Grant Smith Ellis writes
“That’s a pile of horseshit!”
The new chair of the Massachusetts Cannabis Commission (@MA_Cannabis), Christopher Harding, just cussed at me in a public meeting after I gave formal feedback –and a hypothetical example– regarding coverups of testing lab fraud within the CCC in the context of total yeast and mold testing.
For obvious reasons, this is entirely unacceptable.
@MassGovernor
My remarks in full;
Hello, Commissioners. Thank you very much for taking the time today. My name is Grant Smith Ellis. I wear a lot of hats, but I’m probably one of the few people who speak to you today who has zero fiduciary interest in the outcome of this process, and I think that matters.
So, let me begin by saying there’s no discipline more so than even economics as rife with conflicts of interest as the testing of adult and medical, medical use products for microbial contamination, heavy metals, molds, pesticides, and THC potency.
But I’d like to remind you that THC potency is a consumer protection issue and perhaps an antitrust issue under the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1891. Whereas total yeast and mold, heavy metals, and pesticides in cannabis are a public health issue that have, in this state, caused deaths at a licensed regulated operator.
I’d like to give you a hypothetical.
For example, hypothetically, let’s say there was an individual, hypothetically, who worked at an unlicensed lab in the Commonwealth that was extracting THCP from products that came down from Maine illegally, and then testing it on their staff who were registered agents with the commission. And let’s say it caused those staff members to be incapacitated for days. And then that person went on to, I don’t know, become the director of testing at the commission.
That would be a serious conflict of interest that would undermine the integrity of the ability to implement valid and legitimate and effective regulations in this area.
Let me continue.
Moving to the 3 types of testing and how they can be manipulated. You have 3 types of, types of testing in this area: plating, qPCR microarray hybridization methodologies, and PCR methodologies. Plating can be manipulated by only running the inoculation for 48 hours instead of 60 to 72 hours.
You’ll get false negatives on total yeast and mold and the other contaminants. 48 hours is good enough for food with plating, it’s not good enough for cannabis.
With qPCR microarray hybridization methodologies, there’s a black box process. You rent the machine from the company, you put the sample in it, you send the results out to the company, it does this like thing in a black box, it sends you back the results. The fail rate in those is very low, artificially so.
PCR can also be manipulated because the different testing kits have different inclusion and exclusion criteria. Inclusion lists. So one PCR may be passing, but it’s passing because it’s not testing for the most important total yeast and mold.
Also, potency audits aren’t enough. I’m sorry.
Okay, the issue is manipulation of microbial contaminants and dirty product on the market. If we had audited first total yeast and mold, there would be a scandal in this state right now because up to 50% of the product on the market is falsely passed when it’s dangerously contaminated with total yeast and mold levels that are higher than is being advertised to patients.
Also, please prevent people from selling untested cannabis to children on the Boston Common.
Thank you for your time.
To which Chair Harding responded;
