MESO-Rx Sponsor Primal Pharma - US Domestic

[SwolieGuacamole]

Maybe I’m just not smart enough in this department, but I’ve been trying to wrap my head around this. If Primal actually has legit Test C raw, sends it for purity testing and gets something like 95 percent, then brews a batch and that batch tests at, say, 253 mg/ml… that means the formula was correct, the math was right, and the brew was done properly. So far so good.

But then customers send in their own vials from that same batch and the numbers suddenly come back at 220 mg/ml instead of 250+. Where does that gap even come from? Is it the formula? Brewer inconsistency? Different raw? Equipment? Cosmic radiation? Avocado’s bad aura? I’m genuinely trying to understand how the same product can swing that much.

If this was already explained somewhere, point me in the right direction. I’m asking to learn, not to throw shade.

This is what @readalot and I were talking about. The standard variance is 1-2%. I mentioned that whatever jano seee as his norm/baseline. That number should be applicable against all UGL.

So it’s likely something else. You shouldn’t be seeing a 10%+ variance in the same batch.

 

[Photon]

Maybe I’m just not smart enough in this department, but I’ve been trying to wrap my head around this. If Primal actually has legit Test C raw, sends it for purity testing and gets something like 95 percent, then brews a batch and that batch tests at, say, 253 mg/ml… that means the formula was correct, the math was right, and the brew was done properly. So far so good.

But then customers send in their own vials from that same batch and the numbers suddenly come back at 220 mg/ml instead of 250+. Where does that gap even come from? Is it the formula? Brewer inconsistency? Different raw? Equipment? Cosmic radiation? Avocado’s bad aura? I’m genuinely trying to understand how the same product can swing that much.

If this was already explained somewhere, point me in the right direction. I’m asking to learn, not to throw shade.

It's due to bad feng shui.
Evil spirits begone!!

 

[MisterT]

@Primal_Pharma How does your Bloodwork testing reimbursement work? Going to get labs pulled since switching to your Test E back in Sept.

I assume you're not going to cover the whole Mens Panel I got and just the portion for Total T and Free? The whole Panel from GL was like $200 and then for some reason the only thing that panel doesn't have is IGF so I added that for $27, than you got the $12 lab fee.

Just wondering how one would estimate the test cost and request reimbursement. I was running 50mg EOD for the first little bit but the last 6 weeks I have been on 75mg EOD. Very shortly will be going to 75mg ED for my first Cycle just wanted to make sure all my values were solid out of this cut.

Haven't been under 10% bf since I played Highschool Football haha <3 But now I am too skinny for my height. Dexa had me at 8.9% @ 190lb 6'3

 

[Earthworm Jim]

Maybe I’m just not smart enough in this department, but I’ve been trying to wrap my head around this. If Primal actually has legit Test C raw, sends it for purity testing and gets something like 95 percent, then brews a batch and that batch tests at, say, 253 mg/ml… that means the formula was correct, the math was right, and the brew was done properly. So far so good.

But then customers send in their own vials from that same batch and the numbers suddenly come back at 220 mg/ml instead of 250+. Where does that gap even come from? Is it the formula? Brewer inconsistency? Different raw? Equipment? Cosmic radiation? Avocado’s bad aura? I’m genuinely trying to understand how the same product can swing that much.

If this was already explained somewhere, point me in the right direction. I’m asking to learn, not to throw shade.

I think readalots leading theory is the type of flask primal is using. He recommends something called a volumetric flask for its accuracy. Or something along those lines

 

[crispybacon!]

I think readalots leading theory is the type of flask primal is using. He recommends something called a volumetric flask for its accuracy. Or something along those lines

That might lead to better batch accuracy, but has nothing to do with sample to sample variance within the same batch.

 

[k710]

@Primal_Pharma How does your Bloodwork testing reimbursement work? Going to get labs pulled since switching to your Test E back in Sept.

I assume you're not going to cover the whole Mens Panel I got and just the portion for Total T and Free? The whole Panel from GL was like $200 and then for some reason the only thing that panel doesn't have is IGF so I added that for $27, than you got the $12 lab fee.

Just wondering how one would estimate the test cost and request reimbursement. I was running 50mg EOD for the first little bit but the last 6 weeks I have been on 75mg EOD. Very shortly will be going to 75mg ED for my first Cycle just wanted to make sure all my values were solid out of this cut.

Haven't been under 10% bf since I played Highschool Football haha <3 But now I am too skinny for my height. Dexa had me at 8.9% @ 190lb 6'3

EDIT: From my search looks like you will reimburse $150 for uncapped?

I didnt even know this was a thing lol I just thought you got some store credit for posting bloodwork. I posted mine a few days ago but I didnt want to ask about it while the blackfriday sale was going on lol

Would be hard to reimburse just free test or total test alone if you ran a full panel. (imo)

 

[Primal_Pharma]

That might lead to better batch accuracy, but has nothing to do with sample to sample variance within the same batch.

I don’t think some of you guys understand how batches actually work. When someone brings up using a volumetric flask, that absolutely does impact vial to vial variance. The total accuracy of the batch starts with how precisely the final volume is measured. A calibrated volumetric flask gives you an exact volume instead of 'close enough' and that locks in the correct mg/mL for the entire batch.

Once the batch is fully mixed and uniform, every vial you pull should be the same because it’s all coming from the same solution. If the total volume is off even slightly, the concentration is already wrong before you ever start filling vials, and that’s where inconsistencies appear.

So yeah, better volumetric accuracy does lead to better sample consistency. They’re directly connected brothers!

 

[Crx221]

@Primal_Pharma How does your Bloodwork testing reimbursement work? Going to get labs pulled since switching to your Test E back in Sept.

I assume you're not going to cover the whole Mens Panel I got and just the portion for Total T and Free? The whole Panel from GL was like $200 and then for some reason the only thing that panel doesn't have is IGF so I added that for $27, than you got the $12 lab fee.

Just wondering how one would estimate the test cost and request reimbursement. I was running 50mg EOD for the first little bit but the last 6 weeks I have been on 75mg EOD. Very shortly will be going to 75mg ED for my first Cycle just wanted to make sure all my values were solid out of this cut.

Haven't been under 10% bf since I played Highschool Football haha <3 But now I am too skinny for my height. Dexa had me at 8.9% @ 190lb 6'3

He actually gave me a store credit when I sent him my labs. I wasn't expecting anything nor did I even think about it because it was covered entirely by insurance. I was just appreciative that it was dosed properly & just wanted to say thank you.

 

[TanFishMan]

I don’t think some of you guys understand how batches actually work. When someone brings up using a volumetric flask, that absolutely does impact vial to vial variance. The total accuracy of the batch starts with how precisely the final volume is measured. A calibrated volumetric flask gives you an exact volume instead of 'close enough' and that locks in the correct mg/mL for the entire batch.

Once the batch is fully mixed and uniform, every vial you pull should be the same because it’s all coming from the same solution. If the total volume is off even slightly, the concentration is already wrong before you ever start filling vials, and that’s where inconsistencies appear.

So yeah, better volumetric accuracy does lead to better sample consistency. They’re directly connected brothers!

Can you speak to how EQ has two different colors with the same batch number? Wouldn’t the dark be mixed with the light for a fully mixed uniform batch?

 

[Earthworm Jim]

That might lead to better batch accuracy, but has nothing to do with sample to sample variance within the same batch.

I think the point is his flask isn't up to the job for how big his batches are

 

[Earthworm Jim]

I don’t think some of you guys understand how batches actually work. When someone brings up using a volumetric flask, that absolutely does impact vial to vial variance. The total accuracy of the batch starts with how precisely the final volume is measured. A calibrated volumetric flask gives you an exact volume instead of 'close enough' and that locks in the correct mg/mL for the entire batch.

Once the batch is fully mixed and uniform, every vial you pull should be the same because it’s all coming from the same solution. If the total volume is off even slightly, the concentration is already wrong before you ever start filling vials, and that’s where inconsistencies appear.

So yeah, better volumetric accuracy does lead to better sample consistency. They’re directly connected brothers!

I'm not going to pretend I didn't fail chemistry

 

[The Answ3r]

I don’t think some of you guys understand how batches actually work. When someone brings up using a volumetric flask, that absolutely does impact vial to vial variance. The total accuracy of the batch starts with how precisely the final volume is measured. A calibrated volumetric flask gives you an exact volume instead of 'close enough' and that locks in the correct mg/mL for the entire batch.

Once the batch is fully mixed and uniform, every vial you pull should be the same because it’s all coming from the same solution. If the total volume is off even slightly, the concentration is already wrong before you ever start filling vials, and that’s where inconsistencies appear.

So yeah, better volumetric accuracy does lead to better sample consistency. They’re directly connected brothers!

Alright, let me make sure I’m understanding this right.
So basically, if the total volume of the batch is even a little off, then the mg/ml is already wrong before anyone even starts filling vials. And once that happens, every vial pulled from that batch will be off by the same amount.

And using a calibrated volumetric flask just makes that final volume way more accurate, which means the whole batch is more consistent from vial to vial.

Did I get that correctly, or am I missing something here?

 

[crispybacon!]

I don’t think some of you guys understand how batches actually work. When someone brings up using a volumetric flask, that absolutely does impact vial to vial variance. The total accuracy of the batch starts with how precisely the final volume is measured. A calibrated volumetric flask gives you an exact volume instead of 'close enough' and that locks in the correct mg/mL for the entire batch.

Once the batch is fully mixed and uniform, every vial you pull should be the same because it’s all coming from the same solution. If the total volume is off even slightly, the concentration is already wrong before you ever start filling vials, and that’s where inconsistencies appear.

So yeah, better volumetric accuracy does lead to better sample consistency. They’re directly connected brothers!

I’ll concede my ignorance, as I don’t brew. Given you’ve had some batch inconsistency, and volumetric flasks appear to address this, will you be investing in volumetric flasks? As a reliable and consistent finished product is what matters most to me.

 

[Primal_Pharma]

I’ll concede my ignorance, as I don’t brew. Given you’ve had some batch inconsistency, and volumetric flasks appear to address this, will you be investing in volumetric flasks? As a reliable and consistent finished product is what matters most to me.

Yes, absolutely.

We’re already moving that direction. The only reason volumetric flasks even came up is because someone who actually knows their shit took the time to break it down for us, sent links, and went out of their way to help. That’s the kind of critique I respect. Calling things out but also offering real solutions because they actually want to see us improve.

That’s a lot different from the guys who just sit on the sidelines, don’t buy a thing, will never buy a thing, and still linger just to talk shit.

 

[Elektrobot]

So maybe im not overdosing lol I was aiming for 200mg/week, but its an odd number of units on the syringe so theres always a tiny variance. I pin daily so was thinking maybe the extra points here and there bumped me from 200 to closer to 250, but no way am I pinning 300-350mg/week lol I was so confused because I didnt change anything aside from source and dumping compounds off my stack

I also used roid plotter when I first started, and my bloodwork came back way above what it calculated.

I used the "adjust levels" slider to make it match what my actual bloodwork showed on a certain dose, and mostly rely on the plotter to show me how long to plan for changes when using a certain ester.

 

[Musclemilk]

Just got bloods pulled this morning 24hr after pin 6 weeks into primals deca, test. 250/500 week and .5 arimidex twice weekly. Will post soon as I get them in will definitely want some feedback as first time I’ve ran deca and trying to be in right spot for estrogen

 

[Photon]

Once the batch is fully mixed and uniform, every vial you pull should be the same because it’s all coming from the same solution. If the total volume is off even slightly, the concentration is already wrong before you ever start filling vials, and that’s where inconsistencies appear.

Even if the concentration is incorrect, all vials should have the same incorrect mg/ml or (within a 2 percent variance) within the same batch. That's what people are asking about.

The reason for the discrepancy is because you are brewing multiple homogeneous solutions. (Multiple brews)

Sure, you can improve precision by using a better calibrated volumetric flask, but as long as it isn't a single homogeneous brew that you draw from, there exists the possibility of vial to vial variances.

Am I missing something?
@readalot

 

[newguy2]

Even if the concentration is incorrect, all vials should have the same incorrect mg/ml or (within a 2 percent variance) within the same batch. That's what people are asking about.

The reason for the discrepancy is because you are brewing multiple homogeneous solutions. (Multiple brews)

Sure, you can improve precision by using a better calibrated volumetric flask, but as long as it isn't a single homogeneous brew that you draw from, there exists the possibility of vial to vial variances.

Am I missing something?
@readalot

Thank you that didn't make sense to me either. If it's on batch, whether it's over or under that should remain constant through the whole thing.

Assuming it is a homogeneous solution.

I have no experience in chemistry and not pretending to. But this just seems like basic logic.

 

[Photon]

That’s a lot different from the guys who just sit on the sidelines, don’t buy a thing, will never buy a thing, and still linger just to talk shit.

Not sure if you're referring to me.
But you are free to tag me if you are. I did buy 2 batches of completely unusable contaminated TRE400 and paid for 2 rounds of testing for them.

I did not claim credit for the 2nd round of testing nor the unusable vials. I'd say I've spent enough at your shop.

 

[SwolieGuacamole]

Even if the concentration is incorrect, all vials should have the same incorrect mg/ml or (within a 2 percent variance) within the same batch. That's what people are asking about.

The reason for the discrepancy is because you are brewing multiple homogeneous solutions. (Multiple brews)

Sure, you can improve precision by using a better calibrated volumetric flask, but as long as it isn't a single homogeneous brew that you draw from, there exists the possibility of vial to vial variances.

Am I missing something?
@readalot

This is what I’m getting at.