Flash Sale 70% Off
Give customers details about the banner image(s) or content on the template.
True Hemp Science brings together practical experience with cannabis, independent study, and deliberate botanical formulation. Our founder, Christopher Lynch, began working with cannabis in the late 1990s and established THS in Austin, Texas, in 2016. We follow our ingredients from farm and extraction through formulation, mixing, and blending. This knowledge base explains the choices behind our products and gives you a way to examine cannabinoid profiles, extraction methods, terpene composition, and laboratory evidence for yourself.
We evaluate a formulation through its complete composition. CBD, CBDa, CBG, CBGa, CBDv, CBDva, and other cannabinoids have distinct identities. Their proportions, accompanying terpenes, carrier ingredients, and preparation methods inform our choices. A total milligram figure is useful, but it cannot describe all of those characteristics.
Our preference is for plant-derived cannabinoids, carefully selected botanical profiles, and a transparent account of how the ingredients were obtained. We place particular value on preserving acidic cannabinoids in the formulations designed around them. Our belief in botanical complexity guides our work; the evidence for a particular health outcome still needs to be evaluated on its own.
We also make room for different preferences. Some customers want a pronounced botanical extract; others prefer a milder flavor or a particular neutral cannabinoid. Each product should be understood through its own ingredients and laboratory profile. Explore the Rare Cannabinoids Guide and Cannabinoid Compendium for a broader introduction.
Cannabinoid acids are naturally produced in the plant. Decarboxylation removes a carboxyl group and changes an acidic cannabinoid into its corresponding neutral form. Heat accelerates this process; processing and storage conditions affect the resulting profile. CBDa and CBD, for example, are related compounds with different molecular structures.[1]
| Acidic form | Neutral form | What to check |
|---|---|---|
| CBDa | CBD | Whether the report lists each separately or calculates a combined total. |
| CBGa | CBG | The amount of acidic material retained in the finished formulation. |
| CBDva | CBDv | The distinction between the varin cannabinoid's acidic and neutral forms. |
| THCa | Δ9-THC | Each measured amount and the report's total-THC calculation. |
For our acidic-focused formulations, our development goal is a substantial acidic fraction, with a target of at least half of the measured cannabinoid mass in acidic forms. This is a formulation objective, not a claim that every THS product or batch has the same percentage. MOODiQ, SOLARA 19, and LUMINA illustrate different approaches to combining acidic and neutral constituents. Batch testing establishes the actual proportions.
When we discuss an acidic percentage, the denominator matters: the mass of acidic cannabinoids divided by the mass of all individually measured cannabinoids is different from the percentage of CBDa within the CBD family alone. A calculated “total CBD” value also uses a decarboxylation correction, so it should not be substituted without explaining the calculation.
Read our Acidic Cannabinoids Guide and CBGa guide for more detail. CBGa's conversion through plant enzymes into other cannabinoid acids is a separate process from its decarboxylation into CBG.
Our extraction priorities are preservation, cleanliness, and consistency. In Christopher's production experience, subcritical CO₂ offers a favorable balance of scale, cost, and preservation for the acidic-rich botanical extracts THS seeks. We also use cryogenic ethanol where it better suits the starting material and intended formulation.
These methods recover constituents already present in the plant. The starting material, operating conditions, solvent removal, and subsequent handling all influence the result. “CO₂ extracted” or “ethanol extracted” alone cannot establish the final cannabinoid or terpene profile. Comparative research demonstrates how extraction conditions can produce substantially different compositions.[2]
Botanical origin, degree of refinement, and chemical conversion are distinct questions. Extracting or separating a compound differs from chemically transforming one cannabinoid into another. THS's sourcing preference is for cannabinoids obtained from the plant rather than manufactured through conversion.
Our goal is a clean botanical extract with a well-characterized composition. Residual-solvent testing evaluates solvents remaining in a tested sample. A result below a laboratory's detection limit does not prove the absolute absence of every molecule, and sensory evaluation cannot replace analytical testing.
Terpenes receive deliberate attention in our formulation work. We consider their identity, concentration, and balance alongside the cannabinoids. Christopher's experience leads him to place considerable value on their contribution to the character of a botanical blend. We do not assign a fixed percentage of a product's benefit to terpenes.
Some less-refined botanical preparations have a pronounced herbal, resinous, bitter, or peppery character. Terpenes, other plant constituents, added botanicals, and concentration can all influence that experience. A strong flavor does not by itself demonstrate higher terpene content, purity, or effectiveness. A burning sensation should not be treated as a sign of quality.
For customers who prefer a milder taste, selected refined formulations provide another option. Compare the composition and ingredients rather than judging a product solely by how strongly it tastes.
Increasing the intake of CBD or other non-THC cannabinoids should not automatically increase THC exposure. This is an important principle in our formulation discussions. We consider the actual THC amount separately from the total cannabinoid amount.
Christopher generally favors CBD-dominant profiles around 25:1 to 37:1 or higher, while some formulations have a greater THC proportion. These are formulation preferences, not a universal serving recommendation. For a CBG-rich or mixed formulation, the ratio must name the actual cannabinoids being compared; it should not simply be called a CBD:THC ratio.
| CBD amount | Δ9-THC at 17:1 | Δ9-THC at 37:1 |
|---|---|---|
| 50 mg | 2.94 mg | 1.35 mg |
| 100 mg | 5.88 mg | 2.70 mg |
| 200 mg | 11.76 mg | 5.41 mg |
A high ratio does not guarantee a non-intoxicating serving. Taking more of a fixed blend increases all its constituents. Keeping THC steady while increasing other cannabinoids requires a different composition or an appropriately adjusted combination. Read quantities per serving and per container, and distinguish Δ9-THC from THCa and any calculated total THC.
A high CBD total raises useful questions about concentration, the starting extract, and processing. As an arithmetic example, an ingredient containing CBD and THC in a 30:1 ratio would supply approximately 333 mg THC alongside 10,000 mg CBD if that ratio remained unchanged. Adding carrier oil changes concentration but does not change that cannabinoid ratio.
The bottle's milligram total alone cannot establish isolate use. Container size, measured composition, and manufacturing disclosures are needed. Any regulatory concentration calculation also requires the applicable rules and testing basis; a nominal volume in milliliters should not be treated as an identical mass in grams.
These examples connect the principles above to our catalog. Follow the product links for ingredients, available variants, and current specifications, then match the product to its laboratory report. The groups describe formulation characteristics, not proven differences in clinical effectiveness.
| Formulation characteristic | Products to explore | What to compare |
|---|---|---|
| Acidic-focused botanical oils | SOLARA 19, MOODiQ, LUMINA G53 | Which acidic and neutral cannabinoids are present, their proportions, and the accompanying botanical ingredients. |
| CBG-focused formulations | FOCI and SYNAPTA G22 | Oil-based versus water-dispersible format, cannabinoid composition, and added ingredients. |
| Combined CBD and CBG | BLISSTOPIA | The stated CBG:CBD ratio, delivery format, and botanical additions. |
| Selected distillate formulations | REPOSA and SEZI | The predominant cannabinoid, refinement, flavor, and complete ingredients. |
| CBD and CBN blends | DOZE and NOCTURNA N88 | CBD and CBN quantities, THC content, carrier, and other botanical ingredients. |
| Multi-cannabinoid gummies | ASTRONAUTICA and our gummy collection | Each cannabinoid per piece, THC per piece, package count, and the complete ingredient list. |
For a broader catalog overview, visit the THS Product Guide. Mineral products have a different composition and purpose; they should not be counted toward cannabinoid totals.
The cannabinoid profile and the delivery format answer different questions. An oil, an emulsion, and a gummy can contain different combinations of cannabinoids even when the total milligrams are similar.
Emulsification disperses oil into small droplets in a water-based system. THS's proprietary water-dispersible formulations use sunflower phospholipids, with the complete ingredients specified on each product. We do not use artificial preservatives in these formulations. Products may also contain botanical ingredients that affect flavor and suitability.
Appropriately designed emulsions can improve absorption rate or exposure, depending on the formulation. They do not shrink individual cannabinoid molecules, and they do not automatically bypass liver metabolism. Human research on a specific self-emulsifying formulation found improved absorption compared with oil drops; it does not establish the same magnitude of improvement for THS products.[3]
Compare our cannabinoid oils, water-soluble formulations, and gummies and edibles. THS does not offer combustible products; guidance here concerns the relevant labeled formats.
Christopher's formulation work emphasizes attentive observation. The same milligram amount of CBD, CBG, or a mixed botanical preparation should not be assumed to produce an equivalent experience. Some customers report using different amounts of different formulations; that does not establish a universal conversion between cannabinoids.
Founder observation: In Christopher's experience, some customers assess a consistent routine over approximately 45–90 days. Some report reducing or stopping around the three-month point and returning two to eight weeks later. These reports have not established an optimal cycle, a required break, or a biological “saturation” period.
A useful record includes the product, batch, serving amount, time of use, THC intake, perceived changes, and unwanted effects. Record changes in sleep, comfort, or daily functioning separately from laboratory measurements or diagnosed conditions. Do not wait for a planned review date to respond to an unwanted effect.
THC may impair judgment and coordination, and cannabinoids can interact with medications. Review the THS safety and drug-interaction guide and seek qualified medical guidance for health conditions or medication changes. A reported improvement does not by itself demonstrate tissue repair or disease reversal.
A certificate of analysis describes the sample and tests reported by the laboratory. Use the THS Lab Reports library with the current product label and selected variant.
A COA does not ordinarily reveal the complete extraction or manufacturing history. Those details require sourcing and production records. If a product description and its report disagree, ask THS to reconcile them rather than combining incompatible figures.
We distinguish established chemistry, laboratory measurements, human trials, preclinical research, and our own observations. Each contributes a different kind of information.
A controlled study in 15 healthy adults examined an oral extract containing approximately equal amounts of CBD and CBDa. The acidic cannabinoid reached substantially higher peak plasma concentrations and peaked sooner than CBD in that formulation. This supports further investigation of acidic cannabinoids; it does not establish proportionately greater benefit or the same result for every acidic compound.[4]
A small placebo-controlled study in 34 adults investigated a single 20 mg CBG dose and reported effects on subjective anxiety, stress, and verbal memory. It provides preliminary human evidence, not a comparison establishing how much CBG equals CBD or a demonstration of long-term treatment benefits.[5]
A human study found that vaporized d-limonene reduced some anxiety-related effects of THC under the tested conditions. The inhaled route and specific doses matter: the finding does not establish the effects of terpenes in THS's oral products or a fixed terpene contribution to benefit.[6]
An eight-week trial of a CBD/THC spray reported changes in glycemic measures, including HbA1c. Its small size and reporting inconsistencies limit interpretation. A separate 13-week study that included CBD at 200 mg daily did not establish an HbA1c benefit from CBD. These findings do not validate a 45-day response, a high-dose CBD rule, or cannabinoid cycling, and they do not establish that THS products treat diabetes.[7] [8]
No. Our catalog includes different botanical profiles and refined ingredients. Use the individual product description and batch report to identify its composition. A preference for acidic cannabinoids does not mean every product is formulated around them.
Yes. Acidic cannabinoids can themselves be isolated. A blend made only from neutral CBD and CBG isolates does not supply CBDa or CBGa unless those compounds are present as additional ingredients. Their presence alone does not establish a whole-plant manufacturing history.[9]
Flavor can describe the extract's character, but it is not an assay of purity, terpene concentration, or effectiveness. Consider the ingredient list, manufacturing information, and appropriate testing alongside your preferences.
No. Actual THC intake, delivery format, individual sensitivity, and other factors matter. A ratio should always be read alongside the quantities in a serving.
We have not established a universal cycling schedule. Christopher's observations support paying attention and reassessing a routine; they do not show that everyone benefits from the same duration or break.
Continue exploring: Compare THS products · Read laboratory reports · Learn about THS.