cannabis Science and Technology

 is Founder, CEO, and Chief Technical Officer of Big Sur Scientific. He is the inventor of the BSS series of patented mid-infrared based cannabis analyzers. Dr. Smith has done pioneering research and published numerous peer-reviewed papers on the application of mid-infrared spectroscopy to cannabis analysis, and sits on the editorial board of 

. He has worked as a lab director for a cannabis extractor, as an analytical chemist for Waters Associates and PerkinElmer, and as an analytical instrument salesperson. He has more than 30 years of experience in chemical analysis and has written three books on the subject. Dr. Smith earned his PhD on physical chemistry from Dartmouth College.

Why are those extra decimal places possibly meaningless? How can you use significant figures to discern the true meaning of your cannabis analysis measurements?

Significant Figures and Margin of Error-Or Why the Fourth Decimal Place in Your Potency Reading is Probably Meaningless

Todd Statzer, Director of Environmental Sciences at urban-gro, discusses some best practices for pesticide use in cannabis cultivation.

The subject of pesticides can be especially troubling as cultivators navigate through each state’s list of banned products, testing requirements, and other stringent laws geared towards consumer safety. Whether you are a seasoned cultivator or just starting out, the tips and best practices offered here by Todd Statzer, the Vice President of Environmental Sciences at urban-gro, are sure to help get you on solid ground.

What do cannabis pesticides expert want people to know about the vaping crisis?
	Todd Statzer:

 We believe the vaping crisis was caused by the purchase of illicit products. These illegal products are commonly produced by unregistered growers, black market growers, and imported to the US. Unregistered growers are producing products that do not adhere to any kind of regulatory guidelines towards pesticides use. Some of these pesticides are lethal when used on cannabis. Safe products can only be purchased from a registered dispensary that’s procuring their flower or concentrates from registered cultivation facilities that have regular standardized product testing.

What’s the biggest misconception regarding cannabis and pesticides you’ve come across and how to do you address it?
	Statzer:

 Cannabis is very regulated and there are a very narrow number of products allowed in cannabis depending on what state you’re operating and in what stage of plant growth. Simply using the same pesticides one would use for other crops, such as corn or soybeans, will most certainly lead to a recall because of regulatory testing.

Properly registered cultivators rely on systems such as integrated pest management (IPM) to deliver the appropriate amount of chemicals at the correct time. The goal is to apply the chemicals exactly when needed, which avoids over application, as well as adhering to the producer’s state regulations.

Additionally, many do not understand that a cultivator’s IPM program may utilize beneficial insects as a part of the program. Even in the total absence of chemicals, beneficial insects can be predators that eat a target insect or parasitic (for example, laying an egg in the host) that kills the target pest as a food source.

To conclude, the cultivation of cannabis is highly regulated: there are a limited selection of registered pesticides, the timing applications change from state to state depending on regulatory testing, as well as using beneficial insects in combination with the use of pesticides. By using a true IPM program, cultivators are using proactive pest controls such as beneficial insects as well as rotating proactive and reactive chemical applications.

What can cannabis cultivators do to ensure clean and safe products for human consumption?
	Statzer:

 Primarily, following state guidelines, and ensuring compliance within your state. Additionally, cultivators need to use the best greenhouse practices that utilize cultural controls, mechanical control, and properly designed facilities. Each state has different guidelines for their rules and regulations that dictate what can and can’t be used. For example, some states do not allow the use of chemicals on flower so therefore cultural and mechanical controls become more important as well as the use of beneficial insects. The best way to create the cleanest and safest products is to follow state guidelines, good greenhouse practices, and a compliant IPM program.

What role do IPM programs play in pest control?
	Statzer:

 When thinking about an IPM program, think about using the tools in the toolbox. By that, “the tools” include cultural and mechanical controls, compliant and organic pesticides, beneficial insects, and best greenhouse practices. These factors contribute to the success of an IPM program.

As an example of mechanical and cultural controls, cultivators must pay attention to air sanitization, air circulation, and plant spacing. For example, when treating for powdery mildew, if you don’t have proper air circulation or purification, or if the plants are too close together and not pruned properly, the likelihood of powdery mildew will persist.
	Remember the key to success is attention to all systems used for cannabis production.

What kind of regulations or best practices should cannabis cultivators follow regarding pesticide use especially in states that are more lenient than others regarding banned or restricted pesticides?
	Statzer:

 Cultivators in states with vague guidelines can turn to Colorado, Washington, or Oregon for a list of approved chemicals. This provides direction with guides for safe chemical to use, but you must inquire with your state regulators on the approved use in your state. Additionally, review your state testing requirements, which will help you to further determine which chemicals to use. It is important to remember that the product’s label is the law.

No matter how complex or lenient your state regulations may seem, maintaining compliance is your primary responsibility, and it is complicated. There are many companies that can help you to ensure you have an effective, compliant IPM program.

Are there any in-house tests that cannabis cultivators can do to check the safety of their pesticides?
	Statzer:

 There are in-house tests, but the equipment is expensive. It’s unlikely that a 20,000-square-foot producer can afford the proper testing equipment. You also need trained operators for proper use and calibration.

At the end of the day, having your own equipment gives you a benchmark. This provides you an advantage in case there are discrepancies between your results and state results. Regardless, all states require that compliant cultivators use state certified laboratories for testing. All results must go on every product label.

Editor's note: The version of this article that appeared in the May 2020 print issue was an excerpt of the full interview presented here.

Todd Statzer, the Vice President of Environmental Sciences at urban-gro, offers some tips for pesticide use in cannabis cultivation.

Best Practices for Pesticide Use in Your Cultivation Facility

A recent press release (1) announced the formation of a group called the Legal Cannabis Coalition (LLC), which consists of a dozen Dutch horticultural companies. During the past two years, these companies participated in a joint scientific study to optimize greenhouse cultivation of medicinal cannabis that was organized by Wageningen University & Research (WURR) in The Netherlands.

The press release states (1): “In collaboration with additional partners specialized in lab research, product development, and clinical trials, the LCC offers its combined experiences, services and products to the medicinal cannabis industry.” 

The group has reportedly been active in setting up licensed cannabis producers in North America and around the world. “The cannabis market was turbulent in the first few years,” said Erik van Santen of Koppert Biological Systems (1). “North America is entering an adult phase of legalization. In Europe, South America, Asia, and Africa, we are on the eve of further legalization.”

The LLC’s goal is to become a one-stop destination for a wide assortment of industry challenges. According to the press release (1), to help their clients “the LCC will use all the lessons its members collectively learned over the years from their involvement in setting up and equipping greenhouses, improving plant productivity, GMP and compliance, product development, lab research, and market research to support the global legalization of medicinal cannabis.”

The release also stated that the goal of the LCC is to expand their reach even further based on science and proven solutions (1). With a growing community of members and clients, the LLC is able to help out in a lot of areas. To receive the group’s expert advice, clients must be in possession of a cannabis license and adhere to cannabis regulations.

For more information about the LCC, please visit 

https://www.oreon-led.com/cache/PRESS%20RELEASE%20Horticultural%20companies%20and%20scientif.1390/PRESS%20RELEASE%20Horticultural%20companies%20and%20scientif.pdf

A recent press release (1) announced the formation of a group called the Legal Cannabis Coalition (LLC), which consists of a dozen Dutch horticultural companies.