Sigma audley HGH

[Ateam2023]

Got it.
Luckily I’ve only had one vial that was slightly cloudy. Not even that bad.
Nothing like what I’ve seen before with pic people have posted where it almost looks like watered down milk. Mine could have just been the glass itself for all I know.
Anyway if I ever get one that has floaters in it or cloudy again I’ll likely just toss it. Less than $10.00 a vial. I’ll be fine lol

no i absolutely agree, i know theres "cut" in my dope,, lol

 

[CarvinDC125]

He's repeating a rumor someone said here (guess who).

It wouldn't make sense for a vial to have only GH because 3 mg would be practically invisible compared to the big ass pucks we see.

They all have additives that don't artificially reduce Jano-tested purity because otherwise they'd be WAY less pure. The vials contain mainly additives.

Well what I meant was preservatives not necessarily additives and fillers. That’s what I meant to convey

 

[AlexDavis43]

Well what I meant was preservatives not necessarily additives and fillers. That’s what I meant to convey

So you think adding preservatives reduces Jano purity? Just to clarify what you meant to convey.

 

[TexBe]

He's repeating a rumor someone said here (guess who).

It wouldn't make sense for a vial to have only GH because 3 mg would be practically invisible compared to the big ass pucks we see.

They all have additives that don't artificially reduce Jano-tested purity because otherwise they'd be WAY less pure. The vials contain mainly additives.

Yeah I wasn’t talking about filler, jano has said he accounts for things that are known fillers and doesn’t calculate them in the purity. It may have been a just a rumor and yeah I did see it exactly where you are thinking lol. I can say that with some recent AOD (which I did not buy bc AOD is BS) the vendors were trying to get creative with additives/ph stabilizers to prevent the gelling issues people were having and then people were freaking out about the purity being low.

 

[TheCup]

Filtering with a .22mm PES syringe filter does not damage rHGH.

Cloudy rHGH *is* damaged rHGH, that just happens to be damaged in a way that's visible to the unaided eye. But the vast majority of the time, the same damage would not be visible and appear as a clear vial.

As I said, I’m no chemist, but the testing labs I’ve used here in Ireland were clear: they told me absolutely not to run it through a 0.22mm PES syringe filter. We had long talks about peptide chemistry, and they all said the same. You might well be right, and you likely know more about the chemistry than I do, but the testing lab’s advice is enough for me. Either way, there’s no reason to re-filter properly handled HGH of this quality.

You’re right about the white residue most likely just broken protein. HGH is a 191-amino-acid peptide. Your body makes it, breaks it down, and sees plenty of similar destroyed peptides all the time. Small amounts of food protein even leak into the blood after meals, postprandial protein leakage, and a healthy body handles that just fine.

If a vial looks properly off, fair enough, bin it. But a bit of foam or a few particles in a sterile, tested vial? That’s not something I’d lose sleep over. Immune reactions are rare unless you’re hammering massive doses, I have never had one and I used daily for 20 years.

The labs also said most of the fear comes from pharma marketing. If worst-case scenarios are all you’re thinking about, maybe this stuff’s not for you, but I'm not the one to say.

 

[TheCup]

He's repeating a rumor someone said here (guess who).

It wouldn't make sense for a vial to have only GH because 3 mg would be practically invisible compared to the big ass pucks we see.

They all have additives that don't artificially reduce Jano-tested purity because otherwise they'd be WAY less pure. The vials contain mainly additives.

I think you are right, but they usually lack manitol and some buffer stuff or so the older stuff I tested did. I'm sure these labs adds all the needed things. And newer products could even have improved.

Its very likely the source are all the same, I don't know enough about that, but its safe to assume it's not just mixed in a dirty kitchen somewhere.

 

[AlexDavis43]

I think you are right, but they usually lack manitol and some buffer stuff or so the older stuff I tested did. I'm sure these labs adds all the needed things. And newer products could even have improved.

Its very likely the source are all the same, I don't know enough about that, but its safe to assume it's not just mixed in a dirty kitchen somewhere.

And importantly, it works

Maybe it doesn't have the Pharma formula or it's sticky or whatever, but at the end of the day, it works

 

[CarvinDC125]

So you think adding preservatives reduces Jano purity? Just to clarify what you meant to convey.

No no, not at all. I’m saying adding preservatives can cause injection site reactions to some who are sensitive to said preservative.
The less the better in that regard. I’m just saying ironically China GH might be cleaner than domestic in some cases.
I’m in no way trashing any product though

 

[CarvinDC125]

I think you are right, but they usually lack manitol and some buffer stuff or so the older stuff I tested did. I'm sure these labs adds all the needed things. And newer products could even have improved.

Its very likely the source are all the same, I don't know enough about that, but its safe to assume it's not just mixed in a dirty kitchen somewhere.

And importantly, it works

Maybe it doesn't have the Pharma formula or it's sticky or whatever, but at the end of the day, it works

Correct. I think it’s safe to assume it’s not being produced in some dirty kitchen somewhere. A lab lyophilize machine alone cost into the 10s of thousands and I’m assuming their set up is quite large for the volume and number of different peptides these guys can produce. Of course I’m speaking of peptides and such, not oil based products like steroids. That one we can only test and pray that our source is honest and keeps a good reputation.

 

[TheCup]

And importantly, it works

Maybe it doesn't have the Pharma formula or it's sticky or whatever, but at the end of the day, it works

Exactly. If pharma really worked that much better, I’d be using it. The way I see it, good Chinese HGH works just the same, it’s the same molecule after all.

You might notice the powder looks a bit off sometimes, slightly yellow or uneven. That’s normal enough. It comes down to differences in freeze-drying and whether they’ve added things like mannitol or not. Has nothing to do with purity or how well it works.

Mannitol and other stabilisers in pharma HGH aren’t there to make it any stronger, they’re just meant to help with solubility, stability, and how it looks in the vial. They don’t change how the hormone works in your body.

And to be fair, I wouldn’t even say these are all without mannitol. My tests are a bit old now. The better Chinese labs were already using stabilisers back then, glycine, salts, phosphate buffers, even polysorbates, so chances are they’re using mannitol too now. Maybe they’ll confirm it themselves.

So yes, you might hold on to a bit more water if there’s no mannitol, but pharma can do that too, especially when the dose is higher. If it’s a bother, take a light diuretic, like dandelion extract, and that’s that.

 

[TheCup]

He's repeating a rumor someone said here (guess who).

It wouldn't make sense for a vial to have only GH because 3 mg would be practically invisible compared to the big ass pucks we see.

They all have additives that don't artificially reduce Jano-tested purity because otherwise they'd be WAY less pure. The vials contain mainly additives.

Aye, I’d agree with this lad. He’s not wrong.

Jano can correct me if I’m off, but from what I understand, his tests focus purely on the protein profile, meaning what proteins are actually present in the vial, and how much of it is active, properly folded HGH.

You’re getting key info like:

• Purity % — how much of the protein content is genuine 22 kDa HGH. Usually around 90 to 99 percent in good batches.
• Dimers % — how much is clumped together, which sure can lead to immune response if it's insanely high. *
• Fragments % — bits of broken or degraded HGH. Useless, really.
• IU (International Units) — a measure of how biologically active the batch is, regardless of total weight.

What he doesn’t test for are things like mannitol, glycine, salts and so on, the non-protein stabilisers. Those won’t show up in the report because they’re not proteins. Doesn’t mean they’re not in there, just that they’re not relevant to that specific kind of testing.

He also doesn’t routinely check for sterility or endotoxins, but there’s a reason for that, and it’s not negligence. Proper sterility testing takes two weeks, under controlled lab conditions, and it’s expensive. Same goes for endotoxin tests like LAL or rFC, you’d need specialised gear, and it’s usually done by pharma companies as part of full QA protocols. Not something most third-party labs can afford to run on every batch.

So instead, Jano focuses on what he can measure with high accuracy, fast turnaround, and low risk: protein structure, activity, and purity.

And if something’s wrong, like foreign proteins, high dimer levels, or degraded fragments, it’ll show. He flags unknown bands in the protein gel, and purity drops like a stone. You can’t hide garbage protein from that sort of test.

Long story short, if his report says 96% purity, 0% dimer, and high IU, it’s clean. If something dodgy’s in there, it won’t stay hidden.

*dimmers: Small amounts of dimers (1–5%) are common even in pharma and usually harmless.

It's my view the immune system only tends to react if you’re injecting large amounts of misfolded or foreign protein repeatedly, and yes, HGH is taken daily, but that’s not a problem unless the product is badly made.

The fear around dimers has been blown out of proportion by some (pharma or overly cautious users), though it’s not completely baseless in extreme cases.

 

[Ghoul]

Aye, I’d agree with this lad. He’s not wrong.

Jano can correct me if I’m off, but from what I understand, his tests focus purely on the protein profile, meaning what proteins are actually present in the vial, and how much of it is active, properly folded HGH.

You’re getting key info like:

• Purity % — how much of the protein content is genuine 22 kDa HGH. Usually around 90 to 99 percent in good batches.
• Dimers % — how much is clumped together, which sure can lead to immune response if it's insanely high. *
• Fragments % — bits of broken or degraded HGH. Useless, really.
• IU (International Units) — a measure of how biologically active the batch is, regardless of total weight.

What he doesn’t test for are things like mannitol, glycine, salts and so on, the non-protein stabilisers. Those won’t show up in the report because they’re not proteins. Doesn’t mean they’re not in there, just that they’re not relevant to that specific kind of testing.

He also doesn’t routinely check for sterility or endotoxins, but there’s a reason for that, and it’s not negligence. Proper sterility testing takes two weeks, under controlled lab conditions, and it’s expensive. Same goes for endotoxin tests like LAL or rFC, you’d need specialised gear, and it’s usually done by pharma companies as part of full QA protocols. Not something most third-party labs can afford to run on every batch.

So instead, Jano focuses on what he can measure with high accuracy, fast turnaround, and low risk: protein structure, activity, and purity.

And if something’s wrong, like foreign proteins, high dimer levels, or degraded fragments, it’ll show. He flags unknown bands in the protein gel, and purity drops like a stone. You can’t hide garbage protein from that sort of test.

Long story short, if his report says 96% purity, 0% dimer, and high IU, it’s clean. If something dodgy’s in there, it won’t stay hidden.

*dimmers: Small amounts of dimers (1–5%) are common even in pharma and usually harmless.

It's my view the immune system only tends to react if you’re injecting large amounts of misfolded or foreign protein repeatedly, and yes, HGH is taken daily, but that’s not a problem unless the product is badly made.

The fear around dimers has been blown out of proportion by some (pharma or overly cautious users), though it’s not completely baseless in extreme cases.

Long on rationalization and short on fact.

RP-HPLC-MS accurately detects the chemical composition of a molecule. Not structure, or bioactivity, any more than a scale can distinguish between a ball of dough and a loaf of bread.

Any claim a "pure" rHGH monomer means it's properly folded and active is an assumption, not based on anything being analyzed. Other tests are used for that purpose. CD or NMR for structure. IGF response using cells in a test tube for activity.

This is a straightforward concept.

True or false.

There's no nuance.

Does "purity" testing verify correct folding and measure bioactivity or not?
.
.
.
.
(no)

 

[Ateam2023]

No no, not at all. I’m saying adding preservatives can cause injection site reactions to some who are sensitive to said preservative.
The less the better in that regard. I’m just saying ironically China GH might be cleaner than domestic in some cases.
I’m in no way trashing any product though

domestic is likely just china hgh , im pretty sure, just because its sold domestically doesn't mean its not the same China ugl hgh ,,

 

[TheCup]

Long on rationalization and short on fact.

RP-HPLC-MS accurately detects the chemical composition of a molecule. Not structure, or bioactivity, any more than a scale can distinguish between a ball of dough and a loaf of bread.

Any claim a "pure" rHGH monomer means it's properly folded and active is an assumption, not based on anything being analyzed. Other tests are used for that purpose. CD or NMR for structure. IGF response using cells in a test tube for activity.

This is a straightforward concept.

True or false.

There's no nuance.

Does "purity" testing verify correct folding and measure bioactivity or not?
.
.
.
.
(no)

Ah now, from what I’ve seen, most proper reports, like Janoshik’s work, don’t rely on just the one trick. They’ll use SDS-PAGE, ELISA, a bit of HPLC, and they’ll measure IU as well, which gives you a fair sense of whether the stuff actually does what it’s meant to do. Not perfect, but close enough to call it useful.

So when a batch comes back showing 96% monomer and a strong IU reading, then for all practical purposes it’s folded right and doing the job. That’s not guesswork, that’s grounded in what actually works.

This whole “yes or no” carry-on is a bit of a false frame, isn’t it? It’s never that cut and dry, it’s the test panel and the context that matters, not some tidy little binary.

You’re acting like if one test doesn’t answer everything, then the whole thing’s rubbish. That’s not fair reasoning, lad, that’s just debate for the sake of it.

 

[AlexDavis43]

Ah now, from what I’ve seen, most proper reports, like Janoshik’s work, don’t rely on just the one trick. They’ll use SDS-PAGE, ELISA, a bit of HPLC, and they’ll measure IU as well, which gives you a fair sense of whether the stuff actually does what it’s meant to do. Not perfect, but close enough to call it useful.

So when a batch comes back showing 96% monomer and a strong IU reading, then for all practical purposes it’s folded right and doing the job. That’s not guesswork, that’s grounded in what actually works.

This whole “yes or no” carry-on is a bit of a false frame, isn’t it? It’s never that cut and dry, it’s the test panel and the context that matters, not some tidy little binary.

You’re acting like if one test doesn’t answer everything, then the whole thing’s rubbish. That’s not fair reasoning, lad, that’s just debate for the sake of it.

Sounds like you have a science background which is cool. I've done SDS-PAGE and ELISA many many times and surely so has Jano.

In this context, however, we're talking about HPLC. And IU is calculated from mgs.

The fact that people are getting results from using UGL GH means it isn't misfolded or sticky or whatever. None of the methods you mentioned assess misfolding, which just seems like a reach from the bubble boys.

 

[CarvinDC125]

The new batch of 24iu Green tops from SSA are very good!
I got them in earlier this week after a long shipping turnaround of 5 weeks. my rep gave me this test report with them link below and pdf attached. It Even has a pic of the green top vials in the link version lol.
The one vial I’ve reconstituted so far came out crystal clear. I would think it’s high end domestic if I didn’t know better. Just amazing for $90.00. I’ll report back later once I use the whole kit, but I have a feeling this is going to be the highest quality one I’ve gotten yet.
Link to lab report Janoshik Analytical

 

[Ghoul]

Ah now, from what I’ve seen, most proper reports, like Janoshik’s work, don’t rely on just the one trick. They’ll use SDS-PAGE, ELISA, a bit of HPLC, and they’ll measure IU as well, which gives you a fair sense of whether the stuff actually does what it’s meant to do. Not perfect, but close enough to call it useful.

So when a batch comes back showing 96% monomer and a strong IU reading, then for all practical purposes it’s folded right and doing the job. That’s not guesswork, that’s grounded in what actually works.

This whole “yes or no” carry-on is a bit of a false frame, isn’t it? It’s never that cut and dry, it’s the test panel and the context that matters, not some tidy little binary.

You’re acting like if one test doesn’t answer everything, then the whole thing’s rubbish. That’s not fair reasoning, lad, that’s just debate for the sake of it.

It is absolutely yes or no. I don't hold you responsible for the confusion. It's the idiots and liars intentionally clouding the issue because to them, it's a weird matter of faith, not objective facts.

Do you know where the "IU" measurement of activity in Jano's test comes from?

 

[TheCup]

It is absolutely yes or no. I don't hold you responsible for the confusion. It's the idiots and liars intentionally clouding the issue because to them, it's a weird matter of faith, not objective facts.

Do you know where the "IU" measurement of activity in Jano's test comes from?

As for IU, I assume Jano bases it on an ELISA-type assays or similar, calibrated against a known reference? Not perfect, but it reflects actual effect, not just molecule weight. When it matches with proper SDS-PAGE and shows clean monomer content, low dimers, low fragments, then you've got a strong indication the material is both present and active. That’s what matters for the use of it, not some lab-theory ideal, but ss the other lad said, whether it actually works. You’re calling people idiots and liars for not sticking to your one narrow lens. That’s not scientific reasoning, so be it.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

You’re acting like if one test doesn’t answer everything, then the whole thing’s rubbish. That’s not fair reasoning, lad, that’s just debate for the sake of it.

He just wants to be right. Makes mountain out of mole hills. Talked about that we should do advanced testing to figure it out, we ask if he wants to throw down money, now radio silence.


He is probably going to quote me somewhere else as retaliation. Lol

 

[TheCup]

Sounds like you have a science background which is cool. I've done SDS-PAGE and ELISA many many times and surely so has Jano.

In this context, however, we're talking about HPLC. And IU is calculated from mgs.

The fact that people are getting results from using UGL GH means it isn't misfolded or sticky or whatever. None of the methods you mentioned assess misfolding, which just seems like a reach from the bubble boys

Aye sure, we’re no chemists. Just an old electronics engineer, who used to Make a fortune building amps and big bloody speakers for some of the biggest brands back in the day. Then ended up teaching chemistry and maths to rowdy teenagers at the local highschool. So no white coat, but enough to know when someone’s talkin’ shite.

And I’m with you all the way. Some of these lads act like it’s mixed in a garden shed with a rusty spoon. Truth is, it’s made in proper Chinese med labs, mightn’t have the pharma label, but as you said it works.