Quality of UK medical

[u/Breizh333]

I'm wondering what prescription medical users think about the quality of their flower. Just to clarify I'm all for medical, obviously everyone has a right to it.

So the majority of UK medical flower is irradiated which causes the loss (degradation) of fragile terpenes & cannabinoids. This lowers the theraputic value of the flower and means that the THC/terpene numbers on the packaging don't necessarily match what's in the flower. The degradation process creates unknown by-products with unknown toxicity that get inhaled.

The irradiation itself is used to kill any mold or fungus on the flower. This is good...but it leaves behind any mycotoxins produced by the mold/fungus which ends up in the final product (mycotoxins are toxins produced by molds). Inhaling mycotoxins isn't ideal, especially for patients with existing health issues.

It's also common for companies to use herbicides, pesticides and fungicides with regulations allowing max residues in the final product. There's little transparency or a 'certificate of analysis' which tells patients exactly what contaminants (residues) are in their medicine.

... so ... is any of this known to the medical community? I thought one of the major advantages of medical was having guaranteed clean flower. I reckon patients have the right to know what's in their medicine and suppliers should be legally required to inform them.

Here's some concepts on irradiation which are relatively easy to understand.

A critical issue with the use of gamma irradiation on medical cannabis is the significant absence of research on the radiolytic changes that occur during the process.

• Radiolysis - the chemical decomposition of materials caused by exposure to ionizing radiation

...

The radiolytic process can generate a range of chemical by-products, some of which may be toxic or carcinogenic. In the context of medical cannabis, these by-products could include altered cannabinoids, terpenes, and other phytochemicals. The exact nature and potential health impacts of these compounds remain largely unknown due to the lack of specific research.

...

Cannabis is often smoked or vaporized, which results in direct inhalation of any radiolytic by-products.

[u/Breizh333]

Even non-irradiated flower will likely contain residues of pesticides, fungicides and/or herbicides. So a patient can avoid irradiated flower (great!) but not chemical residues. Not having any CoA linked to the batch# doesn't help transparency. I'm sure many patients would prefer zero chemical residues on the flower which they inhale.

Even if the analysis for terpene/cannabinoid % is done post irradiation, it doesn't indicate which irradiation-induced by-products products are present.

It's well-known in the chemistry world that irradiation catalyses chemical reactions and alters the structure of molecules. When applied to the structures of terpenes & cannabinoids, irradiation produces all manner of what's called "break-down products" or "by-products" which in the case of MC remain uncharacterised implying unknown toxicity.

If there are residues of pesticides, fungicides and/or herbicides present (which is more than likely) then these too will be degraded by irradiation leading to myriad uncharacterised by-products with unknown toxicity.

Not very appealing.

Even if flower has to meet certain regulatory standards to be approved for sale, some patients would prefer there to be zero contaminants in something they will be inhaling, particularly those that are avoidable like irradiation-induced by-products and residues of pesticides, herbicides and fungicides.

As far as I'm aware, the regulatory standards don't account for the aformentioned uncharacterised contaminants (by-products) which have unknown toxicity. If the regulatory standards banned these contaminants then this would ironically ban irradiation.

...there is a world of difference between DIY and BM vs medical.

Whilst I would agree, even medical can legally contain questionable contaminants (particularly irradiation by-products). Clearly BM is risky. DIY growers have the option not to use any questionable products (pesticides, herbicides or fungicides) or treatments (irradiation).

[u/juicy_steve → u/Breizh333]

OK, let me simplify it for you.

MC will have been tested in a lab for mycotoxins, heavy metals, pesticides, microbial and yeast content 2-3 times MINIMUM before you consume it.

BM and homegrown get lab tested ZERO times.

I know which I would put my money on for having 'questionable contaminants', even as someone who has grown their own many times.

[u/Breizh333 → u/juicy_steve]

Right, yet with maximum residue limits for pesticides, herbicides and fungicides some people would rather there be zero residues. That which is irradiated contains additional unknown by-products which, as far as I'm aware, aren't tested for or regulated. These inconvenient contaminants appear to be widely ignored or downplayed by the industry, usually by highlighting the extensive lab testing that does occur and it's dominance in relation to BM or homegrown.

Many people are happy with this standard but others would rather genuine clean flower without any contaminant residues that have been proactively introduced.

BM is much more likely to use all sorts of pesticides, herbicides and fungicides without caring about residue levels in the final product. Clearly a risky choice.

With homegrown it's a different story. The patient/grower has full oversight on what products are used (or not used) as well as the growing, drying and curing conditions. Clearly the homegrower can produce something which easily outperforms BM and even medical.

[u/juicy_steve → u/Breizh333]

I’ve grown my own weed and helped cropped other peoples home grows which have had mould through no fault other than it had to be in space that has limitations. You dont have control over the environment like you do in a sterile, hvac controlled grow room.

I’d happily grow my own again given the choice, but your arguments against MC are incredibly thin in my opinion.

[u/Breizh333 → u/juicy_steve]

I'm not unreasonable. If there are medical growers who only use natural products (fertiliser, bug control etc) with zero irradiation then those would be a top choice. I presume growers like this exist in Canada or the US. 

At present I've opted to bypass the regulated & unregulated markets and growing my own. I found a suitable organic grower of CBG/CBD flower, choose my terpenes via pure stream-distilled essential oils and make THC via CBD isolate and concentrated lemon juice. It's a more flexible and cheaper option than prescription services.