• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer
  • Tech Forum
  • Apply
  • Blog
  • Estimate Request
  • Portal
  • Search Organizations
a2la logo

A2LA

A Better World Through Accreditation

  • Accreditation
    • ISO/IEC 17025 – Testing/Calibration Laboratories
      • Acoustics and Vibration
      • Biological
        • Cannabis Testing
        • Food And Pharmaceutical
        • Veterinary Laboratory Accreditation Program
        • FDA ASCA Pilot Program (Basic Safety And Essential Performance)
        • Threat Agent Testing Laboratory Accreditation Program
        • FDA ASCA Pilot Program (Biocompatibility Testing Of Medical Devices)
      • Calibration
      • Chemical
        • Veterinary Laboratory Accreditation Program
        • Competition Animal Drug Testing Laboratory Accreditation Program
        • Food And Pharmaceutical
        • Consumer Product Safety Testing (CPSC)
        • Cannabis Testing
        • World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) Testing Laboratory Accreditation Program
        • Oregon Toxic-Free Kids Act Accreditation Program
        • Threat Agent Testing Laboratory Accreditation Program
      • Construction Materials
        • Harris County, TX/City Of Houston/Houston Port Authority
      • Electrical
        • U.S. FCC Equipment Authorization Program
        • CTIA Wireless Association
        • Consumer Product Safety Testing (CPSC)
        • Bluetooth Program
        • EPA ENERGY STAR Program
        • NAVAIR
        • Automotive EMC Laboratory Recognition Program (AEMCLRP)
        • Notified Body Accreditation Program
        • Project 25 (P25) Compliance Assessment Program
        • FDA ASCA Pilot Program (Basic Safety And Essential Performance)
        • ISED Equipment Authorization Program
      • Environmental
        • CA ELAP Laboratory Assessment Program
        • EPA National Lead Laboratory Accreditation Program (NLLAP)
        • Kentucky Underground Storage Tank (UST) Program
        • DOE Consolidated Audit Program (DOECAP) Accreditation Program
        • DOD Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program
        • TNI Field Sampling & Measurement Organization (FSMO) Accreditation Program
        • Air Emission Testing Bodies (AETBs) Assessment Program
        • DOD Advanced Geophysical Classification Accreditation Program (DAGCAP)
        • Wyoming Storage Tank Remediation (STR) Program
        • State Environmental Laboratory Assessment Program
      • Forensic Examination Accreditation Program
      • Geotechnical
        • Harris County, TX/City Of Houston/Houston Port Authority
        • Putting Green Laboratory Accreditation Program (PUG)
      • Information Technology
        • Gaming Standards Association (GSA)
        • Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6)
      • Mechanical
        • Consumer Product Safety Testing (CPSC)
        • EPA ENERGY STAR Program
        • BIFMA Compliant Program
        • Counterfeit Avoidance Testing
      • Nondestructive
      • Sampling
      • Sustainable Energy Testing
        • EPA ENERGY STAR Program
      • Thermal
        • Consumer Product Safety Testing (CPSC)
        • EPA ENERGY STAR Program
    • ISO/IEC 17020 – Inspection Bodies
      • ISO/IEC 17020 – Inspection Body Accreditation Program
        • Forensic Examination Accreditation Program
        • Special Inspections Accreditation Program
        • Cybersecurity Inspection Body Program
        • FedRAMP Third Party Assessment Organizations (3PAO)
        • Field Evaluation Body Accreditation Program
        • Notified Body Accreditation Program
    • ISO/IEC 17065 – Product Certification Bodies
      • ISO/IEC 17065 – Product Certification Body Accreditation Program
        • Telecommunication Certification Body (TCB) Program
        • EPA WaterSense Program
        • EPA ENERGY STAR Program
        • Notified Body Accreditation Program
    • ISO/IEC 17043 – Proficiency Testing Providers
      • Proficiency Testing Provider Accreditation Program
    • ISO 17034 – Reference Materials Producers
      • ISO 17034 – Reference Materials Producers Accreditation Program
    • ISO 15189 and CLIA – Clinical Testing Laboratories
      • ISO 15189 and CLIA – Clinical Testing Laboratories Accreditation Program
    • ISO 20387 – Biobanking Accreditation Program
      • ISO 20387 – Biobanking Accreditation Program
  • About
    • Overview
    • Board of Directors
    • COVID-19
    • Careers
    • Leadership
    • Recognitions
    • Regulators and Specifiers
  • Resources
    • Acronym Glossary
    • Annual Reports
    • Documents
    • Downloadable Content
    • FAQs
    • Press Releases
    • Training
  • Membership
  • Get a Quote
  • Online Payment

AOAC and Industry to Set Voluntary Consensus Standards for Cannabis

» Cannabis » AOAC and Industry to Set Voluntary Consensus Standards for Cannabis

August 14, 2017 by tto_admin

A2LA Today l September 2016 l Number 132
By Susan Audino, S.A. Audino and Associates, LLC

*reprinted from the May/June 2016 issue of AOAC Inside Laboratory Management

AOAC and industry are partnering to develop Standard Method Performance Requirements (SMPRs®) in an effort to find the best testing method(s) for cannabis. Analytical testing in the cannabis sector is greatly suffering from a lack of standardization and appropriately vetted methods that have been rigorously evaluated. The result is diminished consumer safety and insufficient knowledge about a legally acquired and purchased commodity.

“One of the biggest challenges facing the cannabis industry is the lack of consensus on standards and test methods,” said AOAC Executive Director, James Bradford. “AOAC can help by gathering stakeholders and experts to work toward consensus in setting standards and finding the best method(s). AOAC will implement its working group strategy in which relevant standards development activities are supported by Organizational Affiliates (OAs) and leverage existing AOAC stakeholder panels.”

Work on cannabis will be part of the AOAC Stakeholder Panel on Strategic Food Analytical Methods (SPSFAM) activities.

Regardless of personal opinion, cannabis use is widely sanctioned and is only growing in availability and use. Just as they do with other foods and botanicals, consumers have a right to know what they are getting and that it is safe from intentional or accidental adulteration.

As of this writing, 24 states and the District of Columbia have sanctioned medical use of cannabis, and four of these states also permit adult use. Cannabis consumers range from toddlers to the geriatric population as well as household pets. Cannabis can be used to treat a host of diseases, disorders, and illnesses.

There is a wide variety of cannabis delivery systems from which to choose: smoking, vapor, tincture, salves and creams, sublingual films, transdermal patches, and, of course, infused edible products.

The cannabis plant may be grown under “organic” conditions, outdoors, indoors, or even hydroponically. This is a huge business prompting all sorts of entrepreneurs for businesses-like cultivation, dispensing, or even analytical testing. There is no federal oversight of the cannabis industry and possessing it remains a federal crime.

Some states have established requirements for analytical testing, and some have gone so far as to require testing laboratories to be
ISO/IEC 17025 accredited. Testing laboratories are expected to evaluate, for example, residual solvents, pesticide residue, THC potency, relative concentrations of specific cannabinoids, mycotoxins, and microbial contaminants.

Although the technology required for cannabis is no different than what is used for other botanical or agricultural products, sample matrix poses one of many significant issues. Sample source and sample size represent additional challenges. For example, raw plant material may come from bud, stem, leaf, or whole plant each of which will yield different results. Extraction from edibles can be quite challenging, particularly when the infused edibles are items such as gummy bears. Common instrumentation in cannabis testing laboratories includes HPLC, NIR, UPLC, GC, PCR, and ELISA. There is growing interest in both the carboxylated and neutral cannabinoids. Interestingly, there have been reports of analysts determining the concentrations of acidic (carboxylated) cannabinoids from the neutral (decarboxylated) chromatograms generated by GC.

The most significant issue facing the cannabis industry is the lack of consensus or standard test methods. Different laboratories get different results, leading to lack of confidence in analytical results. The quality of testing is all too often questionable, at best. Where some laboratories have developed protocols of the highest scientific integrity, others are less than adequate. Further hindering competent testing is the lack of accredited proficiency test (PT) programs. Due to the federal prohibition of cannabis, proficiency providers are not able to ship PT samples across state lines. At present, there is one Interlaboratory Comparison (ILC) program provider offering a “potency test” that is comprised of a 5-part cannabinoid matrix in methanol between 10-1000 μg mL-1, and falls within federal guidelines for interstate shipping. It is important to note that participating laboratories may use whatever method(s) they have available to them. Alternatively, intrastate laboratories are beginning to collaborate and develop their own round robin-type of interlaboratory comparison studies to ascertain technical ‘competence’ until such time that raw materials can be legally transported between states and more appropriate PT schemes can be developed.

For those states that require analytical testing and permit cultivators and/or dispensaries to transport samples to the laboratory, there are limited to no guidelines relative to the provision of samples. For example, there are few, if any, specifications as to what part or parts of the plant are to be sampled; how to choose a representative sample from the ‘batch’; or even how much sample should be provided to the laboratory. There are reports that customers have provided as little as 5g samples for analysis with no characterization of the sample or sampling protocol.

But not all is lost. The scientific community is collaborating. As part of AOAC’s standards development process, a working group on cannabis will examine analytical challenges, regulatory requirements, and gaps in current methodology, etc. in an effort to develop draft SMPRs against which candidate methods can be evaluated. The infrastructure of existing AOAC stakeholder panels (in this case, SPSFAM) will be used to advance draft standards developed by the new working group.

It is anticipated that AOAC will introduce and begin standards development activities for cannabis in September 2016 at the 130th AOAC Annual Meeting and Exposition in Dallas, Texas, USA.

For more information or if you would like to participate, contact Susan Audino, S.A. Audino & Associates, LLC, at susan.audino@gmail.com or Dawn Frazier, AOAC Executive for Scientific Business Development, at dfrazier@aoac.org.

Cannabis,  ISO/IEC 17025

Footer

Headquarters 5202 Presidents Court, Ste 220 Frederick, MD 21703
301.644.3248
info@A2LA.org
  • Careers
  • Contact Us
  • Lodging a Complaint
  • Get Involved
  • Privacy Agreement
  • Online Payment
  • Tech Forum
  • Apply
  • Blog
  • Estimate Request
  • Portal
  • Search Organizations

© 2022 A2LA · Powered by Orases Custom Software · Website Privacy Policy & Terms of Use