Enhanced Testing Database

readalot

Member
Thread to track all of the great vendor / member activities in the enhanced testing arena. The other thread covers only Projects 1 - 3 (demonstration); vendor/member activity can be found.

Slowly a surveillance database for raw AAS and GH quality/impurities can be built for additional testing (additional to API purity, HPLC, etc ). If nothing is found then that's a great result to track as well. The data will be available for those interested.

Scope:

1. Hplc Purity
2. GCMS
3. Expanded metals list
4. Endotoxins
5. Residual solvents
6. Sterility
 
Last edited:
@TheLobster

Assumed to be forthcoming....

 
Last edited:
@Axle Labs long excuse why he never did what he said he would do (9 months and counting)

 
@NeoAnabolics

Presumed forthcoming:

1. Sterility on finished oil
Well, two samples are being sent for sterility testing for current batches. For the up coming brews I am going to get raws tested before brewing.

2. Has also offered to properly test raws before brewing on upcoming batch. Welcome improvement to current standard here if implemented.
 
Everything came back fine. This database is showing that there are no concerns.

You want to create a “upper tier” level of sources but without even trying, they are showing their current products are at that level.

Who’s going to pay extra for something that isn’t really any better than what’s being produced now?
 
You want to create a “upper tier” level of sources
Not quite. I want sources to test their products consistent with their claims. If a source makes a pharma grade claim, where are the receipts?

What allowed you to make the observation you just did that everything came back fine? Yes, someone had to do the work. We have covered this, but in your opinion, does the database in its current coverage allow you to conclude with any certainty that everything is fine in the UGL universe? Or would additional surveillance be necessary to make a statistically valid conclusion? A little early to declare victory, don't ya think?

Before we ask for a premium grade of product, maybe we need some data to properly assess the landscape. Vendors who assist with this deserve credit IMO. Hence a higher tier of vendor who does the QC. Better than continuing on with the unsubstantiated marketing claims.


The community will decide if they will or not pay for the surveillance and data to draw meaningful conclusions.

Yes, someone will have to pay for the surveillance that today is sorely missing IMO. Either it comes from vendor margin or increased prices. I'm agnostic and focused on the data. Let the market decide.
 
Last edited:
there are no concerns.
If you get this figured out or already have, let me know:


Jano and I are curious and no clear answer yet.

No concerns? I can't say that at all. It's why QC exists and is an ongoing process. If it wasn't needed Pharma industry could save a bundle.
 
If you get this figured out or already have, let me know:


Jano and I are curious and no clear answer yet.

No concerns? I can't say that at all. It's why QC exists and is an ongoing process. If it wasn't needed Pharma industry could save a bundle.
How are compounds tested for purity that are used by the compounding pharmacies. Do the same.

It’s HPLC testing. You don’t need to reinvent the wheel just because Jano doesn’t have the calibration standards to determine what that “junk” is. The pharmacies don’t.
 
How are compounds tested for purity that are used by the compounding pharmacies. Do the same.

It’s HPLC testing. You don’t need to reinvent the wheel just because Jano doesn’t have the calibration standards to determine what that “junk” is. The pharmacies don’t.


I'm sure Jano will be pleased you have cleared that up for him.

You are fundamentally missing the issue.
 
Last edited:
Has the community decided? When was the vote?

Because you keep going to source threads and making it seem like the “readalot enhanced testing” is a new requirement.
Make it seem?

A source should back up their claims. If the community learns a bit from my posts then great. Some education is definitely needed. A requirement? Absolutely for me. Don't trust and verify. Enough of these pharma grade claims with nothing behind them.

If a source just wants to do HPLC. Fine. Just dont claim pharma grade. Simple.
 
Make it seem?

A source should back up their claims. If the community learns a bit from my posts then great. Some education is definitely needed. A requirement? Absolutely for me. Don't trust and verify. Enough of these pharma grade claims with nothing behind them.

If a source just wants to do HPLC. Fine. Just dont claim pharma grade. Simple.
I think you should call the FDA Karen and report them for using “pharmaceutical” when they aren’t.

I’m holding my breath. I’m sure your testing will identify something one of these times.

You’ve been speaking in hypotheticals for almost a year now. I respect that you spent a good deal of money on this. But unfortunately you could probably spend 2x to 3x more and it still wouldn’t be real.
 
it still wouldn’t be real.
Real? Believe me, the money was real LOL.

Just my testing? That would be a real shame.

No comments on my QC / surveillance arguments?

Is your hypothesis that all UGL gear is free of any significant impurities tested for by pharma? How would you test such a hypothesis?
 
Last edited:
Find something. Anything. Real.

You will have community-wide support.

Test some shitty Asian gear. Whatever. The worst of the worst. Just find something to show that any of this has value.
 
Find something. Anything. Real.

You will have community-wide support.


Test some shitty Asian gear. Whatever. The worst of the worst. Just find something to show that any of this has value.
You sure?

Value? We aren't aligned on the premise. I wouldn't have spent the money if this wasn't of value.
 
Back
Top