Do we really even know that fellas?
You mates need to understand LM is a reagent test only, as a result its primary utility is to RULE OUT the presence of ANY AAS!
From a analytical perspective it becomes MUCH more complicated when attempts are made to CONFIRM the presence of an anabolic agent and much more difficult still to determine which specific AAS is present.
Guys take a look at the chemical structures of AAS bc what's important is how little they may differ. Add a hydrogen, hydroxyl group or remove a methyl group and you now have a different AAS.
I will tell you NO reagent test is that good and in fact that's the very reason "drug testing" requires a MS and or an HPLC for confirmatory testing.
I'm not being critical here mates (especially of Odie) but as KKM has said, temper your enthusiasm with some reason based on science and to date the makers of LM haven't released ANY evidence based data proving this test does what they claim it can do!
You really want a better idea of how accurate LM may be NOW? Then you MUST use the same DBOL test on other AAS, especially those with a similar structure, to determine what type, if any, reaction occurs. (if you want some good test comparisons based on structural similarities, let me know)
Finally since many of the samples you fine mates sent me also underwent LM testing we will have a much better idea how to use LM once the damn lab (oh yea I'm as frustrated as anyone on Meso about the delays) I'm using is up and running with completed new standards.
Regs
JIM
