I know that I'm risking the burning of a bridge that I've not even crossed yet, or may not ever want to cross, but I feel that I have to put my 2 cents in here. I already have a trusted source, albeit expensive, and certainly wouldn't mind checking out other sources in the future. Am I "brave" in stating my opinion when I may come back months from now and ask to purchase? I don't know. I'm suppose that many stay silent for just that reason. I guess that if I burn a bridge, so be it. That being said...
People are injecting substances into their body. I think that sources sometimes forget that, and look at "business", raw materials, and the like, instead of understanding that people are putting their lives in the supplier's hands. If a product isn't pure, then what is it? Certainly, the chances are that bad juices are "bad" because they've been cut too much with something that is relatively safe, but then, with no testing, when will something harmful come down the pipe?
Hear me out, because I'm not accusing anyone of not caring, only wanting things put into perspective.
The supplier buys something that has been misrepresented, the supplier's customers inject this substance into their bodies, and it is proven that that substance was not what the customers ordered. Not harmful, but not what was expected either.
If something is not as represented, it could very well be anything, because in this business, you're only as good as your word. There is no FDA ready to torch you, no lawyers to sue you. Only your word. Knowing that one is only as good as their word, in the event that something goes wrong, a man of his word must cast a wide net, in the attempt to make absolutely sure that any bad product is accounted for, even if it means that more good product goes out than what went out bad originally. After all, who is at fault? Surely not the customer.
While it seems reasonable to say, "Prove it, and I'll make it right- no, better than right", one is still left worried about what they're injecting into their bodies, not necessarily because they believe that it is harmful, but because injecting a substance into one's body entails risks, and every injection raises the odds of one encountering an issue. In addition, we are speaking of people's time, blood, and sweat here. You can't give that back.
I, for one, want to make sure that, if at all possible, I get the exact results that I expect, every time that I inject. I'm weighing out the cost/benefit, the value of my time, the odds of getting ill, etc., and I wouldn't inject something into me if it were suspect, even if a well-meaning source is willing to "make it right" if things go wrong. It's not worth it to me. So, if I suspected the quality of the product, I wouldn't use it. It's money wasted. It's not the cost of the bloods- I'm always going to make sure that everything is monitored. I just value my health, and am willing to risk some, but not too much.
If a source says that only a small amount got out, and has a good idea of when it went out, then it seems to me that in a business where one's word is everything, the cost of casting a wide net and replacing any suspect juice is a small price to pay to avoid the appearance of wrongdoing. It's integrity beyond reproach that one should strive for. No, I'm not suggesting that one should be a punching bag to anyone who complains, but in the case of an issue that has been proven to exist, well, the value of one's word can be priceless, or it can be in question.
I don't feel like I have an unreasonable take on this, but as a final thought, consider this: When nothing ever goes wrong, one never has a chance to prove that their integrity trumps all. Consider this episode an opportunity to shine. Seldom remembered is the team that won by a point, but memories are made when that same team came back from 21 down to win by a point.
Just my newb on Meso, but almost a half century on earth, opinion.