MESO-Rx Sponsor AASraw: GMP-Certified Steroid and Peptide API Manufacturer

[Cob]

you remind me of a child touched by mr prez and is mentally stuck at the age it happened.
You have no ability to learn, the test is more than just putting oil/raws into a machine and getting a number. There is variance, Homogeinity, and this gets a lot more complicated once you put it into oil.
I will explain it once, as clear as I can.

-read this paragraph, you barely literate swine-

Suddenly differentiating between oil and hormone gets easy, but differentiating between TrenE and a misshapen byproduct of synthesis that also happens to have an enanthate ester on it gets harder.
So the test shows stuff that might not be tren as tren when in oil, but corectly differentiates between tren and its misshapen cousin when in raw form.
this is how your method of: "I test the raws, i test the oil, and the oil is always right and closer to the truth" can be a subpar method of gauging raw quality and if you believe it is a foolproof method, you are coping beyond belief.

-thank you for reading this paragraph. reread it if you did not fully understand it.-

Lmao you do realize you are trying to say that testing raws is pointless right? So you cant test raw powder because of sticky whatever bs you said....and now we cant test finished oils because impurities can be counted as purities. Am I getting warm? I guess no one should test anything because its all false positives lol

 

[Cob]

you remind me of a child touched by mr prez and is mentally stuck at the age it happened.
You have no ability to learn, the test is more than just putting oil/raws into a machine and getting a number. There is variance, Homogeinity, and this gets a lot more complicated once you put it into oil.
I will explain it once, as clear as I can.

-read this paragraph, you barely literate swine-

Suddenly differentiating between oil and hormone gets easy, but differentiating between TrenE and a misshapen byproduct of synthesis that also happens to have an enanthate ester on it gets harder.
So the test shows stuff that might not be tren as tren when in oil, but corectly differentiates between tren and its misshapen cousin when in raw form.
this is how your method of: "I test the raws, i test the oil, and the oil is always right and closer to the truth" can be a subpar method of gauging raw quality and if you believe it is a foolproof method, you are coping beyond belief.

-thank you for reading this paragraph. reread it if you did not fully understand it.-

Also it looks like that is specifically talking about tren e. What about all the rest if the hormones out there? Are those all fucked too?

You are calling me names but you have literally just argued that testing is poojntless. What dod you say? Testing is more then just putting oil ir raws in a machine and pushing a button? No shot Sherlock. But guess what... all of us sending tests to these testers are not actually the ones doing the processes are we? You me amd everyone else sends a test off and waits for an emailed result so do tell me how you do it better then me since im such an illiterate swine? You are sitting here arguing against me but not realizing you are making it sound like all testing is inaccurate.

It would be pretty wild to see a test c purity test come in at 99% then send in finished oils that are made off that purity percentage come back as exact the mg its suppose to be. Whoever is making those raws sure know how to add just the right amount of impurities to purifies rstio to get that on the Nats ass huh?

 

[IndividualMan]

Lmao you do realize you are trying to say that testing raws is pointless right? So you cant test raw powder because of sticky whatever bs you said....and now we cant test finished oils because impurities can be counted as purifies. Am I getting warm? I guess no one should test anything because its all false positives lol

I am saying that
RAWS TEST
OF DRY POWDER
are the best indicators of quality.

and that AB has, over the years, maybe not used the best reference material and most sensitive testing methods. Worse equipment, etc.
they have not been very transparent as well, possibly due to a language barrier

Jano has been pretty transparent in how they analyze samples.
they explain mislabelings, what the autoIDs for impurities might be (as I said, there is no test to get "the impurities" because you would need to know each and every impurity beforehand, eg. I mix 70/30 Test C and sugar, and tell jano it is a mix of test and sugar, he will be able to get the reference material and say how much of each is in there without knowing beforehand) and a whole lot more.
also btw, Jano has regularly been within 1% of my local Uni lab for analysis, so thats that.

L4T is new, and they seem to discriminate less than AB, so they are a no go IMO. for raws at least

SO: jano or your local uni is best practice.


anything even semi liquid is anightmare for analysis, and has higher than normal variance. Especially when one substance is dissolved in another one or it is partially crashed.

SO OILS TESTS ARE ALWAYS MORE OFF THAN RAWS TESTS
so you can run your oils with whoever you want, they are all about the same on that front.


In the end, you are just childish and trying to stir up something or run cover for this vendor here, idk and at this point I dont care anymore. I made my point, others can read it and see who argued in a more coherent and understandable fashion.

I am tired now, bye.

 

[IndividualMan]

Also it looks like that is specifically talking about tren e. What about all the rest if the hormones out there? Are those all fucked too?

You are calling me names but you have literally just argued that testing is poojntless. What dod you say? Testing is more then just putting oil ir raws in a machine and pushing a button? No shot Sherlock. But guess what... all of us sending tests to these testers are not actually the ones doing the processes are we? You me amd everyone else sends a test off and waits for an emailed result so do tell me how you do it better then me since im such an illiterate swine? You are sitting here arguing against me but not realizing you are making it sound like all testing is inaccurate.

It would be pretty wild to see a test c purity test come in at 99% then send in finished oils that are made off that purity percentage come back as exact the mg its suppose to be. Whoever is making those raws sure know how to add just the right amount of impurities to purifies rstio to get that on the Nats ass huh?

keep yourself safe, man
You can't afford to lose anymore IQ points. already a good standard deviations below median if you think the testing we have access to is 100% accurate, or if it isnt 100% accurate it is imemdiatley worthless.
Its physics and chemistry, two fields notorious for having to constantly innovate methods to properly measure stuff, and if you had spent a single afternoon in a chemistry lab in uni you would know how much work this shit is and how inaccurate it can be.

Have a good evening, sir, and again, protect your skull from any sudden changes in direction or blunt force impacts. Maybe do some cerebrolysin, idk.

 

[Cob]

keep yourself safe, man
You can't afford to lose anymore IQ points. already a good standard deviations below median if you think the testing we have access to is 100% accurate, or if it isnt 100% accurate it is imemdiatley worthless.
Its physics and chemistry, two fields notorious for having to constantly innovate methods to properly measure stuff, and if you had spent a single afternoon in a chemistry lab in uni you would know how much work this shit is and how inaccurate it can be.

Have a good evening, sir, and again, protect your skull from any sudden changes in direction or blunt force impacts. Maybe do some cerebrolysin, idk.

When did I say it was 100% accurate? Again with your stupidity and putting words in my mouth

The only thing childish here is people like you jocking over jano like hes a god. Denying the facts and tryjng to excuse results with processes talk that you all dont even understand while claiming Im dumb lmao... Then you go posting up some copy and paste shit like that explains why im wrong. The bottom line, yes they all have variances...I never said they dont. However the end results in a blind purity to mg test dont LIE when they come out exactly like they are suppose to. And if you want to claim they lie then you may as well claim that all testing from here on out is a lie. I dont think even your tiny liberal brain wants to go down that path. Go watch some bad bunny and enjoy your night.

 

[Photon]

Since when does anyone run impurity testing? Does impurity testing eliminate purity testing? No, it doesnt. Post up your impurity tedt results and lets talk about it. Until then I dont deal in hypotheticals.

I never talked about impurity testing. If you ignore all impurities, you get a good purity %. If there's no impurities, everything is pure.
Aka an insensitive test. See the NMR test linked above.

You keep insisting the lab is wrong.
Your basis is that mg/ml and raw purity matches? You don't even care if it's detecting the wrong compounds or not?

I never said any lab was wrong.

 

[AlexDavis43]

I mean this in the best possible way

 

[AlexDavis43]

Since when does anyone run impurity testing? Does impurity testing eliminate purity testing? No, it doesnt. Post up your impurity tedt results and lets talk about it. Until then I dont deal in hypotheticals.

I think you're talking about something else, maybe GCMS

But in general:

Jano HPLC: 100 - purity = impurity

 

[AlexDavis43]

-read this paragraph, you barely literate swine-

 

[AlexDavis43]

Your basis is that mg/ml and raw purity matches?

Yes, absolutely

You don't even care if it's detecting the wrong compounds or not?

Well.... shit... when you put it that way

 

[Cob]

Ok I will be your Huckleberry. Post up your gcms/lcms/heavy metals tests. Lets see the results.