Adams, who was a federal government employee for more than 30 years, says in the lead up to legalization, as the government held consultations on the proposed regulatory regime, lab accreditation was never discussed.

“I read the consultation documents. And there were a lot of questions in there about making sure the analysis is correct so that we can have confidence in the numbers, the cannabinoid levels, microbial contamination, metal contamination, pesticides, a whole range of concerns came up again and again,” he says. “Unfortunately, nowhere in that consultation was lab accreditation ever mentioned.”

Accreditation, according to Adams, would ensure those concerns are addressed and that there’s trust in the numbers.

“The reason I support accreditation is it really gives you confidence in the analytical results that are coming out of the laboratories, it makes sure that labs have the quality management system in place, and it gives you an assurance of the technical competence of the laboratory,” he says.

Other organizations, like Kitchener, Ont.-based Labstat International Inc., are calling for testing standardization.

Unlike some other countries with established medical cannabis programs, Canada does not have a standard testing methodology. And though cannabis testing is required by law in Canada — every batch needs to be third-party tested by one of the 145 labs across the country that have been certified to work with cannabis by the federal government — the lack of standardization remains an issue, according to Peter Joza, chief technical officer of Labstat.

“The testing process can be improved through standardization, allowing for meaningful comparisons to be made between products or even comparisons within different variants or batches of the same product,” Joza tells The GrowthOp by email, adding that the issue goes beyond potency profiles.

“While producers must test the cannabis extract or oil in the vape cartridge, they are not required to test the actual vapour that’s emitted and inhaled by the customer,” says Peter Joza, chief technical officer of Labstat. PHOTO BY ADNAN ABIDI /REUTERS

In particular, Joza notes that there are not any regulatory requirements for the analysis of aerosols emitted from cannabis vaping devices. “This means that while producers must test the cannabis extract or oil in the vape cartridge, they are not required to test the actual vapour that’s emitted and inhaled by the customer,” he explains.

“With no testing standards for these types of products, laboratories could be generating results in any number of different ways. Thus, it is not possible to compare the results from one product to another. Therefore it’s also quite difficult to make claims about safety. This can be misleading to customers and regulators.”

According to Adams, accreditation and proficiency testing would also put an end to so-called “lab shopping,” where cannabis producers seek out laboratories that are easy to work with or assign a higher THC score to the products. THC percentage remains one of the biggest drivers of cannabis purchasing.

A 2018 study published in Nature found systematic differences in the cannabinoid content reported by different laboratories in Washington, which became the first U.S. state to legalize recreational cannabis in 2012.

“What has been a persistent problem in the industry is labs producing results that are not fully accurate, and that often manifests itself as inflating the THC numbers in the plant,” Nick Jikomes, the study’s lead author and Leafly’s principal research scientist, told The GrowthOp last year. “The packaging and labelling are, unfortunately, not always going to be accurate signifiers of the cannabinoid content of the plant.”

Adams says accreditation would ensure that labs are operating in a “technically competent way.”

“You can’t be fudging numbers. If you caught doing anything untoward, that’s it, you’re going to lose your accreditation, you’re going to get suspended,” he says.

Adams draws a comparison to labs doing environmental testing 30 years ago and the results sometimes being impacted by other motivating factors.

“That doesn’t happen anymore because, if the data is going to be reported to the provincial government, it must be done in an accredited laboratory. There’s no choice,” he says.

According to Adams, it’s an issue that the cannabis industry needs to get in front of, sooner than later.

“There seems to be very good agreement within the cannabis industry in the cannabis labs, that we really need to get our own house in order,” he says. “The government is going to look at this and if there are problems, if the industry is not stepping up and doing it on its own, they’re going to get a solution forced on them.”