Janoshik Analytical laboratory testing services

[Sampei]

Got timed out. Continuing with results Janoshik shared today (post #1216)...

TE reference standard:
HPLC purity: 98%+
GCMS purity: 95.5%*
*No difference in volatility or ionization among the two detected compounds.

"Random" TE Client Sample:
HPLC purity: 98%+
GCMS purity: 96.2%*,**
*No difference in volatility or ionization among the two detected compounds.
**Pretty incredible no other compounds detected in this sample. It is as clean as the reference standard. Not a trace of raw material or free hormone. I don't understand this at all.

what you don't understand? that raw manufacturer can create pure product if they want and they care?

 

[readalot]

what you don't understand? that raw manufacturer can create pure product if they want and they care?

That a "random" sample used for this particular work would test as clean as the euro pharmacopeia ref standard. As I said, not a hint of anything besides side product. No free hormone. No precursor. Nothing. Look at the GCMS raw data.

IMO: All the data we have thus far indicates HPLC overestimates purity of Test ester raws with -ene impurities due to the inability of the HPLC method to resolve the respective peaks.

See posts #219 and 220. Combined with data shared above by Jano today (minimal side product formation in GC), the picture seems very clear to me.

Would be simple to demonstrate with testosterone impurity (-ene) reference standard mixed with test ester ref standard at various ratios. Then shoot onto HPLC.

 

[janoshik]

We'we had exactly two test e raw samples in last week and the other was 30% purity, so I figured it wouldn't be quite representative.

And I didn't feel like scouring the archives.

Will run the CRM through HPLC tomorrow if we have the time.

 

[readalot]

Thanks for the follow up. Sorry I am confused.

Will run the CRM through HPLC tomorrow if we have the time.

I thought you already did:

Janoshik Analytical

Just need the HPLC raw data for this, no? All that is shown in the raw data file is the GCMS data.

If someone is interested in all of this detail, I'll split the CRM for the testosterone -ene impurity now that Jano purchased this TE reference standard (CRM). That should get to the bottom of this issue.

 

[Sampei]

We'we had exactly two test e raw samples in last week and the other was 30% purity, so I figured it wouldn't be quite representative.

And I didn't feel like scouring the archives.

Will run the CRM through HPLC tomorrow if we have the time.

Was the test C raw sample with more shit in it? Like ditotrestolone or something like that..I would have been more interested in seeing the pharmacopeia standards of test C ran against those test C RAWS, but my knowledge about all these stuff is very very poor so probably just talking shit

 

[readalot]

Was the test C raw sample with more shit in it? Like ditotrestolone or something like that..I would have been more interested in seeing the pharmacopeia standards of test C ran against those test C RAWS, but my knowledge about all these stuff is very very poor so probably just talking shit

Test E or Test C. Either one proves the same point. He is doing the CRM for Test E which is great.

See my extensive comments above. The Test C and Test E raw I had my collaborator send in appears to have been significantly contaminated with impurity the HPLC may show as Test C / Test E. The HPLC results on both of those raws showed high purity. The GCMS data indicates otherwise. That's what we are trying to trying to figure out (Project 3).

Post in thread 'Readalots Enhanced Testing'

Nov 8, 2024

Project 3. Forthcoming.

Project Code Name:
An Honest and Ethical Vendor can make a difference.

Why GCMS (along with HPLC) is your friend. Of course some vendors will continue to not test their raws.

Test C and Test E raws are very pure and g2g, right? "Don't look behind the curtain, we'll go back and dial in the concentrations; everything A-ok. Extra stuff on the house!"

View attachment 301207View attachment 301208

Project 3 cont.

Comparison between GCMS purity (area counts approximation) and HPLC purity. Use drop down above to see the previously shared GCMS TIC tables...

• readalot

• 

 

[janoshik]

Thanks for the follow up. Sorry I am confused.


I thought you already did:

Janoshik Analytical

Just need the HPLC raw data for this, no? All that is shown in the raw data file is the GCMS data.

If someone is interested in all of this detail, I'll split the CRM for the testosterone -ene impurity now that Jano purchased this TE reference standard (CRM). That should get to the bottom of this issue.

I'd love to rerun it personally under my specified conditions.

Was the test C raw sample with more shit in it? Like ditotrestolone or something like that..I would have been more interested in seeing the pharmacopeia standards of test C ran against those test C RAWS, but my knowledge about all these stuff is very very poor so probably just talking shit

European Pharmacopoeia, which is the one I have full access to doesn't use Testosterone Cypionate, so I cannot have that delivered to me with fully iced logistics and guarantees that I can sue for. I looked elsewhere too, but it's not quite easy to obtain such a standard, unfortunately.

 

[readalot]

I'd love to rerun it personally under my specified conditions.


European Pharmacopoeia, which is the one I have full access to doesn't use Testosterone Cypionate, so I cannot have that delivered to me with fully iced logistics and guarantees that I can sue for. I looked elsewhere too, but it's not quite easy to obtain such a standard, unfortunately.

Fantastic! My offer stands if anyone wants to put some skin in the game. And if not I guess I'll pay for the other CRM (for the -ene impurity) myself if Jano agrees to the testing.

Thank you Jano. These are exciting tests and appreciate your work and collaboration.

 

[janoshik]

Fantastic! My offer stands if anyone wants to put some skin in the game. And if not I guess I'll pay for the other CRM (for the -ene impurity) myself if Jano agrees to the testing.

Thank you Jano. These are exciting tests and appreciate your work and collaboration.

My pleasure.

Although I am not entirely sure what exactly you mean by the first paragraph?

Is there CRM for that particular impurity available?

Thank you.

 

[readalot]

Is there CRM for that particular impurity available?

I thought there were a bunch of variants (minus two protons) we could choose from that had CRM status. I or you would have to confirm availability for your location.

 

[janoshik]

There's exactly one available. 'H'






And it's something entirely different.

 

[readalot]

There's exactly one available. 'H'


View attachment 304330



And it's something entirely different.

Infamous impurity F not available? Bummer!

Thanks for checking. It's all riding on your personally specified conditions now.

 

[janoshik]

Not at European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines.

 

[readalot]

His feedback was that the GC peak in question was one of these Test Cyp derivatives missing a hydrogen.

As I stated before, we'd need usp standards to do a definitive targeted analysis with gcms

Also these you shared I'd have to match up with "Impurity X descriptors". But as you say we are limited by what you can get ahold of.

Fun collaborating with you. Thanks.