Janoshik Accuracy Worries Address

[dinfar1337]

Their internal report is completely useless and ought to be ignored.

yes i didnt mention their internal report at all because its always 98-99%

but its not even a %. its just gcms or gc_lc which their report states.

dosent look like hplc at all ive said it many times! it literally says area % xd

thank you for taking time answering my question

 

[Stealth500]

Keep in mind ProM is a pay to play board. He doesn’t give two shits for testing. When multiple blind tests on his paying sources came back bad, of course he’s going to have them deleted and do what he did over there. He loses money if sources can’t pay their fees.

There’s a reason you don’t see those sources anywhere else unless they can pay to sponsor, and another reason you don’t see any testing from them, except maybe 2.

New board rules, users aren't even allowed to post tests there anymore.

 

[cousinmuscles]

That’s pretty piss poor tbh. People are paying your company and expect accurate results. Is it that hard to have these guys trained properly to avoid mistakes?

Seems you grew too fast and employed folk who don’t have a clue and you just shrug your shoulders and wave it off.

I guess Big A on ProM was right about you/your company…

There is no such thing as never making mistakes. However you can choose to address them as he is doing here.

 

[dinfar1337]

sorry to off track this but i hope you can remember this odd sample i sent in. If you look the hplc result was HIGHER than the actual content in the gcms result

gcms area dosent equal hplc percentage.

jano has good accurcary on raws in hplc. although the hitrate can be 90% or so, or smaller amounts of impurities can co elude in the 10% he misses. from my personal experience comparing gcms and hplc test results and then determining jano vs analiza.

analiza will always count all impurities as the main molecule. idk if they even test it or just getting bunch of money for throwing numbers out but yeah defiently not calibrated for raws.

double testing or just regurlar testing at jano is fine, you get so many right tests you can define a good pattern.

 

[The-Squat]

I apologize for the delays, life has its ways to get at me.

So, the nandrolone decanoate that tested at 78%, later on at 54% and 94% with a different laboratory.

I did not manage to find any 78% nandrolone decanoate raw result in the past three years, no matter how hard I tried. Could I, perhaps, be pointed out to report number of that one, please? Only result of ND in the 70%s range of purity is from a different client. @The-Squat
With our record keeping not only I'm seeing that my team was highly hesitant of the result and retested it twice (so three times in total), I'm also seeing how the sample looked.

View attachment 372609


Now, the great thing about physics is it is universal. As many of you here do know a pure solid melts at a single temperature because its crystal lattice is uniform and packs/organizes optimally. This is the entire point of melting point testing. Now, if that solid is far from pure, the melting point depresses.

So, if something that was supposed to be solid at room temperature, such as nandrolone decanoate is so liquid it has to be sent in a vial, it is way beyond reasonable doubt that it is far from being pure.

Given the fact there's probably not a person at this planet who had seen more nandrolone decanoate raw powder samples than me, I also dare to say it is nowhere near 90%s or 80%s. I don't wish to appeal to my authority - there's dozens of reports in that range, where ND tested in 80%s and it was still pure enough to remain solid.

89%
View attachment 372610

83%
View attachment 372611

It really only starts going full liquid way below that.

So I feel that the fact of how the sample looked is sufficient proof for me, that my employees did not fail here.

I have to say, I have no idea how Analiza Bialek arrived at their number and their mg/ml and I have to admit they are experts at providing their clients with the numbers they like seeing. Maybe used your own raw as a standard? We've seen that with some lab in the USA using raws from their clients as their standards. Bold U. I'm sure someone will remember. Not me, not today, I apologize.

Anyway, I find it a little dishonest to claim "All other tests from other people of the finish showed to be at the 94%." when there is exactly one other test being mentioned by a company such as AB, who was not able to stand up to much scrutiny even here, on Meso.

I do hope the best for you, I really do but I don't have the 78% as it wasn't mine. Maybe he will provide it or chime in.

The finished products are real, call me dishonest all you want but you are the one every time I have an issues and come to you a couple weeks later just to be told samples are destroyed after 2 weeks but you magically find this one after 6 months.

We have resolved things in the past if it was in the time frame of the sample not being destroyed. You have told me more then once it's too late the sample was destroyed because we only keep it 2 weeks.

I have sent Deca to you a few times that have melted from the heat before and you call it normal, but now all this? You are the one that told me to send deca in a vial because it melts in the summer,

I have let this go a long time ago, I wish to no further discuss it because I just don't see the consistency with you own words.

It's not like I'm the only one with these issues.

Mistake happen is right but you are not owning up to this and I don't care, it's not just me and the deca, I'll leave it at that.

 

[The-Squat]

I see the vial shown is a picture off the report my mistake on that.

The other raw report is 79.77%, same batch as the 54%.

AB had no clue of the concentration of the finished product.

I had to correct myself on that, but I'm done here as it's all water under the bridge for me.

 

[Cob]

I have the 79.77% test but my name is on it and Im not posting it. It was done on August 15th 2025. I sent you my sample then squat sent you his. It was the same batch of deca. We got 2 wildly different results from you. Wildly different.

Jano, as a business owner myself this is not the way to handle your mistakes. Own them. Denying them when there are multiple people claiming the same issues is not the way to fix issues. Obviously a mistake has happened. Mistakes do happen to everyone, but not owning it only shows your character. Your testing has been basically banned on pm as farbas I know. Thats pretty telling of how you handle these issues.. I dont care iif people want to claim pm are a pay to play. Big A didnt just one day wake up and say im going to lie about jano now after all this time and not allow his testing to be posted. They make enough money they dont need to lie about a testing company. Where there is smoke there is fire.

About deca being melted, Ive been doing this for over 13+ years. Deca always melts in the summer. That has nothing to do with the purity. You've seen more deca raws then anyone yet you make such a rediculous comment. Is it room tempature in the summer? Is August in the summer? Are all packages shipped in continuous air conditioning? Im sorry but stating it was melted shows its not pure is laughable, especially by someone who does what you do.

People need to stop making excuses for this. Mistakes happen. You all troll the hell out of sources for a mistake but when jano makes one he is god and infallible. Thats the type of behavior that makes a community look bad. It doesnt serve anyone any good to run cover. Covering for people is not what makes for an honest community that prides itself on helping people and being safe.

If you want to test jano then send him samples from the same batch at different periods of time and see how accurate he is. Do your own diligence before blindly defending somei one.

All im saying here is Jano needs to take responsibility, for his testing when a mistake is brought to light. I cant work with anyone that thinks its everyone and every thing else thats caused the issue. Excuses dont work with me. Respect does.

 

[Swedishsteel]

wner myself this is not the way to handle your mistakes. Own them. Denying them when there are multiple people claiming the same issues is not the way to fix issues. Obviously a mistake has happened. Mistakes do happen to everyone, but not

Great input. I find it ironic tho that big A dont allow jano testing, as he himself constantly delete my posts about a board sponsor scamming me on 500-700 usd years ago. rotten guy

Promotes SEOs that dissolves peoples muscle groups, like jerry wards shoulders n ruined my left biceps. what do those poison syntherol contain, battery acid !? off topic but still

 

[Cob]

Im not saying Big A is a saint by any means but jano has been banned from more boards then just PM. I dont agree with anyone running cover for others mistakes. Just own it...its really not that hard to do and the results are much more positive as long as the correct action is taken to fix the mistake.

I dont even really care much aboit jano...I have no intentions towards him. I simply commented because of how he is trying to handle this issue.

 

[dinfar1337]

If you want to test jano then send him samples from the same batch at different periods of time and see how accurate he is. Do your own diligence before blindly defending somei one.

All im saying here is Jano needs to take responsibility, for his testing when a mistake is brought to light

Eg. if you weight 100 mg of the powder, but detect 94.31 mg of the substance there, the purity is 93.41%. Even if the HPLC graph shows 99.91% for example.

Regarding the other two tests - as you correctly point out, if co-elution happens, than the measurement is higher than it should be, artificially improving purity.

Identification of impurities is very tiresome and expensive process and we cannot afford to do that at the point in time where every single of our employees is working 20-30% overtime. I myself am writing these lines down with severe fever.

@Cob are we in the same thread? xd

 

[Cob]

I apologize for the delays, life has its ways to get at me.

So, the nandrolone decanoate that tested at 78%, later on at 54% and 94% with a different laboratory.

I did not manage to find any 78% nandrolone decanoate raw result in the past three years, no matter how hard I tried. Could I, perhaps, be pointed out to report number of that one, please? Only result of ND in the 70%s range of purity is from a different client. @The-Squat
With our record keeping not only I'm seeing that my team was highly hesitant of the result and retested it twice (so three times in total), I'm also seeing how the sample looked.

View attachment 372609


Now, the great thing about physics is it is universal. As many of you here do know a pure solid melts at a single temperature because its crystal lattice is uniform and packs/organizes optimally. This is the entire point of melting point testing. Now, if that solid is far from pure, the melting point depresses.

So, if something that was supposed to be solid at room temperature, such as nandrolone decanoate is so liquid it has to be sent in a vial, it is way beyond reasonable doubt that it is far from being pure.

Given the fact there's probably not a person at this planet who had seen more nandrolone decanoate raw powder samples than me, I also dare to say it is nowhere near 90%s or 80%s. I don't wish to appeal to my authority - there's dozens of reports in that range, where ND tested in 80%s and it was still pure enough to remain solid.

89%
View attachment 372610

83%
View attachment 372611

It really only starts going full liquid way below that.

So I feel that the fact of how the sample looked is sufficient proof for me, that my employees did not fail here.

I have to say, I have no idea how Analiza Bialek arrived at their number and their mg/ml and I have to admit they are experts at providing their clients with the numbers they like seeing. Maybe used your own raw as a standard? We've seen that with some lab in the USA using raws from their clients as their standards. Bold U. I'm sure someone will remember. Not me, not today, I apologize.

Anyway, I find it a little dishonest to claim "All other tests from other people of the finish showed to be at the 94%." when there is exactly one other test being mentioned by a company such as AB, who was not able to stand up to much scrutiny even here, on Meso.

@Cob are we in the same thread? xd

I believe so

 

[dinfar1337]

I believe so

as for transpency

jano admitted 1 page back he is not reliable on raws when it comes to impurities over 10% atleast for 75% or 55% raws its expected theres a technical issue with that impure raws.

for the deca part, i get its annoying when he dosent save samples over 2 weeks. but this is just policy for everyone and ofc he saves a sample if he finds it important for study later.

jano is super profesional and answers stuff even if you werent the one that paid for it about his services. its not ideal with the raw situation but its the best we have which is why people still choose him.

 

[janoshik]

The finished products are real, call me dishones all you want but you are the one every time I have an issues and come to you a couple weeks later just to be told samples are destroyed after 2 weeks but you magically find this one after 6 months

I see the vial shown is a picture off the report my mistake on that.

Well, glad that got sorted out rather quickly.

I have sent Deca to you a few times that have melted from the heat before and you call it normal, but now all this?...

.... I just don't see the consistency with you own words.

Yes, because obviously melted such as

is exactly the same as inhomogeneous liquid.


I'm inconsistent, got it.

You are the one that told me to send deca in a vial because it melts in the summe

You do realize I can literally look at your order email that sort of shows that it was your own initiative?

I do hope the best for you, I really do ...

Mistake happen is right but you are not owning up to this

My friend, please, don't insult our intelligence no further.

 

[janoshik]

I have the 79.77% test but my name is on it and Im not posting it. It was done on August 15th 2025. I sent you my sample then squat sent you his. It was the same batch of deca. We got 2 wildly different results from you. Wildly different.

Now, @Photon had a great point about homogeneity of the samples being a potential issue.

There was an internal note from my analysts, that the sample above was not homogeneous liquid at all. In fact, if you look at the photograph of the sample, you can see yourself actually!

The other raw report is 79.77%, same batch as the 54%.

Always happy to help.

I could address the entirety of your post, @Cob, but then, ultimately, I would just be repeating myself over and over again and frankly, I'm not a fan on a Saturday evening.

I trust the people are able to see past the concern trolling and use their brains to asses the situation themselves. I am ready to stand their scrutiny. Are you?

 

[Cob]

View attachment 375362

Always happy to help.

I could address the entirety of your post, @Cob, but then, ultimately, I would just be repeating myself over and over again and frankly, I'm not a fan on a Saturday evening.

I trust the people are able to see past the concern trolling and use their brains to asses the situation themselves. I am ready to stand their scrutiny. Are you?

So now your customers are trolls? Got it. Thank you for proving my point.

 

[cousinmuscles]

as for transpency

jano admitted 1 page back he is not reliable on raws when it comes to impurities over 10% atleast for 75% or 55% raws its expected theres a technical issue with that impure raws.

for the deca part, i get its annoying when he dosent save samples over 2 weeks. but this is just policy for everyone and ofc he saves a sample if he finds it important for study later.

jano is super profesional and answers stuff even if you werent the one that paid for it about his services. its not ideal with the raw situation but its the best we have which is why people still choose him.

They are only using ~30-40mg of what you send, and if it has split/separated, it would make sense that the result will vary. Maybe we shouldn't get obsessed over variance in low purity raws then, unless you ask them to mix it somehow and get a homogenous sample.

 

[janoshik]

They are only using ~30-40mg of what you send, and if it has split/separated, it would make sense that the result will vary. Maybe we shouldn't get obsessed over variance in low purity raws then, unless you ask them to mix it somehow and get a homogenous sample.

We do homogenize the samples before the testing, but do you think the client homogenized the source material before sampling?

 

[dinfar1337]

Maybe we shouldn't get obsessed over variance in low purity raws then

spot on

it should get thrown out anyway. 75% or 55% is completely unacceptable

 

[Cob]

as for transpency

jano admitted 1 page back he is not reliable on raws when it comes to impurities over 10% atleast for 75% or 55% raws its expected theres a technical issue with that impure raws.

for the deca part, i get its annoying when he dosent save samples over 2 weeks. but this is just policy for everyone and ofc he saves a sample if he finds it important for study later.

jano is super profesional and answers stuff even if you werent the one that paid for it about his services. its not ideal with the raw situation but its the best we have which is why people still choose him.

Im going to disagree with Jano being the best we have. With how expensive raws are these days Im not willing to risk tens of thousands on janos inaccurate raw testing.

Anyway, I wont be using Jano and I will never recommend him - my choice. I know to much of his history and now I have personally experienced it for myself. And believe me, he knows his history as well. Life goes on. I have better things to do then listen to his excuses and ad hominem.

 

[janoshik]

So now your customers are trolls? Got it. Thank you for proving my point.

Nice try. Because I'm obviously referring to all my clients as you are trying to falsely assert.

You really go by the trolling handbook.
It must feel upsetting that people are seeing through it, right?

Maybe next time try being less obvious "where there's smoke there's a fire" and so on is just a tad more obvious.

Or trying to defend a case where you try to claim a disgusting glue-like substance is >90% pure raw. Something literally anyone with experience can see through.