Metro Meds

It recently became evident on Facebook that Metro Meds is buying and selling marijuana from growers contaminated with mold and bugs from posts by a previous packager who alleges she was fired for being pregnant.

Though the original post no longer exists, screenshots have been captured that show the VERY moldy marijuana in question, which is so dense it looks like the grower tried and failed to remedy the mold issue with PGRs. It also shows a bug in the bowl used for packaging marijuana that gets sold at a premium to sick patients. The OP says she tried to put the contaminated bud aside, "but they still sent it out," and she was told not to tell others about this issue.

How did the dispensary respond on Google and Instagram? As seen in my posted images, they said on Instagram, "Those pictures were posted by a disgruntled ex employee who wasn’t fired, but walked out. In fact, her husband is still employed with us. She was a packager and her job was to sort through flower, package it, and inspect it for contamination. On the very rare occasion flower we purchased was contaminated it was immediately sent back to the grow we purchased it from. Flower in this condition has never made it to our sales floor to be sold to patients. At Metro Meds, our number one priority is our patients health and happiness. We would never risk our reputation just to sell contaminated product."

So, in effect they admit they sometimes purchase flower from contaminated grows and cherry pick the bud that isn't visibly moldy and ask for your hard-earned dollars in exchange. Why do you have people at the dispensary inspecting the flower you buy for contamination? If you were truly buying flower from an ethical grower that's clean and tests and inspects their bud, you wouldn't need someone to inspect it because you would already know it's clean and has been properly inspected beforehand at the grow. But I guess y'all are trying to save some money and are buying flower from contaminated grows and inspecting it yourself to try and pick out the mold and bugs. They said the flower described never made it to the sales floor, which is contrary to what the OP said, and even if it never did reach the sales floor, was it just this nug that was given back to the grower out or was it all of the flower you bought from them like it should have been?


None of this should come as a surprise, since the leadership at Metro Meds has never been keen to following ethics or the law. Dispensary directors Anthony Yousif and Ronnie Kassab operate a 7-day auto insurance business in Michigan named L.A. Insurance, which was recently fined over $55,000 by the state for deceptive business practices where they would charge customers for roadside assistance packages without informing them. If these two executives are unethically scamming families out of their money in Michigan, I can't even imagine what's going on with their largely unregulated Arizona dispensary business. This is the second dispensary I've found now whose owner/executives were fined for highly unethical business practices. These clowns applied for a dispensary permit in Ohio, let's hope that state has more sense than AZ and looks into the businessmen's poor history before handing out a license.

They said they wouldn't risk their reputation just to sell contaminated product, but in Michigan they risked their insurance business's reputation by scamming customers and getting caught for it. If they did it there, why wouldn't they do it here when there's no regulations regarding the quality of bud they sell.

It's absolutely disgusting that this bud would even be in the Metro Meds building in the first place, regardless of who is right on whether or not it's being sold to patients. But since their leadership is has proven to be untrustworthy, I have no hard time whatsoever believing it was sold to sick patients. When it comes time to put your head on your pillow at night how can you all sleep at all knowing there's a good chance you've worsened the condition of cancer patients at their own expense buying flower from contaminated grows and completely downplaying the severity of your practices. Truly abhorrent.

Y'all also said you are trying to do the right thing. If that's true, here's how you can partially help fix your reputation:
1) You stated the contaminated flower was sent back to the grow. If this is true, Arizona Administrative Code Title 9, Chapter 17, Article 3, Section R9-17-318, Subsections C-F requires that you have documentation (including the description) of the marijuana being transported from Metro Meds back to the grower. The community would like to see this document as proof to the fact that the marijuana in question was transported back to the grower as you stated.
2) Providing the name of the grower of the contaminated flower in question, along with reasonable proof that you no longer purchase flower from this grower.
3) Providing details on how much contaminated flower from this batch was sent back to the grower, along with comprehensive test results for the specific batch of flower in question (if patient health is truly your top priority, I would expect every batch of flower you purchase to be tested).
4) Any legitimate medical dispensary that practices responsibly would already have all this documentation and would gladly provide it to assist in repairing their reputation and seeking the truth, but something tells me I won't see a since piece of tangible evidence.

Sources:

Article on L.A. Insurance Practices: https://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20170507/news/170509850/state-targets-la-insurance-for-deceptive-business-practices

Document on L.A. Insurance Fines: https://www.michigan.gov/documents/difs/LA_Ins_Kassab_Gardon_15-12463_15-12464_616643_7.pdf

Document on Ohio Dispensary Application: https://medicalmarijuana.ohio.gov/Documents/DispensaryApplications/Northwest%203/REYNOLDS%20HOLDINGS,%20LLC%20-%20Application%20ID-943.pdf

AZ Administrative Code Title 9 Chapter 17: https://apps.azsos.gov/public_services/title_09/9-17.pdf

Copyright Disclaimer

In accordance with section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research.
The information on this site is available, without profit to those who wish to read and/or share the information found on this blog site for research and educational purposes.


Powered by 100% green energy in Reykjavík