What's new
  • ICMag with help from Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest in November! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!

True Terpenes VISCOSITY extract liquifier LAB TESTS: Mineral oil but no terps!!

Between $ 250-300 each. EEO was the most expenisve at $300. Plus a few hundred for the four bottles I bought. So far around $1300. BUt this next test may cost more than $1500 itself. All together I expect to spend more than $2500

The reason for price difference is normal essential oil GCMS testing for purity like if you buy peppermint oil and you want to know if its really peppermint oil costs 250-300. That because its just a single test to identify terps, essential oils by terp profile, and adulterants/impurities. Its not a lots of testing and research to identify each unknown peak.

I first got Visocisty tested because I wanted to see if I should keepp using it, not because I was trying to get there "secret recipe", so I didnt use the type of testing for getting their recipe. Thats why my first 3 tests werent super expensive. I expected all terps so for the first lab test I sent in to a terp lab. And when they found no terps but did find what they think is a type of isoparrafin mineral oil I waas in disbelief, so I went to the best terp lab Dr. Pappas for the second test. When he found basically the same thing as the first lab I got a third test to confrim the first two.

The next test Im having done on the new bottle is from a lab that can do lots of testing to identify as many peaks as possible. Including petroleum distillates to see if the mineral oil stuff is from plants or crude oil (not the it matters much). This could cost a good amont of money.
 

Gray Wolf

A Posse ad Esse. From Possibility to realization.
Mentor
ICMag Donor
Veteran
No, not really. Because as much as I and others trust you, we can't take anyone at their word no matter who it is, thats the whole reason for this testing I started and spent a lot of money on.



Ummmm, if you pay for the test as you've stated you would, I don't see how me not revealing proprietary secrets keep you from doing so???????????????

I am only the (trusted?) 3rd party disinterested certified chain of custody mule, not a messenger.


As long as you are truthful in doing so, there is no need for me doing so that I can see.



I will repeat that people have the right to know if TT is lying to them about what they are buying.


Truth in advertising is the law of the land. When you look at an ingredient list and it says spices and natural flavors, are they not typically talking about terpenes and terpenoids?



What I can say is if any tests come out different than mine, like showing a lot of terps, that test is suspicious because all three of mine have shown zero terps. The great thing is we dont have to rely any one persons testing alone, not mine, Old Golds, Futures. We need to see them in aggregate, so we can know if someone is pulling a fast one.


Dissimilar test results will certainly highlight a problem, but a little early to be beating that horse, until the actual empirical test results suggests that it is a problem.

Looking at it from a process standpoint, rather than a personal integrity issue among us'n testers, is there any other way we could get dissimilar results?


IE: One for instance would be, "What if random lots of mispackaged and labeled material were supplied by a TT vendor and their sin was not catching it?"

Another might be, is this a small enough event to have been sabotage?


Suffice to say that if the results come back different, that it opens a window to back track and determine why the results are different.


I wasnt saying we need a new defintion. Im saying we should define them as they are already defined, for everyone to see so were on the same page, because its pretty clear TT is trying to play word games now.


Both my samples of Viscosity state on the labels:

Viscosity Extract Liquifier is a natural and organic blend of virtually odorless and flavorless terpenes. It does not contain PG, VG, PEG, MCT, coconut oil or other non-terpene ingredients.

That is the standard against which they will be judged.

And I want to make sure that TT cant say something is a terp when it isn't, like those alkanes I listed which aren't terps but are in Viscosity.


I am using standard definitions as previously discussed.


Please dont take my posts to you as an offense or something. I just want this to be fully legit and to be trustable. And the only way for that to happen is transparnecy. Like I wrote before, in my opinion at the very least everyone who gets testing done should post the lab's conclusion. It's not enough to give a summary of what the lab said if the lab wrote a report.

OK im going back on vacation until eveyones test results come in.


Above in blue.

Perspectives and values differ. I trust the other testers and I'm cool with them individually making the decision on what to reveal themselves.


I'll report the results from my attempts to secure a molecular biologist and a pharma lab for this experiment later this week, as available.
 

Weird

3rd-Eye Jedi
Veteran
The fact that they the consumer has to spend this kind of money to assure a company's promise absolutely unreasonable.


The fact that the product was not as promised on the label already is simple proof of a failure to meet that promise regardless of cause, nefarious or otherwise.

What is worse, simple searches and posts about this company weigh favorably in driving traffic to their interests. So regardless of the good intentions of those in the community to be fair and balanced it works to the benefit of the irresponsible profiteer who didn't do due diligence in regards to what they sell for the consumption of others outside the framework of health regulations.

One one hand I get it but it is not an acceptable dynamic to support nurture even if through the concept of plain vanilla democracy.

If the business model is such that it is not profitable without skirting due diligence to assure their product is as promised or they are too inept to include it why do they deserve coddling in making it right?

imho altruism for the benefit of one who potentially harms many even in ignorant negligence is not well placed. From a pragmatic perspective If the product is intermittently faulty, and GW's tests come back as pure terpenes all this does is allow a company with a faulty manufacturing process to continue without engaging a process that guarantees constituents in the delivered product.
 

Weird

3rd-Eye Jedi
Veteran
cultivation was attractive because of the benign nature of the plant and what that means to the humanity I share it with



to me every step we take away from that baseline is a compromise in humanitarian integrity and humanitarian integrity, even though relative to our understanding of the world (and thusly imperfect or efficiency subjected to wisdom), has always been the foundation of my choices when it came to business be it IT or otherwise.


Giving a fuck actually pays dividends and making it a priority keeps it engaged and effective. But I get it, no matter who we are or what we are focused on we generally only keep one factor in our focus so it is easy to focus so sharply on one aspect of our desires that we forget the other variables that lend to expressing our full potential.

This dynamic has allowed many industries to profit at the expense of the humanity it serves and here we have the opportunity to profit without compromise so let us not accept any.
 

Gray Wolf

A Posse ad Esse. From Possibility to realization.
Mentor
ICMag Donor
Veteran
Well, we have progress. Sadly not the progress that I had hoped, but we are moving on to the next step.

My favorite molecular biologist and pharma lab are not going to be available for this project, and my choices will be limited in which labs are willing to lend their name to this spirited 50 page controversy, so I’m changing the game rules.

I’ve sent the two samples to an anonymous lab more than capable of analyzing them and will report back on the results once I receive them. Fortuitously, they previously analyzed a sample, so we also have some history to compare to.

Since I’ve paid for the samples, and the tests are being run as a personal favor to me and the industry, I won’t require anyone to reimburse my costs.

More when I have the results.
 

AgentPothead

Just this guy, ya know?
You are good people Gray Wolf. The world needs more of those. I cannot contribute a lot, but would definitely be willing to contribute towards a fund to help disperse the cost if possible/need be.
 

Gray Wolf

A Posse ad Esse. From Possibility to realization.
Mentor
ICMag Donor
Veteran
Someone should start a gofundme for gray:respect:

Thanks for the good thoughts brother, but I only paid $15 for one sample and $18 for the other. Shipping was about $11.

As the saying goes, I often spill that much...........

The real expense will be in the analysis, which the lab has graciously agreed to absorb in deference to my charm and their strong desire to make a positive difference in the industry.

Mostly the latter, and with all of the malfeasance charges exchanged, it just goes to show that there are also under sung and under appreciated good guys out there as well.
 

Old Gold

Active member
I sincerely apologize that it has taken me this long to send my sample for testing. I have been swamped with other work, but I do have the sample in my hands.

ExtractNinja, does your offer to pay for the test still stand?
 

PrivateStalk

New member
Coca-cola has ingredients listed on every bottle yet no one can make one taste like theirs. So I’m not buying trade secrets. I think it’s ballsy to make a product designed for vape production, claim it’s natural (implying it’s safe) but not tell people at all one ingredient they are putting in their body.

They make diy vape pen juice but can’t tell those very same people what’s in it due to trade secret...

In other words, if we told you guys what it is, you would all just make your own... which leads me to believe it’s gotta be something easily and cheaply made by the average joe. Either that, or it’s: if we told you what was in it you’d NEVER put it in you body willingly. Either one reeks!

And lets not ignore how this thread probably directly lead to the changing of their verbage on what viscosity is to not include terpenes. Something smells rotten.

If this was not something intended to be consumed in the body I’d not care, but what if one has an adverse reaction to it? Would poison control be any help? ER? Hell if you consumed 100% all natural odorless terpenes and had a reaction only to find out they are now not terpenes???

The anxiety this company has caused by their secrets alone is bs.
 

PrivateStalk

New member
Has any crazy bastid here added drops of mineral oil to shatter if for nothing else to see if consistency matched in a real world test? As many ppl are paying for tests, let’s pass the hat around and raise money for the brave soul willing to add mineral oil and vape it for human testing. (Kidding). But if you thought that sounded bad, what do you call all the people currently vaping viscosity??? HUMAN TEST SUBJECTS.
 

PrivateStalk

New member
Has any crazy bastid here added drops of mineral oil to shatter if for nothing else to see if consistency matched in a real world test? As many ppl are paying for tests, let’s pass the hat around and raise money for the brave soul willing to add mineral oil and vape it for human testing. (Kidding). But if you thought that sounded bad, what do you call all the people currently vaping viscosity??? HUMAN TEST SUBJECTS.

But in all seriousness i recently switched to C8 for diluent and could have told you after mixing and before vaping that it was not C8. I know that’s a no brainer, but my point was if I put same amount of mineral oil on shatter as viscosity, would it be quickly and easily ruled out by sheer eyeballing it? I don’t have the shatter to spare nor do I have mineral oil on hand for that matter.
 
Top