Qingdao Sigma Chemicals
Subscriber
For a casual bit of industrial espionage
Qingdaoshik analytical service, $6/sample test
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
For a casual bit of industrial espionage
UGL tabs should be reserved as a last resort, for compounds you can't get a script for and are unavailable from India/Turkish pharma. Basically AAS.
Blows my mind anyone would even buy UGL dick pills or AIs when pharma grade is so readily available, often at even lower prices.
I've told you this in my post, when I've met him
Fawkk meee. What next? Fireball bottled up and labeled as tren ace?Agree.
So curious to know who the chef that prepared that clen was.
The other scary thing was insulin pens sold as ozempic, by changing the label.
That was a shocker. The stuff people do for money.
The fake Rimo story was interesting, too.
But at least with that they don't end up killing anyone.
It was a good interview, I liked some of the questions he was asked.
For some reason, I thought he would have been older than he is.
Fawkk meee. What next? Fireball bottled up and labeled as tren ace?
This Friday at exactly 12am on the dot. Tit pics included.If it's the PermaBlasting factory making it, I will buy anything, lol
You should take a gander at some Jano results for pharma vs UGL products dosed in mcg’s, eg Abdi Tiromel T3 (several tests on that on Meso) vs various UGL clen tabs or the likes of whatever UGL brand caber that @Sampei posted a result for a few days ago.Agree.
You should take a gander at some Jano results for pharma vs UGL products dosed in mcg’s, eg Abdi Tiromel T3 (several tests on that on Meso) vs various UGL clen tabs or the likes of whatever UGL brand caber that @Sampei posted a result for a few days ago.
You might be surprised at which has had more accurate & consistent dosing at times ….
Obviously this is not always the case, but one thing the community (& sources) accepting & adopting Jano testing has shown us is that “pharma dosing accuracy is always better” is a mantra & not a hard & fast rule.
Yup. Now whether it’s doing that for everything as a user is another matter - if you take a 20mg cialis tab & it works as it should, whether it’s +/- 25% is a moot point IMO & not worth spending £100 ish to see whether it is or not.Basically, test for variance, if you want to be sure.
I suppose it's the only way.
Yup. Now whether it’s doing that for everything as a user is another matter - if you take a 20mg cialis tab & it works as it should, whether it’s +/- 25% is a moot point IMO & not worth spending £100 ish to see whether it is or not.
The main thing is we keep up the pressure on sources to test & point out it’s in their best commercial interests to do so, as demonstrated by the the popularity of both QSC & the now absent Liska, who really set the benchmark by literally testing everything he sold.
Well stated!You should take a gander at some Jano results for pharma vs UGL products dosed in mcg’s, eg Abdi Tiromel T3 (several tests on that on Meso) vs various UGL clen tabs or the likes of whatever UGL brand caber that @Sampei posted a result for a few days ago.
You might be surprised at which has had more accurate & consistent dosing at times ….
Obviously this is not always the case, but one thing the community (& sources) accepting & adopting Jano testing has shown us is that “pharma dosing accuracy is always better” is a mantra & not a hard & fast rule.
Yes! This was a fantastic takeaway. Turns out the "rusty orange" tren is as "fire" as we thought hahaThe characteristic trenbolone bronze hue is a bad omen, associated with oxidation and using too high a temperature when separated from the oil vehicle used.
I’m not the best at staying afloat of all the testing results out there admittedly. How would you summarize the case of Sopharma clen versus the top 3 UGLs? Actually significantly worse? I only recall that last I checked they were comparable — no significant difference in inter-sample variability. But that even Sopharma clen could see 25% deviations from the label. Is that still the case, you’d say — that everyone is basically +/- 25% on, or off depending on optimism/pessimism, -point when it comes to mcg dosing of clenbuterol?You should take a gander at some Jano results for pharma vs UGL products dosed in mcg’s, eg Abdi Tiromel T3 (several tests on that on Meso) vs various UGL clen tabs or the likes of whatever UGL brand caber that @Sampei posted a result for a few days ago.
You might be surprised at which has had more accurate & consistent dosing at times ….
Obviously this is not always the case, but one thing the community (& sources) accepting & adopting Jano testing has shown us is that “pharma dosing accuracy is always better” is a mantra & not a hard & fast rule.
Why Aromasin? It’s dosed in tens of mg unlike Adex, etc.It's not that pharma tabs don't suffer variance, that's an expectation and even the regulating authorities allow pretty generous allowances for that.
The difference is that UGL produces the occasional wildly overdosed tab on a routine basis, an extreme rarity in pharma because the consequences are far more dire and costly than underdosed.
I'm not aware of any UGL that goes through the steps of precision grinding and sifting, or careful selection of excipients for the properties of a specific API. Even the smallest backstreet India pharma producers understand the dangers of "nutmegging", the clumping of APIs that takes place during mixing.
Nevermind checking pharmacokinetics by dissolving a tab, having no appreciation for the significance that the rate of dissolution has, in particular determining where it gets absorbed in the digestive system.
UGL is probobly why there's so much "AI trauma" out there. A single bad aromasin tablet would certainly do that.
Why Aromasin? It’s dosed in tens of mg unlike Adex, etc.
I believe that you’re making what’s called a conclusory argument: to wit, that pharma companies like Sopharma use sophisticated methods and technologies to root out any possibility of dangerous overdose… because they are pharma companies that have sophisticated methods and tech…
Despite this self-evident authority that pharma companies hold in your — (and admittedly mine also before listening to jano) — highest regard, jano explains that the mere fact that they are pharma companies is not special… see the circular logic?
Jano explicitly tells us here that market forces and what he refers to as the bias or pressure of applying caveat emptor as a principle to all that we do here in this harm reduction community of ours is, through competition, giving a considerable upper hand to the UGLs!
Your statement attesting to personal unfamiliarity with UGLs using sufficient quality control reminds me of a friend of mine, who his first day on the job, defended the company to a potential customer: “I don’t know of a single instance of a mistake occurring!”
Of course not.
Having used exclusively pharma for years when possible, and never venturing into UGL clen in my life (doubtful I’ll start):OK, but even so, it's only recently with a couple of sources here that we have seen good results and more consistency, with regards to orals.
If you look back at lab tests that go back further in time, the scenario is very different.
If one takes it from there, the reluctance to rely on ugl and assume pharma may be a safer bet is understandable.
If one cannot say, in absolute terms that pharma is always better than ugl, the opposite is also true, from what I can see.
Things appear to be improving on the ugl front, as you say, at least for some.
I certainly admit that your experience and judgement regarding this is far superior than mine, so I appreciate your opinion.
Also, I am sure you got the people you train to utilise clen and I imagine you also told them where to get it from, especially if they were not versed in sourcing stuff themselves.
And maybe you have used it yourself, got it from a ugl that provided you variance lab tests you were happy with and can report on a safe and successful outcome.