Janoshik Analytical laboratory testing services

[Sdryx]

Do we understand that your claim is that Energy Control is innocent, Sir?

You just simply cannot stop attempting to deflect can you?

I know absolutely nothing about EC. They could be as fake as you. I have no idea actually. Although I will be following their thread now.

That statement was in reference that YOU LIED and accused a VERY reputable and contributing member here of fraud. Only later did you apologize and admit that you were lying about them and your fraudulent lab testing results.

 

[janoshik]

You just simply cannot stop attempting to deflect can you?

I know absolutely nothing about EC. They could be as fake as you. I have no idea actually. Although I will be following their thread now.

That statement was in reference that YOU LIED and accused a VERY reputable and contributing member here of fraud. Only later did you apologize and admit that you were lying about them and your fraudulent lab testing results.

Thank you for the clarification and please, accept our apologies, we were not sure what exactly you were referencing.
Do you mean that we had accused Mr. Mands of fraud?

 

[Dr JIM]

In other words, Sir, there is a single documented professional failure in regard to the results over the span of six years we are in the business.

For which we had apologized and are ready to handle severe financial repercussions.

Also, please, make notice that we had conducted hundreds of blind tests over the years and our results of AAS testing had been verified by comparison with both SIMEC and Analyzer.

Its the lie that gets ya!

And the fact you fraudelntly denied that "single documented case" even existed until NOW almost always mean many others went unnoticed, esp when customers have such a limited fund of knowledge and want to believe THEIR PEDs are GTG.

So once you start including what many in the analytical industry consider the minimal information required to validate test results, let us all know.

Heres the short list AGAIN

1) Calibration curves of standards and the samples being tested
2) Pre-procedural specifics to include the following; Grid type, ALL solvents used and their concentration, PH log, etc
3) Procedural narrative
4) An appropriate depiction of the standard superimposed onto or directly above the involved sample using identical units of their respective X and Y axis

And if you really want to prove your a changed man I have several STANDARDS for you to test as UNKNOWNS!

JIM

 

[Doug_S]

Its the lie that gets ya!

And the fact you fraudelntly denied that "single documented case" even existed until NOW almost always mean many others went unnoticed, esp when customers have such a limited fund of knowledge and want to believe THEIR PEDs are GTG.

So once you start including what many in the analytical industry consider the minimal information required to validate test results, let us all know.

Heres the short list AGAIN

1) Calibration curves of standards and the samples being tested
2) Pre-procedural specifics to include the following; Grid type, ALL solvents used and their concentration, PH log, etc
3) Procedural narrative
4) An appropriate depiction of the standard superimposed onto or directly above the involved sample using identical units of their respective X and Y axis

And if you really want to prove your a changed man I have several STANDARDS for you to test as UNKNOWNS!

JIM

Oh God. Now we get the $.02 from the "doctor" who stated that if ecoli is detected in HGH it's contaminated with bacteria, that AAA is capable of sequencing, and that Mass Spec (which can literally tell carbon 12 from carbon 14) is not accurate.

If we're talking about fraud how bout you sit the fuck down "doc"?

And on edit

WTF are you talking about validation? You learn a new word? You sure as hell had NO Data Quality Objective on the shit you did. You don't even know what a calibration curve is "doc". Quit pretending you poster.

 

[Dr JIM]

FYI

Here's a pic of a few standards to use as unknowns.

Since all were produced by companies that are well established and well recognized within the analytical industry, unknown testing results should approximate the listed concentration yet accurately identify the AAS itself with minimal difficulty.

However an analytical lab would be expected to achieve results within the 3rd standard deviation for those compounds in which the category, such as AAS, is known

 

[MindlessWork]

Oh God. Now we get the $.02 from the "doctor" who stated that if ecoli is detected in HGH it's contaminated with bacteria, that AAA is capable of sequencing, and that Mass Spec (which can literally tell carbon 12 from carbon 14) is not accurate.

If we're talking about fraud how bout you sit the fuck down "doc"?

And on edit

WTF are you talking about validation? You learn a new word? You sure as hell had NO Data Quality Objective on the shit you did. You don't even know what a calibration curve is "doc". Quit pretending you poster.

Oh lookie...a shill! How dare you talk down to Dr Jim like you are an authority on gear testing. Maybe you can learn a thing or two from @Dr JIM so sit and listen well.

 

[Doug_S]

FYI

Here's a pic of a few standards to use as unknowns.

All were produced by companies that are well established and well recognized within the analytical industry.



View attachment 90638

And this is why I know you are stupid. See, if you really had standards, you could send them in to Jano, he would be blind, and if he fucked it up, you would have him dead to rights.

We do that shit in the industry all the time. You don't know that though, so you just HAD to post to show everyone you have a standard.

 

[Doug_S]

Oh lookie...a shill! How dare you talk down to Dr Jim like you are an authority on gear testing. Maybe you can learn a thing or two from @Dr JIM so sit and listen well.

DRJIM has no fucking idea what he is talking about. Every chemist on the board including Analyzer has called him out for his bullshit. You sir are duped by the shiny.

 

[Inquiring Mind]

In other words, Sir, there is a single documented professional failure in regard to the results over the span of six years we are in the business.

For which we had apologized and are ready to handle severe financial repercussions.

Also, please, make notice that we had conducted hundreds of blind tests over the years and our results of AAS testing had been verified by comparison with both SIMEC and Analyzer.

It don’t matter single, multiple...you got caught lying. Your done here. No one Meso in their right mind will ever deal with you! Just leave! Have some self respect already.

 

[janoshik]

And if you really want to prove your a changed man I have several STANDARDS for you to test as UNKNOWNS!

JIM

We will be happy to test any unmarked and unlabeled standards of the compounds that we provide the testing for you, Sir.

We will be waiting to be contacted.

 

[movingiron88]

We will be happy to test any unmarked and unlabeled standards of the compounds that we provide the testing for you, Sir.

We will be waiting to be contacted.

Just out of curiosity, why don't you just provide @Dr JIM with what he is asking for? Especially if it can prove your credibility?

 

[janoshik]

Just out of curiosity, why don't you just provide @Dr JIM with what he is asking for? Especially if it can prove your credibility?

We have already provided that multiple times in the past, Sir.

Had we been complying with every redundant request we would be doing nothing else.

We will, however provide the requested data once again.

http://janoshik.com/formeso.zip

We are also talking in private with Jim about the testing the standards he had mentioned.

 

[movingiron88]

We have already provided that multiple times in the past, Sir.

Had we been complying with every redundant request we would be doing nothing else.

We will, however provide the requested data once again.

http://janoshik.com/formeso.zip

Unfortunatey I will not be downloading an unknown file to confirm or deny this has what @Dr JIM is requesting.

To bad you wont post the information on Meso. I think it would have sent a long way and would have helped to dispel any accusations.

 

[janoshik]

Unfortunatey I will not be downloading an unknown file to confirm or deny this has what @Dr JIM is requesting.

To bad you wont post the information on Meso. I think it would have sent a long way and would have helped to dispel any accusations.

Unfortunately, one of the files had not been in a file format that is allowed to be uploaded on Meso so we chose the faster way of zipping the files and uploading them to our own data center.

However, we consider your concern valid and will convert the file and upload the data here.

 

[janoshik]

Attached are documents accompanying the European Pharmacopoeia Somatropin standards and a calibration curve exhibiting linearity in very wide range.

 

[janoshik]

Attached are the raw data used for construction of the calibration curve attached in the above post.

 

[janoshik]

And here are the pictures of the European Pharmacopoeia Somatropin reference standard.



As you can see, the amount of data is indeed massive, so the mere export and processing of the data takes significant amount of time.

 

[movingiron88]

Thank you Jano and I appreciate you taking the time to respond to my question.

I will be the first to admit this is way over my head. What do you think @Dr JIM

 

[janoshik]

Thank you Jano and I appreciate you taking the time to respond to my question.

I will be the first to admit this is way over my head. What do you think @Dr JIM

We are always happy to make the time when the interest is genuine, like in this case.

If you'd like our explanation of the data above, we'll be happy to help with that as well when our schedule is a little bit more free.

 

[Dr JIM]

Thank you Jano and I appreciate you taking the time to respond to my question.

I will be the first to admit this is way over my head. What do you think @Dr JIM

Janos doing what he does best playing games, downloading volumes upon volumes of DATA!


IMO he is NOT TRUSTWORTHY!

Jim