"Generic" GH ASSAYS

[rpbb]

Example?

He was paid for his services and he provided them for multiple sources there. Simec was also paid for their services to test the same products and failed to provide accurate results.

so basically what you're saying (correct me if I'm wrong), is that Janos is being paid to test hgh over at pm, and he considers his knowledge and expertise to be better than what's being done here

 

[RandallNowan]

Thank you to everyone who's putting the effort in here - especially @mands who remains the voice of reason, as ever.

 

[jolter604]

Why not pfitzer

 

[PrideofNYC123]

so basically what you're saying (correct me if I'm wrong), is that Janos is being paid to test hgh over at pm, and he considers his knowledge and expertise to be better than what's being done here

I'm not interested in determining who is smarter, but yes we paid him to test hgh. He also tests aas and the results can be found all over the internet; but that is not allowed at PM for one reason or another. We will eventually have a round 2 and he will likely test for us again(not my call, I just donate); he is not in the US and therefore we won't run into any potential legal issues.

I am sure he considers himself to be more knowledgeable than Jim and vice versa, and that's the rub that gets between then 2 when discussing methods/results. Jim is the established one here and he will get the benefit of the doubt from 99% of meso, but they both deserve to be heard imo.

 

[DickySmalls]

If AAA may have an error of 10% I believe that the black top vial would be dosed as TP was saying: 13.X + 10% isn't close to 15IU?

Eh at this point I'm not too worried. I sold all my greys and bought black tops. They're inexpensive and overdosed on everyone's tests so might as well take a gamble with those considering the greys will either be accurate @ 3.33 or underdosed which both ways is worse than being overdosed.

 

[rpbb]

I'm not interested in determining who is smarter, but yes we paid him to test hgh. He also tests aas and the results can be found all over the internet; but that is not allowed at PM for one reason or another. We will eventually have a round 2 and he will likely test for us again(not my call, I just donate); he is not in the US and therefore we won't run into any potential legal issues.

I am sure he considers himself to be more knowledgeable than Jim and vice versa, and that's the rub that gets between then 2 when discussing methods/results. Jim is the established one here and he will get the benefit of the doubt from 99% of meso, but they both deserve to be heard imo.

Than he should have disclosed that in his first post. What I recommend is that he posts his metholodologies and why he thinks his methods are correct, without attacking Dr J. I always enjoy a good scientific debate, but when you start the conversation out calling someone a liar, the conversation is going to go downhill fast. Also, the fact that CBS called him out as a fraud destroyed his credibility anyways

 

[mands]

Why not pfitzer

I know this thread has gone to crap but don't push your products here. Post them somewhere else please.

mands

 

[Geterdun]

Than he should have disclosed that in his first post. What I recommend is that he posts his metholodologies and why he thinks his methods are correct, without attacking Dr J. I always enjoy a good scientific debate, but when you start the conversation out calling someone a liar, the conversation is going to go downhill fast. Also, the fact that CBS called him out as a fraud destroyed his credibility anyways

Im sorry, but this thread isn't about debate, it's about two very devoted members, giving free time and free knowledge to this community. If there is to be debate, start a different thread please.

 

[Geterdun]

My post most likely come across wrong. I meant no disrespect to anyone here. I just want to try to keep our providers, Dr J and Mands here and continue with this testing. Again, my apologies to @rpbb if that seemed negative.

 

[janoshik]

You won't post it because you're a lying shill, get lost

Where exactly did I lie and whom exactly do I shill for?

Ad hominem me some more without evidence.

Maybe it's because you came to this thread with your lying Bullshit to protect some source. Like I said, start your own thread, and post your superior testing results

Where exactly did I lie and whom exactly do I shill for? Please, just point it out for me.
Thanks

BTW, anything posted at a paid source board is usually bullshit

Another pearl, thank you for your input as valuable as ever!

btw, you can't get into that lab posting section at PM without having 50 posts, which makes it useless. and are you the guy that was saying your testing was better than simecs. I always thought that was fishy, you came out of nowhere to "offer" you're testing services, always figured you were some guy the owners of the board hired to make everything look good. The sad thing is that when TP's blacktops tested so well by Dr J, TP gained a ton of credibility here (more so than the testing you did at PM created), wish he would have stuck around

WOW, you can't just get extremely easily some info the other people paid for but you actually have to contribute something for getting? Are you going to cry me a river for that?

And yeah, I totally got hired to make everything look good.

That's why Veteran supplies stopped selling HGH because of my results. LOL

How do you know his were any better.

Well at the very least I'm not saying that pharma is vastly overdosed, unlike SIMEC.

Also, SIMEC says Karl puts 30 IU into his vials. That is bullshit - even Karl says so.

If it were true why would Karl say 'NAAAAH WE PUT MUCH LESS HGH IN THERE' ?

Make it run through your brain cells a few times.

I was thinking even though we are testing HGH and it's known we really don't know what we are testing when it comes to a few samples out there. For example the starch sample we found. This would be beneficial to test using AAA as HPLC could not identify without having a standard correct? Or am I off base here?

I'm not really sure how AAA can identify starch, Mr. Mands - would you care to explain?

Also, I believe you are not correct, AAA cannot just identify everything (for example starch, as far as I know).

Let me make an example:
if you have a sample that is pure 1mg of HGH, lets say AAA tells you it's 1mg, HPLC tells you it's 1mg - we both clear on this, right?

now, if you have 0mg of HGH, both AAA and HPLC tells you it's 0 - still we do agree, I believe

However, what happens, if we have 1mg HGH and 1mg of lets say albumin protein?
I know what happens with HPLC testing - it tells you there is 1mg of HGH

Are you sure you know what would AAA tell you, Mr. Mands? I am very sure the information about HGH content would be much different from reality

But doesn't AAA actually identify proteins that HPLC cannot? I was under the impression HPLC couldn't identify contaminated proteins or amino acids and AAA can. Let me know if this isn't accurate.

Yes, AAA can identify proteins Mr. Mands.

HPLC cannot identify proteins - HPLC can identify protein only by comparing it to a standard.

However, if you use AAA only (without collecting fractions of HPLC) on a mixture - for example for the mentioned mixture of albumin and hgh you will get nonsense.

Even if you used HPLC in conjunction with AAA to identify proteins I doubt it is of any use for our purposes.

If the AAA outputs the results for for example myosin as a protein - how would you know it is myosin without an extremely huge library and knowing what you are EXPECTING in there.

If you could find them that wold be great. If not I will look as well.

Thank you and that's good.

mands

I can look when I have some time Mr. Mands, but I am busy at both of my jobs these days and I apologise if I won't be able to find much.

Regarding the precision and accuracy of AAA it strongly depends on the lab.

See following.

AAA does not have an error of 10%. It does not even have a variance of 10% as far as I know.

mands

https://thinksteroids.com/community/attachments/1-3-sam-hsa-control-2021-pdf.50721/

https://thinksteroids.com/community/attachments/1-3-sam-hsa-control-1-020-pdf.50718/

This is data posted by Dr. JIM.

Coefficient of variation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

% RSD is Coefficient of variation

In the sheets posted by JIM I see dont see a variation UNDER 5% and most being OVER 10% Mr Mands. And this is only for intralab assays.

And this is just calibration - what am I supposed to think about the results of real samples then?

If I am wrong, please correct me.

Also, let me again quote JIM and his contradicting statements:

"Finally with a margin of error of around 0.1% it's considerably less sensitive and/or specific than an AAA!" (talking about HPLC)

"AAA QUANTIFIES GH quite accurately with a margin of error of around 5%, IF performed correctly! "

so basically what you're saying (correct me if I'm wrong), is that Janos is being paid to test hgh over at pm, and he considers his knowledge and expertise to be better than what's being done here

I'm being paid to test on PM, reddit, 4chan, anasci, eroids, individual customers (users), individual sources etc.

I consider my knowledge and expertise on subject to be much better than that of JIM.

If you take a long look, just straight out compare how much information / vs shittalk or personal attacks had each of us posted. Just compare it silently and make up your own judgement.

Than he should have disclosed that in his first post. What I recommend is that he posts his metholodologies and why he thinks his methods are correct, without attacking Dr J. I always enjoy a good scientific debate, but when you start the conversation out calling someone a liar, the conversation is going to go downhill fast. Also, the fact that CBS called him out as a fraud destroyed his credibility anyways

Are you doing to tell me what should I be doing? Oh thank you Sir!

Are you telling me to not attack JIM?
If I see somebody posting lies and bullshit I should not attack him? Why, because you like it up your ass from him? Not good enough of a reason for me. (but I ain't saying you can't enjoy it, your call)

Also, JIM calls everybody liar first so your argument sounds stupid, doesn't it?

Also go read the thread CBS is referring to. The retards couldn't even work out European way of writing dates and took it for a conclusive proof.


FROM NOW ON I'LL KEEP RESPONDING ONLY TO POSTS THAT ARE WRITTEN WITH GOOD MANNERS

 

[Dr JIM]

Simec was off on all included the pharm standard we gave them.

There is no guarantee that his results or Jim's results are correct, but they are all we have to go by.

.

Please, there are no guarantees in ANYTHING in life but by golly there's a huge difference bt those who hide behind a vail of secrecy as does Jano when he refuses to cite any of his own data yet is more than willing to criticize ours.

Damn dude have you ever been fed a pile of shit if he's "conducting tests" without OPENLY revealing the data.

OTHERWISE LETS SEE THE DATA YOU SPEAK OF and then maybe we can have a "fair and balanced discussion"!

 

[janoshik]

Please, there are no guarantees in ANYTHING in life but by golly there's a huge difference bt those who hide behind a vail of secrecy as does Jano when he refuses to cite any of his own data yet is more than willing to criticize ours.

Damn dude have you ever been fed a pile of shit if he's "conducting tests" without OPENLY revealing the data.

OTHERWISE LETS SEE THE DATA YOU SPEAK OF and then maybe we can have a "fair and balanced discussion"!

I mentioned the reason why I am not posting them over here.

It would felt as betrayal to the members of pm.com community who paid their money for my services and I am not willing to do that.

However, feel free to join the board and see for yourself. There is no secrecy.

If you go over there and post the data here, it will be on you.

Also, please mind that most of my criticism is not about the data provided, but about your claims and integrity.

 

[janoshik]

For example post #1161

 

[mands]

I would like to add something here and I will add to the new thread as well. The testing that @Dr JIM and I are doing is in NO WAY for the purpose of getting refunds or free gh from any of the suppliers that we have tested or will be testing.

It's to educate the community about the generics being sold out there... Good or Bad!

You can use it as one of many tools when deciding what GH to run.

mands

 

[Dr JIM]

I was reading a study and the average percent error and variation was less than 2.5% and that was 10 years ago. I believe it's much better now. Still searching.

mands

It depends upon the sample and technique used MANDS but Id rather provide a high end standard deviation than a lower one. The reasons may NOW seem a little more obvious as lab rats love to split hairs! Been there done that!

 

[janoshik]

I would like to add something here and I will add to the new thread as well. The testing that @Dr JIM and I are doing is in NO WAY for the purpose of getting refunds or free gh from any of the suppliers that we have tested or will be testing.

It's to educate the community about the generics being sold out there... Good or Bad!

You can use it as one of many tools when deciding what GH to run.

mands

I don't think anybody had ever implied that Mr. Mands - I certainly did not ever imply that I believe you are doing this for personal gain.

Neither I did ever suggest JIM does. Like I said many times over, what 'my problem is' are his claims which are untrue, far stretched and usually express with unusually bad manners.

Such untruths and lies, if I may, can confuse many people (and it obviously did) if they come from somebody they hold in regard, that's why I called him out.

 

[janoshik]

It depends upon the sample and technique used MANDS but Id rather provide a high end standard deviation than a lower one. The reasons may NOW seem a little more obvious as lab rats love to split hairs! Been there done that!

You would rather provide a high end deviation than a lower one?

What is this, then?

'"Finally with a margin of error of around 0.1% it's considerably less sensitive and/or specific than an AAA!" (JIM talking about HPLC)

 

[mands]

I don't think anybody had ever implied that Mr. Mands - I certainly did not ever imply that I believe you are doing this for personal gain.

Neither I did ever suggest JIM does. Like I said many times over, what 'my problem is' are his claims which are untrue, far stretched and usually express with unusually bad manners.

Such untruths and lies, if I may, can confuse many people (and it obviously did) if they come from somebody they hold in regard, that's why I called him out.

This wasn't geared towards you at all.

mands

 

[CensoredBoardsSuck]

Also, please mind that most of my criticism is not about the data provided, but about your claims and integrity.

Coming from a fucking clown who whored himself out to gentech and produced fake lab tests is pretty damn funny.

BTW, have you and your boyfriend figured out if you're in the UK or that former commie hellhole, the Czech Republic, yet?

 

[mands]

I'm not really sure how AAA can identify starch, Mr. Mands - would you care to explain?

I believe there is a misunderstanding or I stated it wrong. We had a vial sent in from a member that only contained carbohydrates or starch. The AAA recognized there were no proteins present and then after testing it was determined it was starch.

Let me make an example:
if you have a sample that is pure 1mg of HGH, lets say AAA tells you it's 1mg, HPLC tells you it's 1mg - we both clear on this, right?

now, if you have 0mg of HGH, both AAA and HPLC tells you it's 0 - still we do agree, I believe

However, what happens, if we have 1mg HGH and 1mg of lets say albumin protein?
I know what happens with HPLC testing - it tells you there is 1mg of HGH

Are you sure you know what would AAA tell you, Mr. Mands? I am very sure the information about HGH content would be much different from reality

Well it would tell us exactly what was in the sample provided if it was indeed protein correct? Are you saying it would not identify the albumin protein percentage or otherwise?

Yes, AAA can identify proteins Mr. Mands.

HPLC cannot identify proteins - HPLC can identify protein only by comparing it to a standard.

Regarding the precision and accuracy of AAA it strongly depends on the lab.

I would think AAA would be better suited for identifying GH and much quicker? I believe HPLC would be a all around better choice for identifying HGH or other PED's. If you had a standard to go by? Am I assuming correctly?

mands