Select a categories

  • Select a categories
  • PHYTODYNAMIC CANNABINOID PRODUCTS
  • Foodstuffs
  • Cannabinoid Foods
  • Traditional Hemp Foods
  • Consumer goods
  • Footwear
  • Children's shoes
  • Men's footwear
  • Women's shoes
  • Сlothing
  • Bed linen sets
  • Fiber
  • Hemp fabric
  • Women's hemp bag
  • Insoles
  • Hats
  • Knitwear
  • Cosmetics
  • Series "HEMP OIL"
  • Series "PHYTODYNAMIC CANNABINOID COSMETICS"
  • Supplies
  • Medicine
  • Information sources
  • Books
  • lm
  • Presentations

  • Your shopping cart is empty!

Compare 0

What is different about the approach of officials to conflict situations in civilized countries and in Ukraine in the field of modern hemp breeding?

15/02/2019 | hempmarket
heading_title

Government officials who are engaged in regulating sales of hemp products in California throughout the month have clarified the interpretation of the rules in order to further avoid possible conflict situations.

Manufacturers, as well as testing laboratories in California, sighed with relief when state regulators gave a clear interpretation of the rules governing the amount of tetrahydrocannabinol in food and beverages that fall into state retailers. The hype arose after the rules concerning foodstuffs made using cannabis ingredients came into force in California in January 2019. Two government agencies that control the hemp industry in the state have issued contradictory interpretations of this regulatory act, detailing the limit values ​​for the amount of THC, testing methods and packaging features for cannabis products. In particular, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) and the Bureau of Cannabis Control (BCC) in California related to the control of the amount of THC in food published conflicting interpretations of the above rules. CDPH indicated that food products can not contain more than 10 mg of THC, and in the package the amount of tetrahydrocannabinol should not exceed 100 mg. Unlike colleagues, BCC allowed food to be tested in cases where the amount of THC exceeded 10% of the permissible level. Those. if 11 mg of THC were found in any single product, the CDPH would give a negative conclusion and the BCC “would release” This heading to market. This led to the fact that a number of products were banned from entering the market, since based on different interpretations, some laboratories that tested products for the amount of THC allowed sales, while others prohibited them. 

Considering the ambiguity of the situation, consumers and business entities immediately fell down lawsuits in the following main categories of cases:

• filed by consumers of hemp products who claimed to have suffered due to the fact that the package did not specifically indicate the amount of THC contained in the product;

• enterprises that have incurred huge costs for the production of products that have not been tested for the amount of tetrahydrocannabinol contained in manufactured goods;

• unforeseen contingencies arising from increased government control.

In connection with the foregoing, government officials who are engaged in regulating sales of hemp products in California throughout the month have clarified the interpretation of the rules in order to further avoid possible conflict situations. Both government agencies have agreed that the maximum amount of THC can vary within the 10% band, which can be either more or less than the maximum allowable level.

Thus, the laboratories conducting an analysis of the amount of THC in food products immediately received clear guidelines on the amount of psychoactive cannabinoid in the products marketed. Previously, two laboratories in the state of California regularly issued the appropriate certificates providing the opportunity to sell products in which the number of TGCs could not exceed 10% of the maximum number, and one laboratory did not issue the relevant documents, after the position was revised by CDPH officials, all three laboratories can work in the same legal field.

In our country, several government agencies are engaged in the policy of controlling industrial crops of technical hemp. The peculiarity of the officials of the Ministry of Internal Affairs is that the "servants of the people" climb into the affairs of business entities who are absolutely legally engaged in cannabis, without any reason whatsoever. Trying to "play"  on the imperfection of the current legislation, they regularly try  explain  heads of cannabis farms, what they need to do or "remind about themselves", without any legal basis for this (after obtaining the necessary permits for this "servants of the people in uniform" have no relation to legal crops hemp). 

This situation is repeated in different variations every year, and the psychological pressure begins on the threshold of the sowing season, when the regional divisions of the Ministry of Internal Affairs write requests to the enterprises that are not provided for by law or try to communicate under any pretext of. Most of this kind of action by law enforcement officials leads to nothing, but takes time / resources and discourages agricultural producers from growing the most profitable agricultural crop due to the fact that they often have to talk about “muddy” Ministry of Internal Affairs officers, who for the most part cannot clearly state what they want and on what basis they need to provide any information about the upcoming sowing.