Quote Originally Posted by Burnt Toast
Even so, this doesnt necessarily bolster the articles credibility. Frankly, their conclusion on their experiment exhibits a few holes. If zinc were ingested, the test subjects would have to ingest some fluids with the zinc. Its a pretty safe bet that these test subjects did not ingest zinc "dry" and without any fluids to follow. With this being noted, it becomes a question mark as to whether zinc was actually responsible for these tests being ruled a negative.

For any scientific experiment to have any validity, you can only change one variable. In that experiment, there are two variables obviously involved and these experimenters are attempting to change the two varibles: the amount of zinc being ingested and the amount of fluids consumed with the zinc. Never mind that there was no baseline established for the pot-using test subjects before the experimenters had attempted to change the two variables.
You cannot change two variables.

So that begs the $64,000.00 question: Did the zinc actually performed its interfering duties, or did the chaser fluids had succeeded to dilute the THCA concentration in the bladder to the point where the urine sample registered a negative on the Immunoassay?
I guess the apparent lack of peer review speaks volumes. I moderate a small hobby forum. Reading your very consistent posts, I must say that I am impressed. I admire people who make it their business to help others. To paraphrase a few of your posts, 'testing is serious business, family income, and livelihood is a stake.'