readalot
Member
Thanks. Appreciate your response. Your position on sterility is good to know. So keep on trucking with no preventive quality control measures in place. Take care.
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
Tbaz192
Member
Killer if you take all 500mg
Split not so bad but still pippy
Most of you are somewhat new or just have forgotten about AnabolicLab. This site supported and did a lot of blind testing through them and a lot of us donated to keep it going/funded. It’s actually what gave Meso the “harm reduction” spark. They tested for heavy metals and those reports showed that it was unnecessary as the presence of metals was nonexistent.
As far as sterility testing, I would imagine any oil/product that is filtered with a .2um that sources use will show that this testing is unnecessary and useless as well.
As far as sterility testing, I would imagine any oil/product that is filtered with a .2um that sources use will show that this testing is unnecessary and useless as well.
Intrepid
Banned
This is actually an interesting perspective and I appreciate you sharing.
What testing do you feel would be most beneficial, in addition to HPLC testing?
I've shown myself to be a big advocate for harm reduction and making sure these sources stay on point, but I don't really see any additional testing measures needed personally. This question is better suited for @janoshik but I think what @readalot is obsessively pushing for is a bit much. Again, I'm all for more testing measures but most of this is unnecessary and will cost a sustantial amount more. To put it into perspective a member or vendor pays $120 per sample hplc tested. When you add GCMS + sterility to that the cost is well over $500.
Truth be told I've just be silent in the shadows waiting on readalot to actually provide some reports so that it would show that it was unnecessary, but its getting tiresome seeing troll like behavior that has carried on for as long as it has. Which is what is happening when someone bounces in every source's thread on numerous forums demanding the vendor do what they want. There was a much different way of going about this. A simple discussion with Jano would have been a nice start.
readalot
Member
That did happen. His take on this is pretty clear.
Thanks for taking the time to provide your feedback. I don't agree with it; I do appreciate and respect the work you have put it in.
We should be getting some data soon. And another project in the works.
There is no amount of data collection needed to justify sterility testing. My position is this is a simple effective strategy used everyday by industry to do QC on batch production. Sorry if it makes the UGL scene appear less cool or edgy. If you use the don't trust but verify approach for HPLC, why would you not use the same approach with the basics of harm reduction -- sterility?
Last edited:
That's what makes this all a bit more unnecessary. For months you pushed for heavy metal testing and Jano stated he has actually never seen a positive test. You then take a leave of absence and come back pushing for heavy metal testing along with nearly every test offered.
Don't get me wrong, sure it would be awesome to see all the sources start testing for everything under the rainbow but most is just unnecessary and not practical. If they did so hell they would meet GMP standards if they were a legal entity as they would be a operating facility that manufactures a medical product that guarantees the dosage and show that the product is free of contamination.
readalot
Member
Intrepid
Banned
I think you raise some fair points honestly.
Axle also HPLC tests more than most sources, so i think he deserves credit there
readalot
Member
And to be fair here's what I pushed for:
Yes, metals analysis was on the list. What I was pushing for was an improved Meso testing standard. This latest disconnect where people can't even see the value of sterility testing really perplexes me. Credit to some of the veteran members here who do get it. Feel free to critique the list. BBBG was nice enough to provide his feedback over at SST.
If the majority (quorum) of members here can't see the value in something as obvious as sterility testing on each batch of injectables then truly I have wasted my time. Appreciate the feedback.
In retrospect, I should have done more educational outreach before pushing so hard for the whole list. I thought I did that quite generously in the Source QC thread. But these are complex topics that time to understand. Anyway, if I had to do over I would have focused on common ground with sterility instead of trying to replicate a pharma C of A.
Last edited:
Yeah, hard to address it when you edit your posts multiple times and this statement wasn’t previously there lol. Maybe in the sake of your name read your post and be happy with it before posting. Just giving you a hard time but this is the second time I’ve replied to you and went back and saw that you edit your posts until you run out of the 15 minute window to do so.
Anywho, back to sterility and common ground. You are preaching and pushing for this in a vendor’s thread who claims to use a double filtration system. If they are filtering into sterilized beakers/medias and then putting the product in sterilized vials then there is no concern. One would like to think these sources are but there definitely may be a few bathtub labs that aren’t. This is where we kinda see eye to eye and find common ground. As far as heavy metals and GMCS I think it’s unnecessary.
Speaking of @Axle Labs peristaltic pump setup. Axle I’ve always been curious why you don’t just dispense into vials instead of media jugs. Is it because with the filters attached you can’t get the pump to dispense accurately? Or do you just use the peristaltic pump to filter and use a media bottle dispenser to fill vials? It’s just something I’ve been curious about since you initially came here and shared your setup.
I see a big "if" in that statement. If only there were a way to verify that they are faithfully executing the sterile production practices that they claim to follow...
readalot
Member
It is a 30 min window. You are correct though I need to do a better job of just posting once and not editing. Too much multitasking. I am reading it; that's why I am editing it after proofreading.
I am glad we could find common ground. Thank you for that and the rest of your comments.
Respectfully.
Agreed and is why I brought it up and stated this is where we find common ground on something extra that would be nice to see a few test on.
Edit: but I do know and have read where a lot of sources brew a product and send it to Jano for testing before filtered. They do this so if jano’s report showed that the product was underdosed or over-dosed they could make adjustments to the brew and retest. Once they get a good report they then filter. This would throw the sterility testing out the window for those sources
@readalot i was unaware it’s 30 minutes now. Thanks for being civil. This has been a great conversation
Last edited:
readalot
Member
Brother, same here. Thank you. Anyone who tests their Empower product is a rock star in my book.
If you go a bit further in the thread (I know, things are hard to find since it’s so long), we switched away from peristaltic pumps to prevent any Guaiacol contamination. We have separate bottle top vacuum pump setups now for different oils.
As for dispensing straight into vials, this wouldn’t make sense since we’re filtering several liters of oil through the filters which needs to go into a connected receptacle. It can’t be dispensed directly into a vial unless you’re using a syringe filter (this is good for very low volume home brewing).
readalot
Member
Search results
thinksteroids.com
Impurities characterization.
But at least we have some common ground now. Let's focus on sterility for the time being. Care to participate and screen your batches for sterility?
