We hope you enjoyed the January episode of When Things Go Wrong, Sip Safely – Elevating Standards for Cannabis and Hemp Beverage Production. If you missed the webinar, you are in luck because you can view it here.
In this episode, CEO David Vaillencourt and moderator Bethany Moore of The GMP Collective is joined by guest speakers Diana Eberlein, Chair of the Coalition for Adult Beverage Alternatives (CABA), and Ben Larson, CEO of cannabis and hemp infusion technology company Vertosa.
In this episode, we explore the unique challenges beverage manufacturers face in the cannabis and hemp industries—from navigating complex regulations to maintaining exceptional product quality.
We are grateful to see the webinar was summarized by Cannabis Science & Technology in an article on their website.
And thanks to our engaged audience of over 240 registrations, we received numerous audience questions during the webinar and have compiled answers below.
Disclaimer: The answers provided reflect the perspectives of the panelists or their organization, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The GMP Collective.
[Ben Larson, Vertosa] Most brands are bootstrapping their launches to build traction and demonstrate market demand. Given the relatively low barrier to entry and the influx of new brands in the space, venture capital firms have become more selective, often imposing strict prerequisites before considering an investment.
For those without the personal funds to self-finance, the best approach is to develop a comprehensive strategy, create a compelling brand presence, and make the concept feel as real as possible. Many early-stage brands secure initial funding from friends and family or angel investors to cover the costs of launching and proving product-market fit before seeking larger investments.
[Ben Larson, Vertosa] High-quality manufacturing and assurance are essential for building trust with distributors, retailers, and regulators. In an emerging category like hemp THC beverages, establishing strong quality control measures from the start is crucial, as trust can be fragile and difficult to rebuild once compromised.
Streamlining and standardizing quality production not only ensures product consistency and safety but also accelerates regulatory approvals and market acceptance. A single adverse event can hinder industry growth, delay adoption, and increase scrutiny from regulators. By prioritizing rigorous quality control and reliable production processes, brands can enhance consumer confidence, expand market availability, and contribute to the category’s long-term success.
[Ben Larson, Vertosa] Hemp THC-infused beverages introduce a unique layer of complexity to traditional beverage production, requiring more precise formulation, stability, and consistency to ensure a reliable consumer experience. Recognizing this, Vertosa has been actively developing and publishing best practices for manufacturing high-quality products that consistently deliver on their intended effects.
We are excited to collaborate with organizations like The GMP Collective, S3, and ASTM to establish clear guidance on enhancing GMP standards for this category.
[David Vaillencourt, The GMP Collective] Producing of hemp THC-infused beverages demands a level of precision and control beyond that of traditional beverage manufacturing. Achieving consistency in cannabinoid dosing, ensuring product stability over time, and maintaining rigorous safety and compliance standards all hinge on well-designed Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs).
At The GMP Collective, we emphasize that GMP is more than just a regulatory checkbox—it’s the foundation for product integrity, consumer trust, and long-term business success. As the industry evolves, there’s a pressing need to refine and adapt GMPs to account for the complexities of emulsification, cannabinoid bioavailability, microbial controls, and shelf-life stability in infused beverages.
To truly “better” the current GMP framework, manufacturers must integrate quality by design into their entire production process. This includes:
For those looking to get started, there are numerous resources, one being ASTM’s Standard Practice for GMPs for Cannabis Products, D8557, which any manufacturer can use to get started on implementing the basic principles of GMP.
[Ben Larson, Vertosa] The most critical factors to test include:
[Diana Eberlein, CABA]
What are your thoughts on testing the end of the batch?
[David Vaillencourt, The GMP Collective] Final product testing is a critical step in ensuring that cannabis beverages are safe, accurately dosed, and compliant with regulatory requirements. However, relying solely on a final test result can create a false sense of security. There’s a long-standing principle in quality: “You can’t test quality into a product—it must be built into the process.”
From raw material selection to formulation, equipment sanitation, and employee training, every stage of production impacts the integrity of the final product. A passing test result is only as reliable as the controls put in place upstream. Without a robust quality system, inconsistencies in ingredient homogeneity, processing methods, or packaging often lead to batch-to-batch variability—potentially resulting in compliance failures, recalls, and worse – consumer safety risks.
Equally important is the sampling process. If the sample submitted for testing isn’t truly representative of the batch, the results may not reflect the actual product consumers receive. This is why Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs) are essential—not just for passing compliance tests but for consistently delivering safe, high-quality products.
[Diana Eberlein, CABA] The growth is due to a combination of the beverage form factor, a familiar and discreet method of consumption, but also the accessibility to the adult beverage consumer through traditional retail channels where the category’s target consumer routinely shops. A majority of the new and developing consumer-base for low-dose THC beverages are not existing cannabis consumers and not shopping at dispensaries.
[Diana Eberlein, CABA] Currently the Farm Bill still has ban language and many legislators on the Hill feel that they were duped by the “rope not dope”, since they did not mean to legalize intoxicating cannabinoids from hemp with the 2018 Farm Bill. That said, there’s a lot of education happening and, as a category, we are coming to the table with suggested regulation that protects the consumer while creating a pathway to market, leveraging an effective and existing infrastructure for adult beverages that is trusted by legislators and regulators. Our proposed solutions have been well-received, but for us to achieve our goal of removing that ban language from the Farm Bill we will have to remain vigilant on continuing our education. In the last year, we’ve received a significant amount of support from the alcohol industry, particularly adult beverage retailers and distributors. With that additional support and states drafting and implementing legislation to effectively regulate and tax intoxicating hemp products, we continue to be cautiously optimistic that we will be successful in preventing the ban language from remaining in the approved 2025 Farm Bill.
[Ben Larson, Vertosa] CBD and intoxicating hemp THC beverages have evolved into two distinct categories. CBD drinks have faced significant challenges, primarily due to unclear regulatory guidance from the FDA, which has slowed retailer and distributor adoption. Additionally, the category struggled with inconsistent branding and a lack of a strong consumer value proposition—unlike intoxicating THC beverages, which are often positioned as alcohol alternatives.
Despite these challenges, some brands have continued to find success in the non-intoxicating space. Companies like Daytrip and Zentopia have maintained growth, demonstrating that there is still demand for functional, wellness-oriented beverages.
On the THC side, brands are increasingly incorporating non-intoxicating cannabinoids—such as CBD, CBG, and CBN—to create more nuanced effects, like relaxation, focus, or sleep support. While these cannabinoids enhance the overall experience, it is THC that truly defines the category and drives consumer demand. The success of hemp THC beverages stems from their ability to provide a reliable, predictable effect, making them a compelling alternative to alcohol and a growing segment in the functional beverage market.
[Ben Larson, Vertosa] I believe the current regulatory environment is pushing policymakers toward cannabinoid-specific regulations, which is the most logical approach. Lumping hundreds of individual compounds into two distinct but separate regulatory categories has never made sense, but we’re starting to see early signs of change. For example, Minnesota and a number of other markets have implemented a bifurcated model where low-dose hemp, medical cannabis, and/or regulated cannabis coexist. In Minnesota specifically, they all fall under the same governing body. This type of framework acknowledges the nuances between products while providing a more cohesive regulatory structure.
As the industry matures and consumer adoption grows, I expect more stakeholders – especially ones with deeper pockets – to recognize the inefficiencies of the current system. The idea of an entire consumer category built on extracting THC from hemp instead of cannabis is not sustainable in the long run. Common sense, or capitalism, will eventually take hold..
Adding another layer to the conversation, THC is now being derived from non-cannabis sources, further complicating the debate. If cannabinoids can be produced outside of both hemp and marijuana, it challenges the very foundation of source-based regulation and forces the industry to rethink its approach entirely. Over time, I anticipate a more rational and unified regulatory structure based on science, safety, and consumer demand rather than arbitrary plant classifications.
One would think that if most is swallowed, the duration should be longer. Any insights as to why this isn’t the case? Have you all done any studies to test this, or are these anecdotal reports from current users? I’ve yet to see any peer-reviewed journals that have looked at the PK of cannabis beverage.
[Diana Eberlein, CABA] The leading emulsion providers have PK studies that confirm the rapid and consistent onset (please contact Vertosa and SoRSE Technology to see their individual PK studies).
[Ben Larson, Vertosa] This is a complex conversation. Pharmacokinetics (PK) examines how compounds move through the bloodstream, while pharmacodynamics (PD) looks at their physiological effects—and while the two are correlated, they are not always directly aligned.
At Vertosa, we have conducted multiple PK and PD studies, and we continue to research how different infusion methods impact absorption and effects. Our PK data has shown rapid absorption of Delta-9 THC, with peak blood concentration typically occurring within 5-10 minutes. This indicates both sublingual and digestive tract absorption are at play.
Interestingly, our studies also show that 11-OH-THC (the first-pass liver metabolite of THC) peaks just shy of an hour. This suggests that some of the THC is metabolized in the liver immediately (first-pass metabolism), while some may enter circulation first and get metabolized in subsequent passes as blood recirculates through the liver (approximately every 7 minutes).
[Ben Larson, Vertosa] Low-dose beverages tend to have a quicker onset and shorter duration because the body has a limited ability to process and absorb THC at once. The lower the dose, the more quickly the system clears it.
Higher doses lead to larger and longer-lasting concentration curves, meaning the effects persist for a longer duration. This aligns with our PD findings—while THC blood concentration correlates with perceptible intoxication, the “high” threshold is unique to each individual. As long as their THC blood concentration remains above their personal perception threshold, they will continue to feel intoxicated.
Think of it like alcohol metabolism. If you take one shot of tequila or drink a single beer, you may feel slightly buzzed for about an hour before the effects wear off. If you consume six shots in quick succession, however, the alcohol lingers in your system much longer, and the effects persist.
This is why organizations like the DMV publish blood alcohol concentration (BAC) charts, correlating alcohol intake with body weight to estimate intoxication duration. Similarly, with THC, the more cannabinoids you consume, the longer it takes the body to clear them, and the longer the effects last.
As you noted, peer-reviewed studies specifically examining the PK of cannabis beverages remain limited. While our research and findings are based on controlled, IRB-approved studies, consumer data, and peer-reviewed articles will help to further inform the discussion
[Diana Eberlein, CABA] The top emulsion providers in the space have minimal flavor impact and can easily be masked in no & low sugar beverage formats. Additional weighting may be necessary to achieve homogeneity and even-dosing depending on the base of the beverage (juice, for example) and emulsions typically aren’t as stable in dairy-based beverages. That said, the emulsion technologies available can support a wide range of beverage formats.
[Ben Larson, Vertosa] While cannabis and hemp beverages introduce unique challenges related to cannabinoid stability, emulsification, and regulatory compliance, fermentation control follows the same industry best practices used for conventional beverages. Adhering to these controls ensures product quality, safety, and consistency across batches.
[Ben Larson, Vertosa] Again, this is a traditional beverage manufacturing question, by which someone should be working with a GMP expert. 🙂
[Diana Eberlein, CABA] Yes, it is, but whether or not the consumer demand is there for that beverage (depends on positioning and intended use, etc.) is debatable based on the CBD beverage market.
[Ben Larson, Vertosa] Carbonated beverages are by for the dominant application in the sector; however, there are a number of successful non-carbonated products in the market. As we talk to various distributors and retailers, they are on the lookout for unique products to fill out their offering.
[Diana Eberlein, CABA] (Note: I know they asked Ben’s opinion, but if you want to include mine….)
New innovation could benefit other categories, from medical applications to solving for more accurate and consistent experiences for edibles, for example. When it comes to beverage, however, I believe innovation will and should always be in progress, but I believe that we need to ask ourselves “just because we can, does it mean we should?” What solutions benefit the consumer? What do consumers want? If we did adopt even faster-acting solutions, how does that impact the regulations to protect the consumer?
We represent intoxicating beverages that provide a familiar experience to the sessionability of alcohol, which is partially what makes our category so approachable to our target demographic. At the same time, the consumer is still learning the basics of THC beverages and providing a consistent and repeatable experience is essential in building trust. Offering products, at this early stage, that vary in experience could create consumer confusion and adverse effects. Innovation will happen, but, as an industry, we have to be cognizant of what the consumer is ready and willing to accept.
[Ben Larson, Vertosa] I’d echo what Diana has said above. Innovation is always important and something we actively seek out. However, introducing new technologies in a developing market comes with unique challenges. While certain advancements may offer higher bioavailability and improved performance, we must also consider regulatory responsibility, consumer expectations, and real-world product feasibility.
One key question is: Are we amplifying the effects of THC beyond what is responsible? Beverages already have a reputation for hitting harder and faster than traditional edibles, so increasing bioavailability even further raises concerns around predictability, safety, and regulatory oversight.
Here are some key considerations for adopting new technologies:
Flavor Profile – The first test for any new infusion technology is taste. We’ve encountered technologies that were clear and visually appealing but introduced bitterness and long onset times, making them commercially unviable.
Onset & Offset Dynamics – Consumers expect a rapid onset and predictable offset. We’ve tested glycosylated cannabinoids, for example, that provided clarity in solution but had a delayed onset, making them impractical for commercial use.
Manufacturability & Stability – A technology isn’t viable if it can’t be consistently produced at scale. It must work across various packaging types, withstand different heat treatments, storage conditions, and maintain stability over time. Shelf-life validation takes extensive testing in varying environments, and many promising technologies fall short when exposed to real-world manufacturing demands.
Clean Labeling & Consumer Trust – As we build a mainstream product category for the future, clean-label formulations are essential. Many microemulsions we’ve evaluated rely on synthetic emulsifiers that could be seen as undesirable by health-conscious consumers. At Vertosa, we prioritize organic-certified ingredients in our core products, aligning with consumer expectations for transparency and quality.
Innovation is critical for progress, but it must align with consumer needs, regulatory realities, and manufacturability. While new emulsification technologies may offer advantages, they must be evaluated holistically—not just for bioavailability but also for taste, safety, stability, and ingredient integrity.
[Ben Larson, Vertosa] PEG is approved for use in food and pharmaceuticals and is considered safe in both the US and EU, though its desirability is debated. While we have tested formulations with PEG in the past, demand has been very low due to its bitter flavor profile despite its rapid onset, and most customers prefer neutral-tasting, organic emulsifiers.
