Godt240 GODTROPIN 24IU - MALDI-MS; HPLC; UV - 2017/06 - Analyzer

[Analyzer]

I am posting these reports on request of @godt240 .
I have received these samples from him about a month ago, marked just with numbers. Mass spectrometry confirm presence of 191 AA hGH with molecular weight 22.129 kDa and its dimer. No other contaminants were detected. Dimer was found in about 15% of total protein amount, however initially it could be lower. I had some issues with mass spec so the samples were waiting reconstituted in fridge for about two weeks. This could lead to increased levels of dimer. Quantitative assays show total protein content 8.2 and 9.3 mg respectively. According to customer, these samples come from batches 160517 and 120617.

 

[Rockclimber]

Is my math correct, 24iu would be 7.992 mg?

 

[Eman]

You're walking down a very slippery slope @Analyzer - I hope you reconsider posting lab results on behalf of sources like this in the future.

Very disappointing for you to be doing this, IMO.

 

[Ripped]

You're walking down a very slippery slope @Analyzer - I hope you reconsider posting lab results on behalf of sources like this in the future.

Very disappointing for you to be doing this, IMO.

I think it was done right no matter what the results were he posted them a source could choose to post good and keep the sub par results hidden.
I also got respect for you're opinion @Eman I might only be looking at it from one angle.

 

[Analyzer]

You're walking down a very slippery slope @Analyzer - I hope you reconsider posting lab results on behalf of sources like this in the future.

Very disappointing for you to be doing this, IMO.

Well, I stated clearly that samples were donated by source, so it is up to each member's consideration whether trust them or not. Everybody is welcome to donate anonymous sample.

 

[Savagesteve]

Is my math correct, 24iu would be 7.992 mg?

24.6 and 27.9 iu

 

[Naugahyde]

Well, I stated clearly that samples were donated by source, so it is up to each member's consideration whether trust them or not. Everybody is welcome to donate anonymous sample.

The criticism should be more directed at the source, Godt. We discussed here in the forums how this should be done ie ANONYMOUS samples sent to Analyzer from long term members purchased from Godt/other GGh 'brands'. Godt was party to those discussions.
Otherwise there will always be the sneaking suspicion Godt sent his best gear to Analyzer for testing, while us normal Joe Soaps get the stepped on shit.
@Analyzer when you say the samples were identified by numbers did you know then they were from Godt? What was the timeline? Have I misunderstood the process here?

 

[Eman]

Well, I stated clearly that samples were donated by source, so it is up to each member's consideration whether trust them or not. Everybody is welcome to donate anonymous sample.

Yes, I'm more than capable of reading so I'm well aware of how you acquired that product. That's kind of my point. Members here are a little iffy on trusting Godt. If they aren't, they should be.

Then here you come along to post his results for him, for product that he sent to you himself.

It's a slippery slope for you to be on. You should have tested and sent back to him and ended the transaction there. No idea why you'd post his results for him.

I appreciate the service you're providing here, even if you're doing it solely for a side profit, but these test results should be considered worthless.

 

[Naugahyde]

Yes, I'm more than capable of reading so I'm well aware of how you acquired that product. That's kind of my point. Members here are a little iffy on trusting Godt. If they aren't, they should be.

Then here you come along to post his results for him, for product that he sent to you himself.

It's a slippery slope for you to be on. You should have tested and sent back to him and ended the transaction there. No idea why you'd post his results for him.

I appreciate the service you're providing here, even if you're doing it solely for a side profit, but these test results should be considered worthless.

Agree 100%

 

[Ripped]

Agree 100%

If I'm not mistaken members were on him about sending samples to @jano and not sending some to @Analyzer .

 

[Naugahyde]

If I'm not mistaken members were on him about sending samples to @jano and not sending some to @Analyzer .

I'll have to trawl back to check on that later. By this time pretty sure Jano had been 'busted' over the mands sample Saga anyway...
But what's the difference who does the testing it's the principal/ how it's done that matters right?

 

[Ripped]

I'll have to trawl back to check on that later. By this time pretty sure Jano had been 'busted' over the mands sample Saga anyway...
But what's the difference who does the testing it's the principal/ how it's done that matters right?

Yeah I understand the anonymous route as the best one but if there's nobody doing it I believe some testing is better than nothing in this instance .

 

[ickyrica]

The point is the testing facilities ability to maintain integrity in the face of a potential backdoor cash windfall is always going to be in question. Back channel communication is next to impossible to prove. This makes the possibility of a deal between the source and the testing agency very, very real.

Not saying that's the case here, just that it is a fact that shouldn't be ignored or taken lightly.

 

[Eman]

Yeah I understand the anonymous route as the best one but if there's nobody doing it I believe some testing is better than nothing in this instance .

I agree with you. But why have analyzer post the results? It's as if he's endorsing the source because of one test for product that the source sent in... Not a good look.

 

[Ripped]

I agree with you. But why have analyzer post the results? It's as if he's endorsing the source because of one test for product that the source sent in... Not a good look.

Yeah I see what you mean even though he may have meant nothing by it I agree isn't the best look for him. with him being new I'm sure he is going to have a learning curve . I believe that us why it's good that you brought it to his attention .

 

[Marcus]

I agree with you. But why have analyzer post the results? It's as if he's endorsing the source because of one test for product that the source sent in... Not a good look.

Exactly, I have a suspicion that GT instructed him to post results knowing the content of these specific vials or after analysis was received. Suspicious in both cases maybe because he thought more people would believe it if posted by Analyzer. Really this just raises more questions about the testing or any background deals more than anything else

Had it come back underdosed, would the results have still been posted? Either way, just as any member posts results received back, so should GT...

 

[DrinkFlintWater]

maybe because he thought more people would believe it if posted by Analyzer.

Winner winner, chicken dinner!!

 

[Marcus]

@godt240 care to comment?

@Rockclimber this might explain your dad's results a little bit better. Who knows the exact dosage of vials in his kit

 

[Ripped]

@Analyzer how did you come to you're conclusion of 15 to 20% Dimmer with Maldi?

 

[showstoppa]

Jesus Christ if some body isn't smart enough to realize a source is going to send in a good sample the. They deserved to get scammed.

It's not analyzers responsibility to protect people from themselves. Sometimes you can't help stupid, take the results for what they are. Y'all sound like little girls bitching about everything.