The Sprayed Flower Problem: Why Europe’s Cannabis Retailers Need to Know What They’re Actually Selling

There is CBD flower. Low-THC hemp. HHC. THCP. “Infused” flower. “Enhanced” flower. Vapes carrying cannabinoid acronyms that barely existed in the consumer market a few years ago. Some products are clearly labelled. Others are sold using language that suggests conventional cannabis while saying very little about what is actually producing the effect.

That is where the problem begins.

For retailers, wholesalers and consumers, the important question is no longer simply whether a flower looks good, smells good or comes with a certificate showing its CBD and THC percentages.

The more important question may be: what happened to this flower after it was harvested?

Across Europe, authorities have documented low-THC cannabis and hemp being adulterated with synthetic cannabinoids. At the same time, a rapidly changing market for semi-synthetic cannabinoids has developed around compounds such as HHC and its successors.

These are not all the same substances, and it would be misleading to describe every infused cannabinoid as “Spice”. But they create one shared challenge for the cannabis trade: if something has been added to a product, the retailer and the consumer need to know exactly what it is.

A FLOWER CAN LOOK NATURAL AND STILL BE ALTERED

CBD and low-THC cannabis flower are useful carriers because the starting material already looks, smells and burns like cannabis.

A bag of treated hemp does not necessarily look like a chemical product. It still has buds, trichomes, terpenes and the familiar appearance of cannabis flower. If another cannabinoid is applied after harvest, there may be no obvious visual warning.

The European Union Drugs Agency has reported that potent synthetic cannabinoids can be used to adulterate low-THC cannabis and that products sold as cannabis may contain these substances. European monitoring has also identified synthetic cannabinoids in herbal material that appears consistent with low-THC hemp.

For somebody buying the product, that creates an obvious problem. Two buds can look almost identical while having very different pharmacological profiles.

THE INDUSTRY NEEDS TO STOP USING “SYNTHETIC” AS A CATCH-ALL WORD

CBD, THC, HHC, THCP and Spice-type synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists are not interchangeable terms.

Traditional synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists — substances historically associated with products sold as “Spice” — are laboratory-made compounds that activate cannabinoid receptors. Some have been associated with severe intoxication and can be active at very small doses.

Semi-synthetic cannabinoids are a different category. They are chemically modified cannabinoids related to naturally occurring compounds found in cannabis. HHC was the first of the recent wave to become widely recognised in Europe.

According to the European Union Drugs Agency, semi-synthetic cannabinoids began appearing on the European market in 2022. By the end of 2025, 40 semi-synthetic cannabinoids had been identified, illustrating how quickly the market has evolved.

Calling every infused product “Spice” is inaccurate. But assuming every semi-synthetic cannabinoid is harmless because it is related to a cannabis cannabinoid is equally unhelpful.

The chemistry matters. The dose matters. The manufacturing process matters. And the consumer needs to know what they are receiving.

THE HOT-SPOT PROBLEM SHOULD WORRY EVERY RETAILER

One of the biggest risks with sprayed herbal material is not visible on the packet.

It is distribution.

When a potent substance is applied to plant material, an inconsistent process can result in some parts carrying more active compound than others. European drug-monitoring authorities have specifically warned about areas of high concentration in synthetic-cannabinoid herbal products.

For the end user, this can make dose unpredictable. One bud may contain relatively little added material while another from the same batch contains substantially more.

Dose consistency is a basic product-quality issue.

If a supplier is selling “infused” flower, a retailer should be asking how the active substance was applied, how uniformity was established, whether the final finished product was tested and whether the analysis reflects the actual batch being sold.

A colourful package and a QR code do not answer those questions.

“LEGAL HIGH” IS NOT A SAFETY STANDARD

The market for new cannabinoids has often been driven by legal positioning.

A substance appears. It is marketed as a legal alternative to THC. It becomes commercially successful. Regulators begin examining it. Controls follow, and another compound appears.

That cycle is visible in Europe’s recent semi-synthetic cannabinoid market. HHC was placed under international control in December 2025, while other semi-synthetic cannabinoids had already appeared.

The mistake is to assume that a gap in legislation equals evidence of safety.

It does not.

Regulation frequently moves more slowly than chemistry. New cannabinoids may reach consumers before there is extensive information about their effects, metabolites, interactions or long-term risks.

For a retailer, “currently legal somewhere” should never be the full due-diligence process.

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THINGS GO WRONG?

The potential harms associated with Spice-type synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists are well documented.

The UK Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs has described reported effects including agitation, confusion, psychosis, seizures, loss of consciousness, respiratory depression and rapid heart rate, alongside more severe complications such as dangerous heart rhythms, cardiac arrest, stroke and acute kidney injury.

Deaths involving synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists have also been documented.

These substances should therefore not be casually discussed as though they are simply stronger versions of THC.

Europe has continued to encounter new synthetic cannabinoid risks. In September 2025, Czechia reported a poisoning outbreak associated with products containing MDMB-PINACA, with EU drug monitoring highlighting the incident in its 2026 reporting.

That is not an argument for panic. It is an argument for knowing what is in a product before it reaches somebody’s lungs.

THE HIGH STREET IS PART OF THIS STORY

This market is not confined to anonymous online vendors.

European monitoring has reported semi-synthetic cannabinoid products being sold online and, in some countries, through physical shops including vape stores and businesses selling low-THC cannabis and CBD products. The formats are familiar: flower, vapes and edibles.

Physical retail creates confidence.

Customers assume that if something is sold from a proper shop, packaged professionally and described using familiar cannabis terminology, somebody in the supply chain has checked it.

If the shop owner does not know precisely what is present, how can the person buying it make an informed choice?

A COA IS NOT A MAGIC SHIELD

Certificates of analysis have become standard language in the CBD trade.

That is positive — but the industry needs to understand what a certificate actually proves.

A cannabinoid panel showing CBD, CBDA, THC and THCA does not automatically prove that a product contains no other cannabinoid. It certainly does not prove that it has been comprehensively screened for every newly emerging synthetic or semi-synthetic compound.

A COA only tells you about the analytes and methods included in that analysis.

For an increasingly complex cannabinoid market, retailers should stop asking only, “Do you have a lab report?”

The better questions are:

What did the laboratory test for?

Was the finished product tested or only the original flower?

Does the batch number match?

Was the sample screened for unexpected compounds?

Can the supplier explain any ingredient added after harvest?

This is where laboratories and the cannabis industry need to evolve together.

TRACEABILITY SHOULD BE A COMMERCIAL ADVANTAGE

A retailer should know where flower came from, who handled it, what was added to it, which batch was tested and whether the finished product matches the analysis.

The same applies to wholesalers.

If a supplier offers extremely cheap flower with a surprisingly powerful “THC-like” effect but cannot clearly explain the chemistry behind that effect, that should not be treated as an exciting margin opportunity.

It should be treated as a due-diligence problem.

The legitimate cannabis industry has spent decades asking to be treated seriously. Serious industries know their supply chains.

THE REPUTATIONAL DAMAGE DOES NOT STOP WITH THE SELLER

For those of us working in the CBD sector, this issue is particularly frustrating.

CBD businesses have spent years trying to explain that cannabidiol is not simply another way of getting high. Then low-THC flower is used as a carrier for added intoxicating compounds and sold through the same types of retail channels.

When a consumer has a frightening experience, the chemical distinction may disappear.

They remember buying “CBD flower”. They remember seeing the word “hemp”. They remember buying it from a vape or cannabinoid shop.

That reputational damage spreads far beyond the company that sold the product.

At Originals CBD, this is why we believe legitimate CBD companies should speak openly about the issue rather than avoid it.

Being pro-cannabis does not require defending every product that can technically be connected to the cannabis plant.

A mature industry should be capable of saying that some practices are unacceptable.

THIS SHOULD NOT BECOME AN ANTI-CANNABIS ARGUMENT

Naturally occurring THC, CBD, authorised cannabinoid medicines, semi-synthetic cannabinoids and potent Spice-type synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists should not be discussed as though they are one substance.

A consumer knowingly choosing conventional cannabis is fundamentally different from a consumer unknowingly smoking flower treated with an undeclared chemical.

The issue is informed consent.

If the label says one thing and the chemistry says another, the market has failed.

That distinction matters for cannabis reform too. Poisonings involving poorly understood or mislabelled products can easily reinforce the idea that cannabinoid markets cannot operate responsibly.

The best response is not to minimise the risks. It is to show that responsible businesses can identify them and demand better standards.

RETAILERS ARE THE LAST GATEKEEPER

Responsibility does not stop with manufacturers.

The retailer is the final checkpoint before the consumer.

Putting a product on a shelf is effectively an endorsement that the business is comfortable selling it. That should mean more than believing a supplier’s marketing copy.

If a product is described as “infused”, ask what it is infused with.

If it creates a powerful psychoactive effect, ask which cannabinoid creates that effect.

If there is a COA, read it.

If the COA does not test for the substance supposedly responsible for the product’s effect, ask why.

If a supplier cannot answer basic questions, do not make the customer the test subject.

WHERE THE INDUSTRY GOES NEXT

Europe’s cannabinoid market will continue to change.

New compounds will appear. Some will disappear. Some will be controlled. Others may prove to have legitimate uses.

The answer is not to treat every new cannabinoid as inherently dangerous, nor is it to pretend that every product carrying the words “CBD”, “hemp” or “legal” is automatically safe.

The answer is transparency.

Retailers need better product knowledge. Wholesalers need traceable supply chains. Laboratories need testing strategies capable of identifying unexpected substances. Manufacturers need to disclose what is added after harvest. Consumers need enough information to make their own decisions.

At Originals CBD, we believe responsible businesses have an interest in raising this issue because the alternative is allowing the least responsible part of the market to define everybody else.

The cannabis industry has fought hard for credibility.

It should not give that credibility away for the sake of selling an unidentified chemical on a familiar-looking flower.

Before a retailer asks how much margin is in a product, there is a more important question to answer first:

Do you actually know what you are selling?

And before a consumer lights it, they deserve to know exactly what they are smoking.

SOURCE NOTES FOR EDITORIAL FACT-CHECKING

European Union Drugs Agency (EUDA), European Drug Report 2026 — cannabis and new psychoactive substances.

European Union Drugs Agency (EUDA), EU Drug Markets: New Psychoactive Substances — synthetic cannabinoids and semi-synthetic cannabinoids.

UK Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), Synthetic Cannabinoid Receptor Agonists report.

UK Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), Semi-synthetic cannabinoids related to tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol.