MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
24k Pharma US Domestic Source
- Thread starter 24kpharma
- Start date
Buddy of mine recieved 3 crashed vials but they all remained good after heating them up
acoll83
New Member
legendary
Well-known Member
For whatever it's worth I had 2 bottles for TRT from cvs that crashed. I tried to return them. They said they were fine. Right on bottle it says if it crystallized to heat up and shake.
BIGSJ72
New Member
Anyone have the mast within the last 2 weeks?? Still happy?
one came crashed, well. it was thick, i heated it and voila.
but i just went to use it and its crashed. did the hot water thing, back liquid again. we'll see nest time i use it.
I used the heating pad and it took care of it. Weather went from 70s to 30s over night so the temp in my house was cold pretty sure that's what caused it.
I've never had that happen to me and I've been on trt for 4 years
legendary
Well-known Member
After gym I'll see what brand I forget. It was Watson then out of no where cvs switched up. That's when I had the issue. I'll post a pic af label saying to heat and shake
Sun pharma. My vial states same.
All of em do, if had pfizer, watson, perrigo, and sun and they all have the same disclaimer. My first time picking up it was slightly crashed cus costco keeps them in a very cool place. It also gives u temp storage to prevent crashing on the labels
legendary
Well-known Member
Well just picked up my script. They are back to Watson. Yes sun pharma from India I think.
I heard they all came from the same company like hk or something out Portugal?
Hikma Factory Portugal manufacturers it for a few brands, like watson, west ward, etc.
Pomacanthidae
New Member
surprised 24 hasn't come by his thread to say anything about this lately
Gramps
New Member
His email is hit and miss as well. Not comforting.
I am beginning to withdraw from an active public online presence as I believe this may draw unwanted attention. As we have grown, I suspect that there are more scrutinizing eyes on us. Besides that, I do not see any value in addresses concerns that have been addressed many times before such as PIP, crashing, email contact, etc. There is no way we can guarantee that every individual will have a positive reaction to all our oils and compounds - simply because every individual is different. If you have any issues, please email me and I will be happy to address them. But at this time, I do not believe it is in our best interest to continually address concerns that have been addressed several times before. This added exposure is unnecessary when users can simply email us or contact others through PM. If these 300+ pages of posts that reflect my transparency and commitment to customers service have still not convinced you or others reading, then I would ask not to consider purchasing from us. I have responded the same way time and time again - if you are uncomfortable purchasing from us or do not trust us, please do not do so. On a more general note, one should never spend any money they are not willing to lose, it is just part of the black market game.
While I can acknowledge I have periods of time in which I am slower in responding to emails and I occasionally miss an email, I am uncertain where your particular sentiment is coming from. With all due respect, I believe that I have responded to your emails within a 24 hour time period. I would ask that you check your spam/junk folders because as of now I am waiting from a response from you and not visa versa. Thanks.
Gramps
New Member
A couple times in the last few months I feel emails were either missed or dropped due to boredom mid-convo since I'm not a high end user. I'm not the pushy type so when I sense a lack of interest, I move along. Of course if you find my previous email and it's of interest, we can pick up where we left off. Either way, I feel the pip conversation should be of interest to you. In my research, MCT works great for some, not so much for others. There's some good info to know as a brewer and I feel you could benefit from having a plan to address it.
A few updates for the community. As mentioned in the above post, I will be actively reducing my public presence. I will still be easily accessible by email and PM but I will be posting less and less. At this point in time, I feel that we no longer need more public exposure then we have. We will not be going private because of the difficulty in logistics, but we will be reducing our overall presence online. Please direct questions or concerns to me by email.
The Mast P that was put into question a long time ago by Labmax now has analytical labwork completed. The raws batch came in at 95% purity of drostanolone propionate. Please email me for the actual report. We have been working for a long time to close the books on this issue. I believe this highlights the flaws in false negative from labmax.
Another issue I wanted to address, a month or two back there were come concerns about a Test C batch ending in 4997. We now have analytical labs back. But before I disclose the results, let's first take a look at two blood work posts on the same batch. The first individual got 4.1x weekly dosage, the second individual had 7.5x+ weekly dosage, both from the same batch. The proof of these two posts are below:
I am not trying to discredit either users, but the analytical lab reports that came back as overdosed - 222mg/mL. Again, please email for the actual lab report. This again highlights that individual variation can cause a range of blood work results. Here we have two individuals, same batch, but one with 4x and one with 7.5x. Usually, I try to stay out of the blood work dosing debate but at this time I believe I must make a comment. With the advent of analytical testing for users and sources, I believe we now see there is insurmountable evidence that properly dosed testosterone AAS does not have to fall a range - be 7-10x, 10x, 6-8x, etc etc. To be very frank, this community needs to seriously examine all the evidence at hand. You can either accept the analytical labwork in-conjunction with user blood work and conclude that there is no widespread hard applicable rule for blood work dosing, or you can reject the analytical lab work done through this site, myself, and various other sources. These European testing facilities have empowered users and buyers by allowing them to hold sources more accountable, but at the same time they have empowered sources by allowing us to prove to users we are not underdosing product or obtaining low quality raws.
As we try and move away from the public eye, I just wanted to remind everyone of our track record. Even in this very post, I have addressed a concern that was raised months ago. At the time the issue was brought up, I had no way of providing solid evidence. Ever since then I have been working for a solution. After all these months, I have stuck by my commitment to resolve concerns. I have seen how a few concerning posts can induce a widespread panic here. I would again ask that, if you are not fully comfortable purchasing from us after reading through our thread, please do not purchase from us. I understand there is always a worry about unregulated underground purchases. If you have issues, please contact me and let me address them. If I have not responded to your email within 48 hours, send me another email - I do not mind at all. In most cases, I simply forgot to respond or I overlooked your email.
Thanks for reading.
The Mast P that was put into question a long time ago by Labmax now has analytical labwork completed. The raws batch came in at 95% purity of drostanolone propionate. Please email me for the actual report. We have been working for a long time to close the books on this issue. I believe this highlights the flaws in false negative from labmax.
Another issue I wanted to address, a month or two back there were come concerns about a Test C batch ending in 4997. We now have analytical labs back. But before I disclose the results, let's first take a look at two blood work posts on the same batch. The first individual got 4.1x weekly dosage, the second individual had 7.5x+ weekly dosage, both from the same batch. The proof of these two posts are below:
I am not trying to discredit either users, but the analytical lab reports that came back as overdosed - 222mg/mL. Again, please email for the actual lab report. This again highlights that individual variation can cause a range of blood work results. Here we have two individuals, same batch, but one with 4x and one with 7.5x. Usually, I try to stay out of the blood work dosing debate but at this time I believe I must make a comment. With the advent of analytical testing for users and sources, I believe we now see there is insurmountable evidence that properly dosed testosterone AAS does not have to fall a range - be 7-10x, 10x, 6-8x, etc etc. To be very frank, this community needs to seriously examine all the evidence at hand. You can either accept the analytical labwork in-conjunction with user blood work and conclude that there is no widespread hard applicable rule for blood work dosing, or you can reject the analytical lab work done through this site, myself, and various other sources. These European testing facilities have empowered users and buyers by allowing them to hold sources more accountable, but at the same time they have empowered sources by allowing us to prove to users we are not underdosing product or obtaining low quality raws.
As we try and move away from the public eye, I just wanted to remind everyone of our track record. Even in this very post, I have addressed a concern that was raised months ago. At the time the issue was brought up, I had no way of providing solid evidence. Ever since then I have been working for a solution. After all these months, I have stuck by my commitment to resolve concerns. I have seen how a few concerning posts can induce a widespread panic here. I would again ask that, if you are not fully comfortable purchasing from us after reading through our thread, please do not purchase from us. I understand there is always a worry about unregulated underground purchases. If you have issues, please contact me and let me address them. If I have not responded to your email within 48 hours, send me another email - I do not mind at all. In most cases, I simply forgot to respond or I overlooked your email.
Thanks for reading.
I apologize in advance if you feel that way, but in almost all cases it is simply because I missed or overlooked your email. On that same note, I try to remain professional so I avoid answering to addressing personal or extracurricular questions or comments. I believe that sources should not be friends with their buyers, it is strictly a business transaction.
The above user and I are moving the conversation to email for privacy reasons.
In regards to the PIP issue with MCT, CSO (cottonseed), GSO (grapeseed), etc. This has been touched upon in the past. We moved from GSO to CSO because GSO did not hold compounds very well, we had a batch of Test C that was solidified from crashing so much. This caused inexperienced users to panic and worry about their product, some buyers even threw their product away before even coming to me about a solution. We then moved from CSO to MCT because MCT seemed to hold compounds even better. Furthermore, we saw numerous post online saying individuals like MCT better because it was less viscous (flows more easily) which results in it being easier to draw from the vial and easier to push into the muscle. As we have seen, different users react to compounds and oils differently. In fact, it is known that some individuals are allergic to certain carrier oils. There is little I can do to rectify this problem. It would be illogical to run a full line of different compounds in different carrier oils. For the time being we are going to continue using MCT in most of our products, so users should keep this in mind.
