Slight sediment at bottom of prop bottle.

[bdg77]

Have a bottle of prop made from syno or comp-h (can't remember which one). It was well made. Spent almost a week recrystallizing it at least 4 times. First time used NaOH to break down estradiol. Anyway it was made with lots of patience and tlc. Used it for a while. Then got "better" gear (maybe not) and switched to that. I was way over paranoid about any trace of estro that could be in it. So after sitting for a couple years I noticed I very slight film of sediment that kind if swirled around becomes visible. I'm not worried about the estro anymore. In hind site any trace that remains is going to be insignificant. I was thinking about going ahead and running it. It's a 50cc bottle and is at least half full. Wondering about the sediment though. My fear is that it could be bacteria. But honestly I doubt that's what it is. I've seen a contaminated bottle and it looked different, cloudy and not just at bottom. My guess is it's just harmless, but this is not something you want to guess about. Thinking a pressure cook ought to ease my mind. Maybe a pic is necessary. Anybody have this happen? Probably unlikely it look a long time for the sediment to fall out. I could just chuck it, be a real waste though.

 

[A-a-Ron]

Have a bottle of prop made from syno or comp-h (can't remember which one). It was well made. Spent almost a week recrystallizing it at least 4 times. First time used NaOH to break down estradiol. Anyway it was made with lots of patience and tlc. Used it for a while. Then got "better" gear (maybe not) and switched to that. I was way over paranoid about any trace of estro that could be in it. So after sitting for a couple years I noticed I very slight film of sediment that kind if swirled around becomes visible. I'm not worried about the estro anymore. In hind site any trace that remains is going to be insignificant. I was thinking about going ahead and running it. It's a 50cc bottle and is at least half full. Wondering about the sediment though. My fear is that it could be bacteria. But honestly I doubt that's what it is. I've seen a contaminated bottle and it looked different, cloudy and not just at bottom. My guess is it's just harmless, but this is not something you want to guess about. Thinking a pressure cook ought to ease my mind. Maybe a pic is necessary. Anybody have this happen? Probably unlikely it look a long time for the sediment to fall out. I could just chuck it, be a real waste though.

It could be anything. If its nothing to worry about...then good. If it is...then it could be a trip to the hospital, which costs a lot more (including your health) than 25-300 ml's of prop.

 

[A-a-Ron]

I guess to answer your question, nobody could honestly tell you what it is.

 

[Kinikuman]

Have a bottle of prop made from syno or comp-h (can't remember which one). It was well made. Spent almost a week recrystallizing it at least 4 times. First time used NaOH to break down estradiol. Anyway it was made with lots of patience and tlc. Used it for a while. Then got "better" gear (maybe not) and switched to that. I was way over paranoid about any trace of estro that could be in it. So after sitting for a couple years I noticed I very slight film of sediment that kind if swirled around becomes visible. I'm not worried about the estro anymore. In hind site any trace that remains is going to be insignificant. I was thinking about going ahead and running it. It's a 50cc bottle and is at least half full. Wondering about the sediment though. My fear is that it could be bacteria. But honestly I doubt that's what it is. I've seen a contaminated bottle and it looked different, cloudy and not just at bottom. My guess is it's just harmless, but this is not something you want to guess about. Thinking a pressure cook ought to ease my mind. Maybe a pic is necessary. Anybody have this happen? Probably unlikely it look a long time for the sediment to fall out. I could just chuck it, be a real waste though.

Just chuck it. Better safe than sorry.

 

[bdg77]

I should chuck it. Or at least sterilize it first. After thinking about it more I believe it's just some of the glue/binding agents that go along with using pellets. I always keep bottles in plastic bags that have been wiped w/alc. So it being anything but sediment is almost impossible. That being said just the fact that it has any sediment isn't cool. I would imagine this happens with fina if you let it sit for a year. Since it's only filtered once and usually not re-crystalized. But 40cc of fina isn't going to sit around very long. I'll be smart about it, maybe just keep it around for testing experiements.

 

[A-a-Ron]

I should chuck it. Or at least sterilize it first. After thinking about it more I believe it's just some of the glue/binding agents that go along with using pellets. I always keep bottles in plastic bags that have been wiped w/alc. So it being anything but sediment is almost impossible. That being said just the fact that it has any sediment isn't cool. I would imagine this happens with fina if you let it sit for a year. Since it's only filtered once and usually not re-crystalized. But 40cc of fina isn't going to sit around very long. I'll be smart about it, maybe just keep it around for testing experiements.

You could always catch a stray cat and give it a ml or two....

 

[A-a-Ron]

Just curious....but what if you filtered it, then crashed it on purpose, harvested the crystals, clean and sterilized them and then resuspended.

 

[A-a-Ron]

I thought about it being the glue also...but if that's wrong and it's something growing...that would be a shitty mistake possibly.

 

[bdg77]

Yeah ur right. That'd just be reckless without knowing for sure. Not my style. Wouldn't be worth the stress, let alone getting an infection. Never had abcess or infection b4 and I'd like to keep it that way. Had horrible pip from shitty gear, the inkjet, that I could design in a hour or two label kind. Not saying that all gear with homemade labels is bad. Just that my experiences with it have been. I'm really starting to wonder what the future of gear is going to be. I say big labs if they can be domestic or domestic raw resellers.

 

[A-a-Ron]

Yeah ur right. That'd just be reckless without knowing for sure. Not my style. Wouldn't be worth the stress, let alone getting an infection. Never had abcess or infection b4 and I'd like to keep it that way. Had horrible pip from shitty gear, the inkjet, that I could design in a hour or two label kind. Not saying that all gear with homemade labels is bad. Just that my experiences with it have been. I'm really starting to wonder what the future of gear is going to be. I say big labs if they can be domestic or domestic raw resellers.

I think as China is becoming more wealthy, the payoff is just not as great for the suppliers. I think the seller market will move somewhere else.

 

[A-a-Ron]

Personally, I'm going to start giving poor fuckers on government paid health insurance $50 bucks to get on TRY. You know it will probably be easier for them than us!

 

[A-a-Ron]

@bdg77 - how difficult is the syno conversion? I've done fina and component t-h conversions and they were a piece of cake. They don't have estrogen to remove, though. I consider myself a pretty smart guy, and I guess my fear of screwing up is I have a small phobia of caustic an poisonous chemicals. I've read the steps but its hard to visualize it. If you follow the steps thoroughly, do you feel pretty confident in the outcome? Hope my question makes sense.

 

[Mr.graham]

Implant matrices

Early research studied the release of DES in vitro and in vivo; the only mention of formulation variables was ‘‘percent solvent in the formula granulation at the time of pelleting and the compression applied at time of pelleting’’ [111]. Implants used today contain either lactose, cholesterol or a large polymer of polyethylene glycol as a matrix (carrier) for compressed implants or a silicone rubber matrix [112]. Lactose-based implants are ‘‘short-acting’’ whereas cholesterol-based implants are ‘‘long-acting’’ [69] and when compared in terms of feedlot cattle performance, the response to cholesterol-based implants was sustained for 84 but not 126 days compared to lactose-based implants given every 42 days. When feedlot performance was compared over 140–168 days, no difference was observed between lactose- versus cholesterol-based implants [66]. Imbedding estradiol in a silicone rubber matrix provides some theoretical advantages such as modulating the dose rate over time and tailoring the dose rate simply by the length of implant [113]. Another approach to modulating the dose rate over time is to encapsulate the implant in an osmotic membrane which resulted in improved gain in steers that was dose related.

http://www.hormonebalance.org/images/documents/Pellet cattle.pdf

-Graham

 

[Mr.graham]

I personally would filter sterilize it again and be done.

 

[A-a-Ron]

I personally would filter sterilize it again and be done.

Yeah...but if its bacterial growth and not fillers or bonding agents, it could be a very bad thing.

 

[Kinikuman]

Bacterial growth will produce toxins that you cannot filter or sterilize out.
Why risk it?

 

[Mr.graham]

Why would bacteria grow in it if it has BA?

 

[bdg77]

@bdg77 - how difficult is the syno conversion? I've done fina and component t-h conversions and they were a piece of cake. They don't have estrogen to remove, though. I consider myself a pretty smart guy, and I guess my fear of screwing up is I have a small phobia of caustic an poisonous chemicals. I've read the steps but its hard to visualize it. If you follow the steps thoroughly, do you feel pretty confident in the outcome? Hope my question makes sense.

In my opinion it's a real bitch and hardly worth the effort. The fina conversion is simple and straight forward. I'd say doing the syno conversion is about 20 times more work. I think the only one who really got it right was dazed. You used to be able to get a dazed kit for about $120 and refills for about half that. That was a while back though. I believe one of the proprietary chemicals it contained became unavailable. Not sure and I really don't want to get into the topic too much. But bottom line is there are a few different opinions on which is the way to go. Do you use NaOH or not, how many recrystalizations are necessary to remove most of the estro. You've gotta be willing to spend hours controlling super cold distilled H20 drips. Then put your prop in a funnel with a filter paper and spend a bunch of time pouring and spraying cold distilled h20 through them. Mostly spraying to agitate them and keep washing them off sides so you don't lose them. Factor in having to work with methanol. I'd say it's a lot of work to do it right. 20x harder and more work is probably being conservative. And once your done you really don't know how much of the estro you've removed and if you've chosen the NaOH route, you don't really know if you've stripped the prop ester off the any of the test. So you might have a mix of prop and test base. It's something only a chemist could possibly enjoy.

 

[bdg77]

Bacterial growth will produce toxins that you cannot filter or sterilize out.
Why risk it?

That's good to know. I have no idea what the sediment is. It was sterilized and bottle kept in plastic bag that was wiped out with some rub. alc. Took a real long for stuff to settle out. Like I said I'm not going to attempt to salvage it for use. It may use it for testing purposes and try to figure out reagent test for test-p. Maybe, but I wouldn't hold your breath.