FuriousWO
New Member
So this means the concentration listed on the summary page IS the concentration of the tested substance (eg 202ml/mg) and we are NOT supposed to multiply that concentration by the purity listed?
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
Dr Jims Hplc/ms Data
- Thread starter Dr JIM
- Start date
If you look AT THE GRAPH ITSELF peaks 1-3 are labeled accordingly, yet peak one was so small that is was, rightfully, ignored. So your left with TWO PEAKS that are labeled UNDERNEATH the graph as PEAK ONE and TWO. Those two peaks MAY be used to determine the concentration.
However peak ONE can not be used bc it's another compound that eluted at a different interval!
So your left with PEAK TWO. The total is 0.14mg/ml X the dilution factor (obtained from the calibration curve) of 1000 and your left with the substances concentration of 140mg/ml. Not to bad IME.
GOT IT
It seems some of you are catching on about HOW MUCH is missing when UGL post their data. Most are essentially useless, not bc of what is present, but bc of what DATA is MISSING!!!
However peak ONE can not be used bc it's another compound that eluted at a different interval!
So your left with PEAK TWO. The total is 0.14mg/ml X the dilution factor (obtained from the calibration curve) of 1000 and your left with the substances concentration of 140mg/ml. Not to bad IME.
GOT IT
It seems some of you are catching on about HOW MUCH is missing when UGL post their data. Most are essentially useless, not bc of what is present, but bc of what DATA is MISSING!!!
Could you explain what they mean in the explanation of analysis #2. Maybe I read to much into that, but it made me think they selected the testosterone standard for reasons other than detecting testosterone..
And you are one astute fella F!
Well the fact is that's exactly what he was doing. Screening several samples for the presence of ANY AAS but more specifically for T-e, and as you can see the most sensitive UVWL for the PRESENCE of AAS is 248a. That's bc he only had ONE confirmed research grade standard that had not reached it's expiration date, the latter being very important.
Once we received the other standards, Tren, Deca, Bolo, D-Bol, Var and a couple others, we could screen this sample for the presence of other AAS, which perhaps was responsible for the second tallest peak.
Obviously for me to release results with such limitations would have been pointless and BOGUS, IMO. That's the very reason this sample supplier had to wait for 10 weeks before the final results were released.
JIM
Well the fact is that's exactly what he was doing. Screening several samples for the presence of ANY AAS but more specifically for T-e, and as you can see the most sensitive UVWL for the PRESENCE of AAS is 248a. That's bc he only had ONE confirmed research grade standard that had not reached it's expiration date, the latter being very important.
Once we received the other standards, Tren, Deca, Bolo, D-Bol, Var and a couple others, we could screen this sample for the presence of other AAS, which perhaps was responsible for the second tallest peak.
Obviously for me to release results with such limitations would have been pointless and BOGUS, IMO. That's the very reason this sample supplier had to wait for 10 weeks before the final results were released.
JIM
Last edited:
Enigma
New Member
Reading the whole thread we can conclude:
1) Members in this forum try to find ways to analyse steroids
2) Nearly all of the data we catch is wrong. Lab tests are faked or wrong. LabMax is bullshit. Everyone is talking bullshit.
3) Only Jim is right!
I don´t believe that. I mean we had a sample of oxandrolone which gave a positive result at labmax, and in the latest test we can see that there is only a tiny amount of tren in the tab. what does that mean to us?: Labmax is wrong? The whole LabMax is Bullshit? So why does it work that well, and why do I get the right colors with most steroids? Furthermore the lab must be bad if it sends these pills. And finally the one Lab that tested (angus) that tab has to be bogus.
Or otherwise the mistake was made in the last test!
Don't get me wrong. I came to this board to find out more about how to test steroids and stay away from bad sources. And that´s what this subforum is about. So I don´t want to blame anybody and im not interested in these quarrels between members or between members and sources. We should have objective discussions!
But if we have nearly 100% of fail rate in Jims tests (and some of that samples were tested before positive by labmax!!) I aks you what roids do you take? Are all of them faked? how did you get huge? If there is 100mg/ml with 20% purity instead of 250mg/ml in your test?
As far as I can say, the steroids I tested were ok. Most are underdosed for sure. But my oxa tested positive and I felt it when I took it. It was g2g! I tested 12 samples with Labmax (and this forum was great help) and 10 had the right color, the other 2 I am not quite sure. But I am not throwing over all that information because one member (and it doesn´t matter how long he is in or how many points he has got in a forum) tells us to!
Enigma
1) Members in this forum try to find ways to analyse steroids
2) Nearly all of the data we catch is wrong. Lab tests are faked or wrong. LabMax is bullshit. Everyone is talking bullshit.
3) Only Jim is right!
I don´t believe that. I mean we had a sample of oxandrolone which gave a positive result at labmax, and in the latest test we can see that there is only a tiny amount of tren in the tab. what does that mean to us?: Labmax is wrong? The whole LabMax is Bullshit? So why does it work that well, and why do I get the right colors with most steroids? Furthermore the lab must be bad if it sends these pills. And finally the one Lab that tested (angus) that tab has to be bogus.
Or otherwise the mistake was made in the last test!
Don't get me wrong. I came to this board to find out more about how to test steroids and stay away from bad sources. And that´s what this subforum is about. So I don´t want to blame anybody and im not interested in these quarrels between members or between members and sources. We should have objective discussions!
But if we have nearly 100% of fail rate in Jims tests (and some of that samples were tested before positive by labmax!!) I aks you what roids do you take? Are all of them faked? how did you get huge? If there is 100mg/ml with 20% purity instead of 250mg/ml in your test?
As far as I can say, the steroids I tested were ok. Most are underdosed for sure. But my oxa tested positive and I felt it when I took it. It was g2g! I tested 12 samples with Labmax (and this forum was great help) and 10 had the right color, the other 2 I am not quite sure. But I am not throwing over all that information because one member (and it doesn´t matter how long he is in or how many points he has got in a forum) tells us to!
Enigma
Where did I say LM is "wrong". I know of ONE sample where LM "missed it" fella, so what are you talking about? Perhaps if you knew the difference between LM and HPLC you too would understand it's limitations and how LM may be used to the benefit of consumers.
Yep that's right UGL are screwing people why are YOU the only one shocked by this news. You want to dispute the accuracy of the tests I've posted, well let's see some evidence to the contrary.
Fail rate of 100% yea pretty damn close BUT how did I define "fail" fella or is that the part you choose to ignore.
"Objective discussions" your rhetoric is FAR FROM IT!
Yep that's right UGL are screwing people why are YOU the only one shocked by this news. You want to dispute the accuracy of the tests I've posted, well let's see some evidence to the contrary.
Fail rate of 100% yea pretty damn close BUT how did I define "fail" fella or is that the part you choose to ignore.
"Objective discussions" your rhetoric is FAR FROM IT!
Last edited:
johnnyBALLZ
Well-known Member
Uh, my var sample contained trace amounts of tren and did NOT pass labmax.. Are you talking about my sample or someone else's?
There is ONE sample that LM "missed" the content likely bc it contained TWO AAS in very low concentrations.
If people of enigma's ilk would read the LM guidelines, rather than spew their infinite wisdom based of 12 LM tests, they too would understand WHY LM specifically states such testing CAN NOT differentiate between a mixture of steroids.
If people of enigma's ilk would read the LM guidelines, rather than spew their infinite wisdom based of 12 LM tests, they too would understand WHY LM specifically states such testing CAN NOT differentiate between a mixture of steroids.
runner-runner
New Member
I am running about a full week behind so forgive me...Started out really excited 10min ago reading page one, but my excitement went down pretty fast. The testing is great, but without knowing who the sample is from, to me this is pointless testing. The only insight I can gain is basically no VAR is real. For the couple of members that said where their samples were from thank you, this is what we need. I guess I just do not understand why Jim would go through the trouble of posting results if he is not going to say where the sample is from. If you are trying to protect members we need to know who is selling shit gear.
All samples have had the source identified so I've no idea what your referring to. The angus tested sample came from Legend Pharm, another came from GETM. Incidentally as I've already mentioned I don't KNOW where all the samples came from and I won't post conjecture on this forum.
Last edited:
runner-runner
New Member
Well this is what I am talking about. IN YOUR ALL CAPS YOU SAY "IS DOC GOING TO RELEASE THE UGL SOURCES FOR ALL THESE SAMPLES, WELL THE ANSWER IS NO!" So yes the members spoke up about their samples, but if they did not you were not going to say what UGL they are from. Why are you not going to release the names? I am not complaining, I just do not understand why you would do all the work if you were not going to say where it was from.
runner-runner
New Member
Actually I understand your point that you cannot be sure where the samples come from, so never mind.
Thats correct It's the obligation of those who submitted the sample NOT MINE, bc they KNOW where it came from!!!
johnnyBALLZ
Well-known Member
First off, he doesn't know the names up front in most cases for a reason and secondly it's really not his place to do so.. I can't see it being a big issue though, I'd be surprised if a member wouldn't release the lab name..
You, my friend, are a troll... are you so bitch ass you don't use your normal handle, or do we already know you are full blown retard? Underdosed but good to go? Do you listen to yourself?
Do you have ANYTHING relevant to add to the discussion? Or just a "meathead" style labmax advertisement? Fuck off until you break off the babynuts and tell us who you are and where you are from- and stop misquoting and misinterpreting what you read here. No var passed labmax and your mother wish she aborted you. Both facts.
Do you have ANYTHING relevant to add to the discussion? Or just a "meathead" style labmax advertisement? Fuck off until you break off the babynuts and tell us who you are and where you are from- and stop misquoting and misinterpreting what you read here. No var passed labmax and your mother wish she aborted you. Both facts.
mercury
New Member
Enigma has been here for a while, he has a point. He sees what everybody sees that testing is a big mess.
On other hand your contribution to testing gear is none except attacking other members who have something to say.
Enigma
New Member
I´m talking about Capt. Forest´s var that was the "100%" result from angus. he said it was tested positive by LM in his thread.
Mixture? where is a mixture? Regarding your samples there was no mixture of steroids.
And I know for sure that LM cant test mixtures. Why do you think I don´t know that?
no, there was more than "ONE".: page 4. "underdosed testosterone" was the result by LM and angus. you said there wasn´t even test in it.
At least you argue objective
brutus, where is your intelligent/"relevant" part in that message?
What gear do you have? do you even lift? All UGL are full of shitty roids, but yeah, if they have nearly the amount that is written on the vial I´m ok with that.? So you really believe you can get pharma grade steroids from UGL and only these are g2g?
What is the number ONE problem with LM???
EVIDENCE WHICH SUPPORTS ITS ACCURACY!!!
Until LM releases, no doubt what they consider proprietary, evidence based data that clarifies it's utility for evaluating AAS it's credibility will suffer.
Why? Bc the current analytical lab standard requires CONFIRMATION testing of ANY and ALL REAGENT assays.
Thus this products, and there are MANY available in medicine are DESIGNED to RULE OUT DRUG USE should be able to determine if an AAS is present BUT differentiating one anabolic agent from another or providing a concentration is highly speculative.
And the latter is based on research from CURRENTLY available DRUG SCREENING tests.
EVIDENCE WHICH SUPPORTS ITS ACCURACY!!!
Until LM releases, no doubt what they consider proprietary, evidence based data that clarifies it's utility for evaluating AAS it's credibility will suffer.
Why? Bc the current analytical lab standard requires CONFIRMATION testing of ANY and ALL REAGENT assays.
Thus this products, and there are MANY available in medicine are DESIGNED to RULE OUT DRUG USE should be able to determine if an AAS is present BUT differentiating one anabolic agent from another or providing a concentration is highly speculative.
And the latter is based on research from CURRENTLY available DRUG SCREENING tests.
Last edited:
Enigma
New Member
I don´t disagree in that point!
Similar threads
