I will post this again, as it very clearly outlines the cause of the issues, and the steps taken to solve them.
Tablet Dosing:
“
One of these tests was edited by the Rep in order to falsely report the results. This test, when pulled directly from the Jano website, showed the true results indicated overdosing of an oral compound by 25-50%, with a variance between tablets of more than 20%. Unfortunately, the Rep chose to hide these results rather than address and/or correct the issue. This is especially concerning to the Moderators as the source continues to sell items labelled with microgram specific dosing, but fails to dose oral anabolics within 10mg of accuracy”
OK, so let's get into the meat of this. The most important thing here is the issue with the Anavar test report, submitted by a third party
I make Anavar 25mg per tablet, and I have done so for the last half decade. The issue brought up, is the accusation that we have no control over our dosing. The opposite is true. We have been using the same recipes for close to five years. The equipment we use for tablet manufacturing complies with GMP standard, and includes everything you need to make properly dosed products. I am not talking about TDP presses and geometric dilution- this setup consists of large volume GMP V-Blenders, powder micronizing units, and multiple GMP rotary tablet presses. Every person who is involved in the creation of Pareto products is highly educated, and I commend them on their attention to detail and work ethic.
I won't get into much detail in our injectable production, but in five years I have not had a report of debris, or uneven dispensing in our vials. We use digital machinery for mixing and dispensing all our our injectable based products- if you take 400
testosterone Enanthate vials and lay them side to side, there should be close to ZERO variation in fill levels. In short, we have spent the money required to be one of the highest quality labs in Canada.
As for my choice to make Anavar 25mg: If you would like to see my exact recipe, you can PM me- I have no issue sharing it with a well known member. You can argue for or against this, but the logic is this. Before the days of HPLC testing- you had to trust your raw supplier. Thus, it was better to be 'safe than sorry', meaning it's better to spend a little more money and give a slightly higher dose, if there was a chance the raw product wasn't pure. Given that this was the standard, I saw no reason to change it as time went by. Now, the forums operate one way, but the vast majority of sales are based on client feedback. The methods chosen at inception have resulted in a product that is sometimes slightly overdosed, well made, and free from risk of adverse health effects (infection, PIP, etc). I have made this my life's work, to make a product well, and create a strong brand. It's extremely frustrating to see the Pareto name dragged through the mud because of one tablet testing result.
Pareto was not always the large brand it was today, but the basic principles have remained basically unchanged since inception. Going back to the report submitted by a third party Pareto user, This explains why the first tablet is high powered. For the second, overdosed, tablet, I need to explain more about the production process.
We have multiple types of tablet presses at our warehouse, and each unit has it's pros and cons. To give a simple run down, you can compare our units to guns. Two most common assault rifles are the AK-47, and M16. The AK-47 is a very reliable weapon, and can withstand a very harsh environment without malfunction, or the need for repair. The drawback of the AK-47 is that it is less accurate that the M16. The M16 is a very accurate weapon, but is more temperamental, and more likely to fail under adverse conditions. So what does this mean for production of oral steroids?
We have units that are incredible reliable, durable, and are great for producing medium dosed tablets (5-25mg), but are less capable at handling high dose (50mg) or low dose (100 mcg) items. The reason for this is simply design. Less moving parts; no digital/computer controls, or hydraulic systems. These machines can run all day (and have been lately) with minimal repair or downtime.
For the outlier items, we have to use a more accurate and expensive machine. This is digitally controlled, and works extremely well. Now, you are probably thinking “Why don't you use this machine for everything?”
Great question. The motor on the advanced press is meant to be a 3 phase electric motor, but I had it converted into single phase. This was due to the lack of 3 phase power availability at the warehouse at the time. The result of this means we can not use the press as often as we would like due to risk of damaging the motor from the stress of running single phase. On top of this, I commissioned a specialized addition to help increase accuracy of tablet dosing. This part is prone to breaking, and creates a huge backlog when this occurs. As a result, this machine is only used for items such as
clenbuterol,
t3,
viagra,
cialis, etc.
Now that you have some background on the process, I will explain what I believe to have gone wrong with the Anavar result. Anavar is mostly done in the durable tablet press. The design of this press is a powder hopper, attached to a force feeder. When the powder hopper is nearly empty, the force feeder is able to spin freely and more easily push powder into the die. The result will be a heavier tablet- it will look darker, and be harder to break in half. This does not always happen, but can on occasion. This is the only logical reason for having a tablet variance close to 20%, as we employ pharmaceutical V- blenders for mixing of our tablet mix.
When I heard about the report, the first thing I did was e-mail Janoshik and ask what the weight of the tablet was. He did not have this measurement, as his method of testing does not call for this. The reason I asked, was because I have reason to believe that the overdosed tablet was one of these “hard tablets”.
As he was unable to give me this information, I took it upon myself to investigate further. I did a check up on production with my employee who is on control of oral production, and found that upon replication of the same Anavar batch, the tail end of the tablets would be heavier and harder. I corrected the process by instructing the employee to change the settings on the machine when the hopper is at a certain fill level, and it solved the issue.
I then put my attention to the report.
Here is where I will admit a huge fault, and this is against all the MESO principles which I am proud to say I earned my salt on. I believed the overdosed tablet to be a one off issue which was now solved, I chose to remove that result from the test, as chalked it up to an outlier.
On the same note, for 100mcg tablets we do use a step blending method to achieve as close as possible to proper dosing. For those who don't understand what I mean, step-blending is a multi stage process where extremely small dosage APIs can be evenly distributed into large tablets. There is a reason why Pareto makes clenbuterol and T3 in the 100mcg dosage, and it is because step blending, while effective, is not a perfect process. I would always suggest to a client that they purchase pharmaceutical grade T3, or liquid Clenbuterol from Pareto, if they need sub 50mcg doses. I stand by this statement to this day- without wet granulation, you can not be 100% accurate at the mcg dosing level.
But going back to the edited report: I don't think much needs to be said on this, as many have pointed out and shown me that this basically nullifies the entire point of testing Pareto for the history of our operations. I get it, and I agree. It's the only time I have ever opted to do this, and I realize now that I caused more drama by my unethical action.
The statement that I feared, which has become the rally call for expulsion from SST, is that I am unable to control dosing of the products. I chose to remain silent on the issue, as it is well known that among the many forum users, many are involved with other labs. I would not be surprised if some of the users in this forum were not involved in competitor operations. Hell, I would be having a field day if my biggest competition got bad press like this! But remaining silent seemed the wrong choice, as I see now. I hope my explanation lends some insight into the process we use at Pareto, and I invite any question about our production methods.
I would reckon most sources on MESO or SST have not had the experience I have had with tablet production. Hell, I don't think many of our competitors even use a tablet machine, or have built one from the ground up like I have, multiple times. I would be curious to see the results from the capsules being created on a “CAP M QUIK” which other small outfits are clearly using.