Oklahoma lawmakers spent Tuesday morning at the state Capitol digging into whether the medical marijuana industry's testing labs can actually be trusted, hearing from patients, business owners and regulators who described a system riddled with inconsistency. Rep. Jacob Rosecrants, a Democrat from Norman, hosted the interim study after saying he and patients had become sick after using marijuana products.
A System Built on About a Dozen Labs
Oklahoma currently relies on roughly a dozen independent laboratories to confirm that marijuana products meet safety and quality standards before they reach patients, according to Oklahoma Voice. State law requires those labs to test samples from every final harvest or production batch across seven categories, including pesticides, potency, terpenes and heavy metals, as reported by Oklahoma Watch. Every legal medical marijuana product sold in the state must pass through one of these licensed labs before it ever reaches a dispensary shelf, the outlet notes.
Despite that requirement, the Oklahoma Medical Marijuana Authority has taken 29 enforcement actions against independent testing laboratories since the program began, per the same Oklahoma Watch report. Marion McNabb, a cannabis and policy researcher, told lawmakers that laboratory shopping — where businesses seek out labs likely to deliver favorable results — remains central to the problem. “Lab shopping is exactly the core of the problem,” McNabb has said, according to Oklahoma Watch's reporting.
Patients and Business Owners Voice Distrust
McNabb told the interim study that roughly 30% of surveyed Oklahoma medical marijuana patients distrust laboratory testing accuracy to some degree, citing a recent report. Surveyed marijuana business owners separately reported insufficient transparency and communication about testing requirements, along with concerns about potentially unreliable results, McNabb said.
Rosecrants said his constituents have questioned why it has taken so long to fully launch the agency's own quality assurance lab. Per Barrett Brown, the Oklahoma Medical Marijuana Authority's quality assurance laboratory is operational but still awaiting accreditation for certain testing capabilities. Oklahoma Watch's reporting fills in more detail: the lab, authorized under Senate Bill 813 in 2023, is currently accredited to test potency in flower, oil and concentrates, and pesticides in flower, but is still seeking accreditation in other categories. The lab is intended to add independent testing capability that regulates licensed testing facilities themselves, reducing the industry's reliance on third-party data, according to the Oklahoma Medical Marijuana Authority.
Proposals on the Table
Interim study participants — including medical marijuana patients, industry advocates, laboratory testing businesses and the state regulatory agency — floated more than a dozen potential additional regulations during Tuesday's hearing. Among the ideas discussed were aligning Oklahoma's testing criteria with existing national standards and testing for families of compounds rather than listing every individual harmful pesticide in state law, per Oklahoma Voice's account of the study.
Rosecrants said further regulation should expand testing labs' ability to detect pesticides and other hazardous substances through new technology and approved methods. He also said the priorities discussed could potentially be pursued through administrative rules rather than new legislation, and argued Oklahoma should prepare for a possible federal change in marijuana's drug classification.
The state has already moved to tighten pesticide screening once this year: Oklahoma now requires labs to screen for 28 pesticide analytes, up from 13 before March 1, Oklahoma Watch reported. House Bill 3013 would have required testing for specified pesticide analytes.
A National Problem, Not Just an Oklahoma One
Gillian Schauer, executive director of the Cannabis Regulators Association, told the study that Oklahoma's testing model — checking products only at the end of production — leaves little room for catching problems earlier. “Testing ends up being the only marker of whether or not something is safe,” Schauer said, warning that labs and licensees face pressures that can incentivize falsification or finding ways to push products through testing regardless of results. A failed test, Schauer noted, can mean the loss of high quantities of product, raising the financial stakes for every sample submitted.
Lab-to-lab variation has been a persistent issue nationally, and Oklahoma previously passed House Bill 4056 in 2022 directing the Oklahoma Medical Marijuana Authority to work with labs on improved testing regulations and techniques, according to the agency's own laboratory standardization guidance. Other states have taken different approaches to contaminant testing: California requires cannabis products to be tested for 68 pesticides, four inorganic compounds, 20 solvents, six microbes and five mycotoxins, according to a study published on pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.
Not Everyone Wants More Rules Right Now
Not every lawmaker at the hearing was eager to add new layers of oversight. Rep. T.J. Marti, a Republican who represents Broken Arrow and chairs the House Alcohol, Tobacco and Controlled Substances Committee, said Oklahoma should pause further regulation of its medical marijuana industry to let recently passed laws take effect first.
Marti said the industry itself should jointly identify its needs, since the proposed solutions floated by different stakeholders often conflict with one another. He estimated that any set of issues lawmakers might eventually take up would likely draw at least 50% opposition.
Oklahoma voters legalized medical marijuana in 2018, and lawmakers have passed cannabis-related laws retroactively ever since, continually adjusting the regulatory framework as the market has grown. By July 1, Oklahoma had 1,885 licensed growers, 1,346 dispensaries, 614 processors and 13 licensed laboratories serving more than 308,000 patients, according to boofdujour.com. Whether Tuesday's discussion translates into new statutes, administrative rules, or nothing at all remains an open question for the Legislature to sort out in the months ahead.
