Lab reports products purchased through OSGear

[OSGear]

Most of the oils fail the tymc and tamc tests.

The bacteria does not like oil environments, it has to have water to grow. Fungus and mold should be killed during the brewing and BA and BB is used and will kill everything.

The only way to contaminate a vial is to put water and air for the bacteria to grow and that will be visible. Look at the vial, the oil is clear.

So I guarantee you that the oils are just fine. We haven't had any contamination situation in 14+ years of activity .

 

[jitterbug128]

Most of the oils fail the tymc and tamc tests.

The bacteria does not like oil environments, it has to have water to grow. Fungus and mold should be killed during the brewing and BA and BB is used and will kill everything.

The only way to contaminate a vial is to put water and air for the bacteria to grow and that will be visible. Look at the vial, the oil is clear.

So I guarantee you that the oils are just fine. We haven't had any contamination situation in 14+ years of activity .

How are you both claiming that most oils fail but that they are sterilized by the brew process?

 

[OSGear]

How are you both claiming that most oils fail but that they are sterilized by the brew process?

Of course are sterilized by the brew process. I am asking you: If the oils would not be sterile, how many people would have problems? I am telling you, nobody is taking the risk of selling unsterile gear. We are talking here about big labs that sell a lot and I mean it. Contamination is excluded.

 

[jitterbug128]

Of course are sterilized by the brew process. I am asking you: If the oils would not be sterile, how many people would have problems? I am telling you, nobody is taking the risk of selling unsterile gear. We are talking here about big labs that sell a lot and I mean it. Contamination is excluded.

A lot of problems build over time or just go undetected / misdiagnosed, asbestos was once thought harmless as well. This is a horrible excuse to be failing sterility tests

 

[OSGear]

A lot of problems build over time or just go undetected / misdiagnosed, asbestos was once thought harmless as well. This is a horrible excuse to be failing sterility tests

I disagree. People are USING these products as we speak and we would know immediately if something is wrong with any product from any brand available on our website. I am telling you that problems are reported by customers right away if there is something wrong and we also deal with them immediately.

We also run promos and send products for testing and the results are excellent. The Beligas - Etho-Testosterone 300 is the second most sold Test E on our website, after Ultima's Ultima-Enan 250, which is the absolute bestseller. No issues reported.

 

[dallascowboys01]

Then how do you explain the failed testing?

 

[jitterbug128]

I disagree. People are USING these products as we speak and we would know immediately if something is wrong with any product from any brand available on our website. I am telling you that problems are reported by customers right away if there is something wrong and we also deal with them immediately.

We also run promos and send products for testing and the results are excellent.

Tons of people dont even do bloodwork, theres no guarantee people would immediately know, or even that they would associate issues with sterility concerns. And this product was sent for testing with less than excellent results id say lol

 

[OSGear]

Then how do you explain the failed testing?

Total Aerobic Microbial Count (TAMC) and Total Combined Yeast and Mold Count (TYMC) tests are the industry standards for measuring bioburden, but they do face specific "accuracy" hurdles when applied to oils due to the physical and chemical properties of the sample.
Here is a breakdown of why these tests can be tricky for oils and how labs typically correct for it:

1. The Immiscibility Problem
Oils do not mix with the water-based buffers and agar media used in standard TAMC/TYMC methods.

• The Issue: Microorganisms are often trapped within the oil phase, making it difficult for them to come into contact with the growth media on a plate. This results in falsely low counts.
• The Fix: Laboratories must use solubilizing agents or surfactants (like Tween 80/Polysorbate 80) to emulsify the oil into the diluent, ensuring any microbes are released and can grow.

2. Natural Antimicrobial Properties
Many oils (especially essential oils like tea tree, oregano, or peppermint) are naturally antimicrobial.

• The Issue: The oil itself may inhibit or kill the very microbes you are trying to count during the testing process, even if they were present in the original batch.
• The Fix: Neutralization is required. According to USP <61> / Ph. Eur. 2.6.12, labs must perform "Suitability Testing" to prove that the oil's antimicrobial activity has been neutralized (often via dilution or chemical neutralizers) so that a known "spike" of bacteria can still be recovered.

3. Masking and Detection Limits

• Low Bioburden: Oils generally have very low water activity, meaning they don't support much microbial growth. If the contamination is extremely low, standard "plate count" methods might miss it.
• Alternative Methods: For oily products that can be filtered, the Membrane Filtration method is preferred. It involves passing the oil through a filter to "catch" all microbes, then rinsing the filter to remove inhibitory oil residues before placing the filter on agar.

Summary of Accuracy

While the tests are accurate if validated properly, a "straight" test without emulsifiers or neutralizers will almost certainly provide an inaccurate (underestimated) result.

 

[jitterbug128]

Total Aerobic Microbial Count (TAMC) and Total Combined Yeast and Mold Count (TYMC) tests are the industry standards for measuring bioburden, but they do face specific "accuracy" hurdles when applied to oils due to the physical and chemical properties of the sample.
Here is a breakdown of why these tests can be tricky for oils and how labs typically correct for it:

1. The Immiscibility Problem
Oils do not mix with the water-based buffers and agar media used in standard TAMC/TYMC methods.

• The Issue: Microorganisms are often trapped within the oil phase, making it difficult for them to come into contact with the growth media on a plate. This results in falsely low counts.
• The Fix: Laboratories must use solubilizing agents or surfactants (like Tween 80/Polysorbate 80) to emulsify the oil into the diluent, ensuring any microbes are released and can grow.

2. Natural Antimicrobial Properties
Many oils (especially essential oils like tea tree, oregano, or peppermint) are naturally antimicrobial.

• The Issue: The oil itself may inhibit or kill the very microbes you are trying to count during the testing process, even if they were present in the original batch.
• The Fix: Neutralization is required. According to USP <61> / Ph. Eur. 2.6.12, labs must perform "Suitability Testing" to prove that the oil's antimicrobial activity has been neutralized (often via dilution or chemical neutralizers) so that a known "spike" of bacteria can still be recovered.

3. Masking and Detection Limits

• Low Bioburden: Oils generally have very low water activity, meaning they don't support much microbial growth. If the contamination is extremely low, standard "plate count" methods might miss it.
• Alternative Methods: For oily products that can be filtered, the Membrane Filtration method is preferred. It involves passing the oil through a filter to "catch" all microbes, then rinsing the filter to remove inhibitory oil residues before placing the filter on agar.

Summary of Accuracy

While the tests are accurate if validated properly, a "straight" test without emulsifiers or neutralizers will almost certainly provide an inaccurate (underestimated) result.

That looks an awful lot like chatgpt, and despite these issues other vendors are passing the same test. Not trying to bust balls but this is a terrible way to respond to failed sterility testing

 

[OSGear]

That looks an awful lot like chatgpt, and despite these issues other vendors are passing the same test. Not trying to bust balls but this is a terrible way to respond to failed sterility testing

Is a simple Google search. I don't know what other explanation do you want or expect. The data is available publicly and it says it all.

If you are against any argument, then you are free to believe whatever you want sir.

 

[dallascowboys01]

I am just a simple man but the summary you posted is showing an issue with the test to find microbes, that is not the issue here, the test found them.

 

[jitterbug128]

Is a simple Google search. I don't know what other explanation do you want or expect. The data is available publicly and it says it all.

If you are against any argument, then you are free to believe whatever you want sir.

Post in thread 'Janoshik Interview' https://thinksteroids.com/community/threads/janoshik-interview.134427118/post-3689617

Im gonna go with what jano said:

"There are many cases of AAS oils passing TAMC+TYMC, even on this forum I believe.

Endotoxins are part of bacterial wall of gram negative bacteria - that's an easily confirmable fact, so I don't think it requires me to repeat it."

 

[jitterbug128]

Is a simple Google search. I don't know what other explanation do you want or expect. The data is available publicly and it says it all.

If you are against any argument, then you are free to believe whatever you want sir.

And google didnt spit that out, an ai did, it reads exactly like a chatgpt response

 

[OSGear]

I am just a simple man but the summary you posted is showing an issue with the test to find microbes, that is not the issue here, the test found them.

@dallascowboys01
The test provided an inaccurate result.

To answer to @jitterbug128 Janoshik are no longer running endotoxins tests for oils, as they said, because are expensive and takes a lot of time.

 

[Billbo98]

How are you both claiming that most oils fail but that they are sterilized by the brew process?

That’s how retarded @OSGear is bro! They try so hard to manipulate and flip the script they contradict themselves lol

 

[Billbo98]

@dallascowboys01
The test provided an inaccurate result.

To answer to @jitterbug128 Janoshik are no longer running endotoxins tests for oils, as they said, because are expensive and takes a lot of time.

Soooo you're saying @janoshik doesn't know what he’s doing? What a intelligent one you are @OSGear

 

[Billbo98]

@dallascowboys01
The test provided an inaccurate result.

To answer to @jitterbug128 Janoshik are no longer running endotoxins tests for oils, as they said, because are expensive and takes a lot of time.

QUIT SAYING ENDOTOXINS YOU DUMB MOFO ITS A STERILITY TEST ON THE OILS HOLY HELL

 

[Billbo98]

Most of the oils fail the tymc and tamc tests.

The bacteria does not like oil environments, it has to have water to grow. Fungus and mold should be killed during the brewing and BA and BB is used and will kill everything.

The only way to contaminate a vial is to put water and air for the bacteria to grow and that will be visible. Look at the vial, the oil is clear.

So I guarantee you that the oils are just fine. We haven't had any contamination situation in 14+ years of activity .

This is wrong and false on so many levels. @MESO-Rx Administrator care to step in here and enlighten these guys?

 

[Billbo98]

For oils yes, and it looks like the lab in question on this post did faily sterility testing.

There is no looks like it did. It factually 100% did verifiable through @janoshik

 

[jitterbug128]

@dallascowboys01
The test provided an inaccurate result.

To answer to @jitterbug128 Janoshik are no longer running endotoxins tests for oils, as they said, because are expensive and takes a lot of time.

Where did he say either of those things, and on what basis are you claiming that jano had an innacurate result?