Dr Jims Hplc/ms Data

[Dr JIM]

These are FACTS PEOPLE not some biased BS I'm posting. Another fact AAS have absorbtions at two wavelengths 210 and 245 elute at around 10 -14 min using the MOBILE and STATIONARY phase solvents (ACN and H-2-O) the chemist chose in ALL the samples!

GOT IT! SO IF THAT SAMPLE DOES NOT SHOW A PEAK AT BOTH 210 and 245 it's NOT AN AAS

You will also notice in the VAR example above several peaks at around 15 min well sorry AAS don't elute that late!

Also it should be clear my comments are SEPARATE from the chemist WHOM WROTE ALL OF THE SUMMARY PAGE!

 

[Dr JIM]

Here this is what's called an overlay where the standard reference solution was compared to some samples. Notice how many sample elute before t-10 min? Well those are NOT AAS. Then a few do elute at T-10 to 14 min, and those ARE AAS!

Because some of these samples I've not yet posted, if you understand what I'm trying to explain, you should KNOW WHAT IS COMING and it's NOT GOOD IF YOUR ONE OF THESE UGL!

I only ask one thing of Meso members, don't shoot the messenger! (Unless you are one of these UGL and want to challenge the results, BUT YOU DAMN SURE BETTER COME PREPARED and know WTF your talking about!)

 

[Dr JIM]

there is small detail missing, those chromatographs are not HPLC/MS but HPLC

there is nothing new that webs/ sources are scamming they even make fake GC, GC/MS, HPLC, etc. reports to make heir bunk gear look legit.

No nothing is MISSING I just haven't posted any MS yet primarily bc they WERE NOT REQUIRED. Actually YOU could argue something was missing IF I posted the forthcoming analyses as an LC/MS. Which is why I chose HPLC/MS as separate procedural techniques. Perhaps you also suggesting a MS should have been done, if so please explain.

"Nothing new" you say really! Well show ME THE DATA bc to the contrary by far the overwhelming majority of UGL analyses LC/MC "prove" their stuff IS GTG! Well duh no surprise there!

Have you inspected the NAPS data located on their Meso thread Merc? Find any holes there?

No the fact, is I'm posting this information bc no one else has (excluding that which Millard was involved in years ago)!

 

[Dr JIM]

Ok lets try something that had something of value in it AND that something will be revealed by the HPLC. This sample was submitted as VAR but what did it contain?

 

[insertnamehere]

Ok lets try something that had something of value in it AND that something will be revealed by the HPLC. This sample was submitted as VAR but what did it contain?

Does the "Std" notation for listed with the Test and Tren in the "JB-4" pdf indicate that the Test and Tren are lab standards used for the purpose of identification of the sample submitted?

 

[Dr JIM]

Does the "Std" notation for listed with the Test and Tren in the "JB-4" pdf indicate that the Test and Tren are lab standards used for the purpose of identification of the sample submitted?

Thats correct and what std peak is the sample most CW? This is why STANDARDS ARE A MUST WHEN HPLC results are posted.

 

[Dr JIM]

Does any one know the sensitivity of MS? That's to say suppose you had a ONE ML sample of 100% "Tren" in oil, how much TREN is required for it to be displayed as a MW peak?

Now throw some "impurities" into that vial would that change the results?

I ask silly questions like this BC UGL know only TRACE AMOUNTS of a parent compound need to be present for it to be detected by MS.

Now tell me, why oh why are ON LINE analytical labs pushing MS as "the best test", lol!

It's all a ruse guys and no doubt many UGL are duplicitous in their deceit of mates thru the use of on line labs, bc now they have a mechanism to make money on both ends!

 

[insertnamehere]

I would never have thought tren would be present in a var tab. Thats crazy.

 

[Dr JIM]

I really don't know why either except that Tren being a an AAS used in livestock around MANY PARTS of the WORLD INCLUDING CHINA, is READILY AVAILABLE, and I suspect, likely to be legal to purchase and possess in many countries!

However bc it's not Alkylated at the C-17 position its GI absorption would be quite poor at best.

However the fact Tr-A differs from Oxandrolone by only 6 Daltons (312 vs 306) perhaps that is the UGLs reasoning?

 

[insertnamehere]

I really don't know why either except that Tren being a an AAS used in livestock around MANY PARTS of the WORLD INCLUDING CHINA, is READILY AVAILABLE and I suspect legal to purchase and possess.

However bc it's not Alkylated at the C-17 position its GI absorption would be quite poor at best.

However the fact Tr-A differs from Oxandrolone by only 6 Daltons (312 vs 306) perhaps that is the UGLs reasoning?

I don't think the UGLs have that reasoning. Why? Because they don't know what they have in the first place.

Would a regent or melting point test indicate similarities between the two compounds, and therefore cause a mistake in identification, due to the slight molecular weight difference? Or am I way off here?

 

[Dr JIM]

FOR HOSE PEOPLE WHOM WANT TO KNOW IS DOC GOING TO RELEASE THE UGL SOURCES FOR ALL THESE SAMPLES, WELL THE ANSWER IS NO!

However whomever provide me with the samples are well aware of the results and I've left that UP TO THEM.

WHY? Bc spreading "involvement" to other trusted members of Meso increases the credibility of this thread IMO and moreover I'm not SURE where some of the samples actually came from.

 

[Dr JIM]

I don't think the UGLs have that reasoning. Why? Because they don't know what they have in the first place.

Would a regent or melting point test indicate similarities between the two compounds, and therefore cause a mistake in identification, due to the slight molecular weight difference? Or am I way off here?

You don't make the kind of money web based UGL are making by being stupid and NOT knowing what's in the raws they have purchased. Of course they do!

Of course "small volume raw customers" may not know, but who in the hell would buy one KG of Tren and NOT validate or KNOW of it's purity.

 

[insertnamehere]

You don't make the kind of money web based UGL are making by being stupid and NOT knowing what's in the raws they have purchased. Of course they do!

Of course "small volume raw customers" may not know, but who in the hell would buy one KG of Tren and NOT validate or KNOW of it's purity.

How do they validate it though? They get HPLC/MS tests?

The only "evidence" I've seen the shows they know whats in their raws, is from their raw source.

 

[Dr JIM]

Obviously I really don't know for sure but I suspect many of the larger UGLs have direct connections to quality raw sources, which they may be A PART OF, or have developed trustworthy contacts bc of the volume purchased over time.

Of course they could obtain their own HPLCs but I suspect that's the exception to the rule.

 

[Dr JIM]

This is unequivocal evidence some in this lab business are either intentionally deceiving Meso and other forum members, or have a very limited fund of knowledge regarding ANALYTICAL AAS testing.

Regardless I personally believe this activity is outright FRAUD bc the nature of the errors are not only repetitive but also so glaring that malfeasance must be the predominant motive IMO!

This was originally posted as an "oxanadrolone purity of 100%"

This the the Ion Scan / HPLC of the VAR that had a "Purity of 100%". Can you see how this information was obtained, NO! Well neither can I, lol!

 

[devildog93]

I guess i missed a lot on the forums. I remember a thread asking about interest in testing, but i don't know that it ever went anywhere. Jim are you now offering testing or only to guys you know? I mean, bloodwork seems to work pretty well, but if we have serious testing going on did i miss the thread on it?

 

[Dr JIM]

Good question and the short answer is bc I'm doing this for ALL OF Meso's membership the testing will be selective and based on which LABS have been evaluated from an analytical perspective.

Consequently only after enough analyses have been completed (at least 50) that we as a group, have developed a reasonable understanding about which labs are more or less likely to sell AAS that meet the quality and quantity specs listed on those damn vials will I be interested in performing individual analyses.

So if you want something tested this will be the order of priority

1) ANY LAB WHICH HAS HAD CONFLICTING or INCONSISTENT LAB DATA POSTED!

2) A large volume lab with NO PRIOR TESTING

3) A small volume lab with no prior analyses

4) A large volume lab that has NOT had the specific AAS you purchased evaluated

5) A small volume lab that lack specific AAS testing

If you or anyone else believes your AAS may qualify simply forward me or Flesner a PM!

JIM

 

[devildog93]

A couple of questions about this then. I read where you said you will leave it up to people to post data or not. I know where i would stand on this. I would tell everyone everything i get, but i wonder where everyone else stands. Secondly, this "shit list" of bad suppliers would definitely cause some ire. What blowback other than butthurt shills and suppliers coming on the boards and crying can we expect?

 

[Dr JIM]

First unless someone has a damn good reason the info should be posted, after all that's why the tests are being conducted.

Second I reserve the right to post any study conducted, yet I really doubt I would ever need to do that bc most understand this is a group effort and if the predominant rationale for testing is one of individual pursuits "your" on the wrong thread, and forum IMO

Lastly could cause ire! Well I really don't give a shit, bc Im not doing this to appease labs. However if that ire morphs into more acceptable business practices later on, all the better.

 

[flenser]

A couple of questions about this then. I read where you said you will leave it up to people to post data or not. I know where i would stand on this. I would tell everyone everything i get, but i wonder where everyone else stands. Secondly, this "shit list" of bad suppliers would definitely cause some ire. What blowback other than butthurt shills and suppliers coming on the boards and crying can we expect?

The main reason someone would choose to not post the results is if the source provided a sample knowing it would be tested. A pharma grade result would be meaningless in that situation, and posting the results would be a disservice to fellow members.

The next most likely reason would be if the results of the test were in question. There are no regulatory organizations protecting us. No product or service is risk free.