MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
MESO-Rx Sponsor AASraw: GMP-Certified Steroid and Peptide API Manufacturer
- Thread starter AASraw
- Start date
I haven't researched NMR in depth Ive just read that its used for molecular structure, composition, and purity testing. If its not sensitive enough to tedt raws then I guess I won't ever be sending raw powders to jano lol
Motojager
New Member
You do not need NMR to test raw. Jano does/did a good job IMO. The area I have seen the lab lacking is in GCMS. I think that is a staffing issue with them leaning on automated library searching without manual verification backing it up. Raws being shit and having co-eluting impurities that sends auto on goose chase. Lack of techs experience/time in catching it. They are going through growing pains no doubt. But none of the other labs that I have seen have the standards and historical library Jano has built.
Im not going to make excuses for anyone and im sure as hell not going to blame impure raws for bad testing. Im not trying to re open the thread thats already public either. I just dont wamt people making decisions on their own raws solely based on a jano test. With the cost of raws its not time tro be fkn around. Imagine throwing out a kilo of mast because it got an 80% test that wasnt accurate.
Was there some sort of resolution to this?
Photon
Member
I found this to be pretty interesting.
The test wasn't exactly blind -- they knew they were being compared against..and maybe spent extra time double checking each result, who knows. AB also took twice as long.
The Test D raws were melted too..so to get 89% on that from AB, was kind of odd.
Lemme seee
We have different purity% for each raw except MENT.
Based off these purity %, which more accurately matches the mg/ml of the finish brew?
Looks like AB is 3-5% higher for all except MENT.
AB doesn't give the decimal places? It's all rounded figures?
@Sampei
The-Squat
Subscriber
I have yet to have AB not match finished mg does from the raw %, keep in mind it could be months before a finish product gets sent from them same raws.I found this to be pretty interesting.
The test wasn't exactly blind -- they knew they were being compared against..and maybe spent extra time double checking each result, who knows. AB also took twice as long.
The Test D raws were melted too..so to get 89% on that from AB, was kind of odd.
Lemme seee
We have different purity% for each raw except MENT.
Based off these purity %, which more accurately matches the mg/ml of the finish brew?
Looks like AB is 3-5% higher for all except MENT.
AB doesn't give the decimal places? It's all rounded figures?
@Sampei
I'm no going to get into a Jano / AB pissing match, cross reference both if needed.
I will do so myself, take a raw report from AB and send a finished to Jano and visa versa if I feel I need to.
Both have had issues it seems and both seem to do good work, Jano communicates much better. His english is probably better.
Nobody can prove who is closer on those raws without doing a finished product test.
I would not try to rule one out, I would try to help both grow strong, we need them.
cousinmuscles
Member
Yes those too, I even complained about this to my rep, weeks ago when I got the trestolone. It was right after they posted a 98% result. I asked how can they use it for advertising but not recognize it when it doesn't suit them. You won't get so far with the rep as they are just doing their job, it is the boss who won't step down and make good with his customers. I wrote more about their own made reports but didn't mean I exclude the gap between the selected janoshik reports they use for advertising and what you often end up getting...
Iv
Ive never used AB. But I have used Jano. I figured I’d run a test comparing my brewing ability to their raw results to see if I could make a good batch with the adjustments from their raw results of each compound. The test consisted of sending in both test c and e raw powders and using results to make a batch of each. Then sent in half a ml of each finished oil in single vial and the results were spot on. I may have been slightly higher on the test c. But ultimately it was 300mg/ml test e and slightly higher that 250mg/ml of test c.
Attachments
cousinmuscles
Member
±2-3% is not bad testing, it is standard for HPLC, look it up. Janoshik also stated that they retest unusual results multiple times. Nobody is going to throw a kg of masteron with 80% purity unless it really sucked, like didn't melt, had the wrong colour. Even if it somehow was white fine powder that melted at the correct temperature, just contest janoshiks result and ask them to retest it.
Photon
Member
Not a pissing competition.
But rather to acknowledge, that there exists a consistent 3-5% difference between them (with AB being higher), try to understand where it comes from, and how we can get better more accurate results.
Without asking such questions, how can we expect any improvements?
Similar threads
