MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
a few more GENERIC GH ASSAYS
- Thread starter Dr JIM
- Start date
Please let me know which inconsistent sample results?Buck,
I don't know enough about the testing to give an accurate answer, so I'll let Mands, Jim, and Jano discuss that.
But....judging by the inconsistent sample results posted, the SEROSTIM result, and the information stated by the lab....IMO....I think the results are hit and miss using this testing method (AAA) for the type of samples we are testing (formulated proteins - biosimilars)
Also, we are double and triple checking the Serostim results? This was purchased from a private source is my understanding.
mands
Any testing from SIMEC should be ignored and not even considered in my opinion. They don't have a clue what they are doing and are very new to testing HGH.
mands
Cpriest88
New Member
Yes that was a typo on the spreadsheet
That has also been our xperience .
janoshik
Subscriber
So, how's it going to be with the Serostim vial that came at 2mg?
Is JIM going to put it on LCMS for quantification?
Is JIM going to put it on LCMS for quantification?
janoshik
Subscriber
Thank you Mr. Buck, but my question was more specifically pointed onto quantification.
Jano, Jim, Mands,
This was done by a different lab using the same testing method (AAA) for a vial from the same kit as SAMPLE E that Jim's lab tested
1. Analyze somatropin aliquot by gel electrophoresis to verify the presence of the correct protein band.
2. Use UV absorbance at 280 nm to measure specific absorbance. To quantify use a NIST BSA standard for comparison.
3. Amino acid analysis (AAA) can be used if resulting data is corrected for the presence of excess Glycine.
Jim's Lab tested the White Top vial @ 3.62 mgs/vial
My Lab tested the White Top vial @ 2.832 mgs/vial
My Lab also tested an Authentic JINTROPIN 3,33 mg vial
The result was only 1.405 mg/vial
This would indicate my IGF1 @ 420-480 at only 2IUs daily
This is not possible
So the results are incorrect as the lab states:
This sample (JINTROPIN) contained a large amount of glycine and some methionine. This together with the presence of trehalose and mannitol may interfere with the analysis due to matrix effects leading to a lower recovery of amino acids.
NOTE:
We routinely analyze purified proteins for which we usually recover between 90 to 99 or close to 100% depending on the protein analyzed. In general, glycoproteins are observed with lower values, due to their carbohydrate content. To get a more accurate data for formulated proteins (-biosimilars), a purification step or method may need to be used prior to AAA.
Since Glycine is a normal excipient used.....(ex Sandoz Omnitrope 5.8mg/vial contains 27.6 mgs Glycine per vial)
Many of the samples recently tested using AAA states high levels of glycine
Can we conclude that most of these results are inaccurate/inconsistent, especially since the Pharmaceutical Serostim sample result doesn't reflect the label dose (4mg) - (AAA result 2.08 mg/vial)
Thanks
Last edited:
janoshik
Subscriber
Regarding the note, I have suggested before, that the only way AAA would be as useful as other methods would be if the proteins were fractioned by HPLC before the AAA would be concluded (the purification step mentioned here).
Without purification it would, however, provide false results that would be too high.
Too low results can be caused by multitude of reasons, which I don't really feel like getting into again. I would wait for the results of LCMS - provided those are conducted with at least some sort of a standard.
Cpriest88
New Member
s
JESUS. What collosal waste of resources, time, energy and money... all this could've been recitified early on when countless people were demanding a test on a legitimate verifiable USP HGH Sample to assess the accuracy and reliability of this testing methodology. This was brought up in the first round of testing that went down in flames ....
This is rediculous... I have zero faith in any GH analysis performed by clearly inexperienced players ... whether it's SIMEC or Jim and his merry men of "scientists". Fuck this... I'm going back to my own IGF serum testing ... and probably stay there until there is some sort of miracle and amateur hour is sorted out.
And no offense to Mands as his heart is in the right place and I respect the fuck out of him and all that he does ... if it wasn't for him and Millard I wouldn't even give this forum a second look.
I'm done updating the spreadsheet ... if anyone wants to take the reigns let me know .
JESUS. What collosal waste of resources, time, energy and money... all this could've been recitified early on when countless people were demanding a test on a legitimate verifiable USP HGH Sample to assess the accuracy and reliability of this testing methodology. This was brought up in the first round of testing that went down in flames ....
This is rediculous... I have zero faith in any GH analysis performed by clearly inexperienced players ... whether it's SIMEC or Jim and his merry men of "scientists". Fuck this... I'm going back to my own IGF serum testing ... and probably stay there until there is some sort of miracle and amateur hour is sorted out.
And no offense to Mands as his heart is in the right place and I respect the fuck out of him and all that he does ... if it wasn't for him and Millard I wouldn't even give this forum a second look.
I'm done updating the spreadsheet ... if anyone wants to take the reigns let me know .
Last edited:
janoshik
Subscriber
Though, after all tie misinformation and attacks JIM had posted, I hate to be the devils advocate, I gotta say that there is a possibility of Sero being faked. Much less likely than erroneous analysis, but possible.
sasquatchhunter
New Member
But did the Sero come from a legit pharmacy? Or was it an online source? I imagine pharm hgh is faked same a gear. It seems like a choice someone needs to make and assumes risk. Or find a buddy with AIDS
Seros is from Pharmacy....highly doubtful it's fake..
The lab clearly states (my Lab) that there are issues with this method of testing (AAA)
LAB STATES:
If the somatropin is a pure protein without formulation buffer AAA will allow quantification of the protein using our standard AAA.
However, if somatropin is formulated as a pharmaceutical drug for injection, a glycine buffer is used for the formulation. Therefore the glycine peak will be very large and comprise the data.
The JINTROPIN results are incorrect also, along with other samples
Jim mentioned additional testing (LCMS) for the SEROS sample
But, that would mean all the samples would need additional testing
I have 4 other samples being tested (a third lab)
I'll post them and compare the results to Jim's lab
I appreciate Jim and Mands time, money and effort
But....if we are posting results with underdosed results....we need to make sure that the testing method is accurate before throwing these sources under the bus
Last edited:
sasquatchhunter
New Member
Welp... looks like we pin who knows what. Hoping it is what it is. I do know in generic world there are 3 people everyone seems to recommend. HK,TP,PD. Even Bostin Lloyd says HK and was waiting for PD is my understanding. Needless to say this all just seems like an incredible waste of time. That if one was to go generic go to one of those guys. But preference would be get pharm.
janoshik
Subscriber
Thank you, I was not aware that the Seros were obtained directly from pharmacy.
I think that settles it.
I think that settles it.
I'm bummed too
Was hoping this cheaper method of testing (AAA $200) would be more accurate (mg/vial)
