What's new

26% kavalactones!?

ThePiper

Kava Lover
Is anyone familiar with the lab? It seems legit but maybe it's a clerical error? I could be wrong but I don't get the impression that the owner is fudging the numbers on purpose. FWIW they said they could provide test reports for the other strains and that it's all noble.
 

AlohaAimee

Kava Enthusiast
I don't think there's any deception involved here either, just perhaps a slight mistake? Still seems like a good kava though!
 

verticity

I'm interested in things
Is anyone familiar with the lab? It seems legit but maybe it's a clerical error? I could be wrong but I don't get the impression that the owner is fudging the numbers on purpose. FWIW they said they could provide test reports for the other strains and that it's all noble.
USP is a legitimate university with a lab in Fiji..
I guess it's possible it's an honest mistake. Maybe the numbers are supposed to be scaled by calibration factors or something before adding up? But it is pretty clear that there is something amiss. If I paid for a test like that from a lab and received inconsistent results like that I would surely follow up with them and ask them to either redo it or explain to me why it is supposed to be like that..

I'd also like to see the KL breakdown and chemotype from the other lab in Utah that they used..
 

Groggy

Kava aficionado
Admin
The test date on each document is also different, the one claiming 27.98%, was done by Advanced Laboratories on 1.9.19, The one showing the chemotype is dated 2.5.18 and that was done by the University.
 

verticity

I'm interested in things
The test date on each document is also different, the one claiming 27.98%, was done by Advanced Laboratories on 1.9.19, The one showing the chemotype is dated 2.5.18 and that was done by the University.
The dates don't really concern me, considering that the import process probably takes time.. But I am back to being extremely skeptical of the super high KL claims.
 

kasa_balavu

Yaqona Dina
So it was a typo all along. 6.3% seems about right for a blend of average quality from Fiji.

And yes IAS at USP is a legit lab. USP is a university owned by (and with campuses in) 12 Pacific Island countries.
 
Last edited:

_byron

Kava Enthusiast
So it was a typo all along. 6.3% seems about right for a blend of average quality from Fiji.

And yes IAS at USP is a legit lab. USP is a university owned by (and with campuses in) 12 Pacific Island countries.
I am not trying to start an argument here,as I know you are probably way more versed in Kava then I am. But I have had my fair share of Fijian kava's, to say for certain this is something special.

I have had kavatime Dokobana Vula (A single cultivar limited release), and all of the other kavatime fijian blends, Squnach, KWk loa and vula etc.

I am a big time fan of Fijian waka's. Again idk about 26% kavalactones but this kava is something way different then run of the mill Fijian blend.
 

ThePiper

Kava Lover
I'm having her send me the other lab tests. First female kava vendor I have met! lol. It's kinda funny how kava is predominately a men's hobby both in the Pacific and the west. Ill post the other strains chemotypes and nobility tests here if anyone is curious. I ordered the variety pack so i could try this crazy kava without spending an insane price tag. The other kavas are normal prices. (it definitely looks nice as OP showed us)it's super cool that they have a kava vending machine though.
 

Groggy

Kava aficionado
Admin
I am not trying to start an argument here,as I know you are probably way more versed in Kava then I am. But I have had my fair share of Fijian kava's, to say for certain this is something special.

I have had kavatime Dokobana Vula (A single cultivar limited release), and all of the other kavatime fijian blends, Squnach, KWk loa and vula etc.

I am a big time fan of Fijian waka's. Again idk about 26% kavalactones but this kava is something way different then run of the mill Fijian blend.
I am of the opinion that if it works for you it shouldn't matter what anyone else thinks. Enjoy it :)

The couple things that jump out at me and I see as a negative image for kava is;

1. The packaging, specifically calling it "Island Dope", "drug free", I can see where the marketing $$ went, I just don't like the word association. It would have been better if they called it Pure Kava or something, which I think is the name of their company.
2. Those results look shady to me, if it's a typo on the report, it would make sense this kava vendor would then fix the packing accordingly, no?
 

kasa_balavu

Yaqona Dina
I am not trying to start an argument here,as I know you are probably way more versed in Kava then I am. But I have had my fair share of Fijian kava's, to say for certain this is something special.
Hey I'm sorry if I came across as argumentative. I didn't intend that at all. I know a fair bit about the growing of kava and about the industry, but I certainly don't claim to be a kava connoisseur or more qualified than anyone else when it comes to drinking, experiencing or judging kava. This particular kava product might be an exceptional one. What I meant to say (but obviously poorly worded) was that I believe most Fijian kava 3-4 yrs old and devoid of kasa (peeled stems) would test at around 6-8% KL. I personally don't actually put much stock in KL% as being a good determinate of the quality of the experience one will get from that kava.
 

ThePiper

Kava Lover
Hey i dont get this one either. It says kavain is the left one in front based on the chemotype but Dmy is in the largest quantity.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

kasa_balavu

Yaqona Dina
Hey i do t get this one either. It says kavain is the left one in front based on the chemotype but Dmy is in the largest quantity.
This one that says Tongan Kava chemo is actually a correction of the 27% one we correctly surmised to be incorrect. See note 2 at the bottom:
Note 2 This report R1S2018/362S supersedes report no. RS2018/362S issued on 02/05/18. The kava lactone value has been corrected.

And you're right about the chemotype... it's just wrong. 123456? They either seriously messed up at IAS-USP, or someone doctored the results after they left the lab.

Did the vendor pass these results off as being for two different products?
 
Last edited:
Top