So, if there is a checks and balance system in place, who oversees the lab testing?
There is certainly no federal body that is currently interested in regulating legal cannabis.
As far as statewide, I know they must be certified but as far as I'm aware they are not held to the same standards as other labs.
Consider what percentage of product must be tested for it to be deemed clean, or for it to have the percentages labeled on it? I know in CA you can have a lab print out by just sending in an 8th-quarter ounce of flower, you can then take that lab print out to clubs and they will tout whatever the print out says.
The track and trace programs are mostly for tax reasons. It may be useful if a batch tests positive for a systemic pesticide, but if they are doing recalls then clearly something has been missed, regardless if it is reported by a large numbers of consumers or found by the retailer themselves. If tests were 100% and no errors were made and no contaminated weed slipped by there would be no recalls.
here is a very specific source that shows that although there may be statewide oversight in CO, there is still contaminated product on the market. It would be foolish to think that all contaminated product has been recalled. http://www.thecannabist.co/2015/12/04/pesticide-pot-recall-list-marijuana/44711/
Again my point is simply that there is still need for consumer awareness and that even lab tested products are not 100% accurate and there is a lot of room for error. A label may make you feel safe, and CO may be ahead of all other states, but it doesn't mean CO is perfect or close to it. States are just beginning to attempt to regulate a historically unregulated market. I do not need my constitutional rights explained to me... lol... I am asking you whether there is oversight of the labs and clearly you do not know.
http://www.thecannabist.co/2015/12/08/edipure-pesticide-recall-edibles-gobi-analytical-denver/44826/
"the business is also taking aim at the pot-testing laboratory used by the city of Denver, calling the lab’s pesticide testing methodology “dubious at best.”"
There is certainly no federal body that is currently interested in regulating legal cannabis.
As far as statewide, I know they must be certified but as far as I'm aware they are not held to the same standards as other labs.
Consider what percentage of product must be tested for it to be deemed clean, or for it to have the percentages labeled on it? I know in CA you can have a lab print out by just sending in an 8th-quarter ounce of flower, you can then take that lab print out to clubs and they will tout whatever the print out says.
The track and trace programs are mostly for tax reasons. It may be useful if a batch tests positive for a systemic pesticide, but if they are doing recalls then clearly something has been missed, regardless if it is reported by a large numbers of consumers or found by the retailer themselves. If tests were 100% and no errors were made and no contaminated weed slipped by there would be no recalls.
here is a very specific source that shows that although there may be statewide oversight in CO, there is still contaminated product on the market. It would be foolish to think that all contaminated product has been recalled. http://www.thecannabist.co/2015/12/04/pesticide-pot-recall-list-marijuana/44711/
Again my point is simply that there is still need for consumer awareness and that even lab tested products are not 100% accurate and there is a lot of room for error. A label may make you feel safe, and CO may be ahead of all other states, but it doesn't mean CO is perfect or close to it. States are just beginning to attempt to regulate a historically unregulated market. I do not need my constitutional rights explained to me... lol... I am asking you whether there is oversight of the labs and clearly you do not know.
http://www.thecannabist.co/2015/12/08/edipure-pesticide-recall-edibles-gobi-analytical-denver/44826/
"the business is also taking aim at the pot-testing laboratory used by the city of Denver, calling the lab’s pesticide testing methodology “dubious at best.”"