Karius - ALP / BAL Lists -

[Millard]

I always enjoy discussing issues with you. Your respectful, intelligent and insightful contributions are appreciated. I tend to agree with you on most of your points. There are only a couple of places where I disagree.

Your posts seem to indicate that my arguments are only for the benefit of the source. I look at these situations from both sides. If someone posts a bogus test that says a product is poor, when the product is not poor, that person is doing a disservice to end users. False representations, pro or con are equally harmful to an end user. Authority used incorrectly can wrongly deprive someone of something good. I've seen people swear up and down a product was bad when it wasn't. I've seen people use bad information to make judgments across a range of issues in this community. My goal is to find the truth good or bad.

Truth - perfect information - is the most desirable situation for making decisions. I completely support its pursuit. Unfortunately, we will always have bad actors and falsified data and representations.

I strongly disagree with your contention that "false representations, pro or con are equally harmful to the end user".

For example, let's take a comparable false respresentation by a source and a false representation by an end user and evaluate who is harmed the most.

(1) A source falsely claims (and provides manipulated evidence) that a 10mg capsule of Nolvadex contains 10mg of tamoxifen when in reality is contains <1 milligram of tamoxifen.

(2) An end user falsely claims (and provides manipulated evidence) that a 10mg capsule of Nolvadex contains <1 mg of tamoxifen when in reality is contains a full 10 milligrams of tamoxifen.

I want to disprove that false representations pro or con are equally harmful to the end user.

In scenario #1, the end user could realistically put themselves at risk of developing gynecomastia if their decisions are based up the source's false respresentation. Meanwhile, the source unfairly benefits financially.

In scenario #2, the end user could miss out on the opportunity to have an accurately dosed and forces them to seek other options. This won't directly lead to gynecomastia. Meanwhile, the source unfairly loses business.

The harm is not equal.

My point is that, in many important instances, consumers generally have more to lose by pro-source false representations than anti-source false representations.

I still think it comes down to a management vs. consumer perspective. And I can see both sides of the coin. And as a consumer, I'd much rather be deceived in #2 rather than be deceived in #1.

But as you assert, I'd rather not be deceived at all; I want the truth.

And as management, the worst nightmare is to be the victim of #2.

However, you seem to suggest that I am only speaking from a pro source position. I'm the exact same guy I have always been, status, authority, mod, or not. You and Brutus have seen what I've done to sources who rip people off.

I disagree that the dismissal of evidence only benefits the source. For example, any evidence a source or a client creates that is positive is typically thought to be fraudulent, instantly dismissed, and treated with the same weight as a claim. The paradigm that every open source is nothing but a pathological liar out to steal everyone's money and every satisfied client is a shill, has created a climate of fear and resentment that makes many consumers in this community instantly distrust information that could be accurate, to the detriment of both sources and consumers. The knee jerk dismissal of information which not in line with consumer's expectations deprives them of discovering the truth and harms their ability to make decisions.

I agree with you once again on this issue. I think some of the points you made could have been interpreted as "pro-source" - specifically, the semantics issue and the equal harm to end users by all false representations. These are the issues I addressed. But as far as the rest of your arguments were concerned, I think they were more fairly characterized as "pro-truth". And just because there are instances in which the source may benefit from the truth, we should not fail to pursue those possibilities. So, I applaud you for making the case

I have previously addressed the "knee jerk dismissal of information" that is inconsistent with consumer expectations about sources.

One problem is that evidence that confirms expectations about questionable sources (the products suck) and confirms expectations about popular sources (the products are good) is uncritically accepted.

However, when evidence is inconsistent with expectations -- good products by unpopular sources and bad products by popular sources -- the person posting the evidence (not just the results) is crucified.

As a result, this "climate of fear and resentment" may prevent many people from posting evidence that is contrary to most consumer expectations. This is why I think it is important for MESO to support the posting of evidence that is inconsistent with expectations. The support is often lacking, discouraged or outright censored elsewhere.

Sources should always post any evidence they have to support their products especially if it involved analytical labs. Whether it is evaluated fairly is up to the consumer. But the information should be made available.

It has helped me to evaluate evidence people have presented me with. It would good if everyone used something similar and did not immediately accept test results, good or bad.

The credibility of testing results are limited by:
• The party who supplied the product to be tested.
• The party who submitted the product for testing.
• The party conducting the test.
• The method used to test the product.
• The skill set of the party conducting the test.
• The party taking receipt of and announcing the results.
• Any perception of bias.
• Gaps in the chain of custody.

Excellent guide to evaluating evidence. I think every member should consider these points and apply them objectively to all evidence.

All of these issues are of great importance to me as MESO is hoping to sponsor the most credible lab testing program possible. Any insight you have into what it should look like would be appreciated. Basically, what is the best way to address the points you listed?

https://thinksteroids.com/community...nt-accredited-laboratory-in-europe.134357296/

If poor product were as easy to verify as looking at it, then there would not be anything controversial about Brutus' and JB's order. You're referring to a cockroach that requires an analytical laboratory to find.

If only it were as easy as looking for a cockroach in a vial to determine AAS quality...

 

[element00]

Mother fucker, you dont know me. Ive helped more members across the community then I can count on both hands/feet. Dont worry, I wont help anyone one, on here any longer.. As for exposing myself, my rep didnt take a hit, it never will. You guys are nothing but kids with fat fucking mouths, sitting on your apple macbooks, and playing internet tuff guys. Meet me in the real world, any fucking time.
The people that truly know me..regular, big paul, gman, bigben, basskiller, and many others know the real me. I could give two shits if you dont like me. Put me on ignore, problem solved.. Ill sleep like a fucking baby tonite, tomorrow nite and every other fucking night Im on this planet.

I see there's some adult discussion going on in this thread recently, so apologise up front for having to quote this load of shit. IM you think your connected? Dropping names like a school boy...Wtf. Then this constant 'meet me in the real world, I'll kick your ass' haha the same shite you talked with those fucktards from GRanabolics when you were going to Vegas. Lol really man, read over your dribble.
Other than this, and potentially the highlight showing you for what you are, is the public claims of child molestation. Fuck man you clearly don't know what it's like to be truly connected in the real world otherwise you would understand the implications of making false accusations such as this. You have been demanding evidence in this thread, so put up your evidence or shut the fuck up. Initially I thought you were only stupid enough to type that here, but see you've put it elsewhere. Not very bright are you

 

[pmac928]

Can someone tell me how much compound must be present for labmax to give a clear undisputed positive? Or will the colors be weaker if the compound has less of an active ingredient?

 

[brutus79]

Can someone tell me how much compound must be present for labmax to give a clear undisputed positive? Or will the colors be weaker if the compound has less of an active ingredient?

I believe it is a fraction of a percentage and from results I see the color change and intensity can be less intense with lower compound levels... I toyed with the idea of doing less and less of a compound by cutting it with oil until I could mathematically deduce a potency based on the amount of cut it takes to pop a "compound not present" result... but without knowing how well they measure the testing compound that goes in to each vial it is a waste of time... and it probably not too exact a science at their end considering they only promise a positive or negative result.

 

[graniteman]

What does Brutus' using or not using Ecstasydata have to do with your statement:

"So following your infantile attempt at dodging the test..so you're saying a 50 mg tab could only be 2% anadrol and nothing else? No filler, no other compound, that ecstasy.org would identify? Hmmm That's a pretty large tab to only be 2% and nothing else, isn't it?"

And what does your "cut and paste" have to do with it?

I'll tell you what: Absolutely nothing!

The point of my post and "cut and paste" (which you conveniently ignored) was to show that you don't have a clue about that for which you speak. It is indeed possible for a 50 mg Anadrol tablet to contain only 2% active drug and nothing else because Ecstasydata's tests DO NOT, by their own admission, show every component in a tablet, including the fillers and binders.

Your cherry picking parts of Brutus' posts is a blatant attempt to misrepresent what Brutus is saying in order to help you discredit his complaints.

In short, you are FOS. I suspect that "infantile" technique has proven successful for you during debates on other boards. On Meso, it most assuredly will not.

Nice complete dodge, I would love to see this 50 mg tab that is 2% drol and nothing else. While they state some fillers\substances may not be indentifiable this is true WITH ALL mass spec machines\tests. Example some machines will not work on GH as the molecules are tpp large. I ignored your cut n paste because it is completely irreleveant. As you see the tests from here will identify active compounds, so if Brutus claim that the nolva is dbol is true it will show on the test.

 

[graniteman]

Can someone tell me how much compound must be present for labmax to give a clear undisputed positive? Or will the colors be weaker if the compound has less of an active ingredient?

Anyone that tells you this is possible is completely inept. Labmax itself states the test kits are PRESUMPTIVE ONLY. This means simply if it does come up ''positive'' more testing is needed to be conclusive. Brutus and your inhouse ''expert labmax'' tester are either clueless on these tests or lieing to you. I would hope it would be clueless.
You're questions show the problems with the labmax, while testing is a great thing you guys are taking a pre-sumptive , by definition not CONCLUSIVE test, and putting 100% faith in its reliability

 

[brutus79]

Anyone that tells you this is possible is completely inept. Labmax itself states the test kits are PRESUMPTIVE ONLY. This means simply if it does come up ''positive'' more testing is needed to be conclusive. Brutus and your inhouse ''expert labmax'' tester are either clueless on these tests or lieing to you. I would hope it would be clueless.
You're questions show the problems with the labmax, while testing is a great thing you guys are taking a pre-sumptive , by definition not CONCLUSIVE test, and putting 100% faith in its reliability

Blah, blah, blah old man. People give less of a fuck about you than italian muscle- go spread your broscience to the other old men who want to "reign" in everlasting ignorance while the rest of us think for ourselves.... Thought that is backed up by scientific evidence we cut and paste because we don't run the studies ourselves.

Welcome to Graniteman's lab! " uhhhhhh I took some cialis and my pp still doesn't work- sorry hunny but it isn't the cialis, it's that I prefer italian muscles with hair on them".

You. Are. A. Fucking. Joke. The sad part is you don't even see it.

 

[graniteman]

Blah, blah, blah old man. People give less of a fuck about you than italian muscle- go spread your broscience to the other old men who want to "reign" in everlasting ignorance while the rest of us think for ourselves.... Thought that is backed up by scientific evidence we cut and paste because we don't run the studies ourselves.

Welcome to Graniteman's lab! " uhhhhhh I took some cialis and my pp still doesn't work- sorry hunny but it isn't the cialis, it's that I prefer italian muscles with hair on them".

You. Are. A. Fucking. Joke. The sad part is you don't even see it.

You keep harping on that, how come you haven't posted the pm then ? I fully addressed the pm earlier Brutus, unlike you I don't have my head up my ass expecting Pfziser quality and consistency from ugl. But I guess I'm just not as bright as you Son.
It's becoming more and more clear with your resistance to use a unbiased 3rd part what is going on young fella. Hmmm just checked the other forums, still not one other complaint?

 

[brutus79]

You keep harping on that, how come you haven't posted the pm then ? I fully addressed the pm earlier Brutus, unlike you I don't have my head up my ass expecting Pfziser quality and consistency from ugl. But I guess I'm just not as bright as you Son.
It's becoming more and more clear with your resistance to use a unbiased 3rd part what is going on young fella. Hmmm just checked the other forums, still not one other complaint?

Must have dealt with it via pm and allowed themselves to be paid for their silence. That and who wants a couple of dickheads like you and im trotting around misquoting their posts for weeks?

 

[graniteman]

The cockroach is "proof". It is "evidence". It's much more than a claim.

The customers testimony that he saw a cockroach in his meal is evidence.

If the customer took a photo of the cockroach in his meal, it would be higher quality evidence.

If the customer stood up and asked if any other customers had cockroaches in their food and two raised their hands, it would be high quality evidence.

If the customer's report is subsequently confirmed by an independent and accredited health inspector, it is the best evidence.

You are absolutely correct about some people who make fraudulent claims just to get a free meal. This type of behavior is unacceptable and unfairly hurts management.

The customer could have lied about the cockroach. They could have planted the cockroach. They could have photoshopped a picture with the cockroach. They could have conspired with two other customers to corroborate the cockroach story. They could have paid off the health inspector.

I have no doubt that these scenarios may happen. Although some are obviously lower probability than others.

Similarly, I don't think anyone has any doubt that management is fully capable of health code violations as well:

http://www.foodsafetynews.com/restaurant-inspections-in-your-area/

So, your argument does nothing to change the dynamics of the management vs. consumer position.

Millard, if you look back at my posts I actually agree with you. I have never said it wasn't possible he got some bad stuff, it happens in all walks of life. I originally was talking with Brutus about handling it differently is all. It has now devolved. A bvery simple and quick remedy would have been to send it in. You have to admit it's more than strange not one other person has complained since May?

 

[graniteman]

Must have dealt with it via pm and allowed themselves to be paid for their silence. That and who wants a couple of dickheads like you and im trotting around misquoting their posts for weeks?

Odd because I've seen other complaints and they were handled very professionally. Difference was the class of those involved I guess. Anyways good luck with that B, I hope for your sake this works out or your stay here even at Meso your home board looks bleak

 

[pmac928]

I will believe our 3rd party labmax expert. The guy has been doing this for the meso community for sometime now. I have to believe he has nothing to personally gain by giving a doctored up labmax result. With that being said wasn't the labmax a complete fail? So if it only takes a small percentage of active compound to give a positive reading wtf? It doesn't matter cause unless it's a lab that both partys agree on doing the testing this will never be settled between either way. I just don't see a logical reason why Brutus an ballz would make this shit up.

 

[CensoredBoardsSuck]

The cockroach is "proof". It is "evidence". It's much more than a claim.

The customers testimony that he saw a cockroach in his meal is evidence.

If the customer took a photo of the cockroach in his meal, it would be higher quality evidence.

If the customer stood up and asked if any other customers had cockroaches in their food and two raised their hands, it would be high quality evidence.

If the customer's report is subsequently confirmed by an independent and accredited health inspector, it is the best evidence.

You are absolutely correct about some people who make fraudulent claims just to get a free meal. This type of behavior is unacceptable and unfairly hurts management.

The customer could have lied about the cockroach. They could have planted the cockroach. They could have photoshopped a picture with the cockroach. They could have conspired with two other customers to corroborate the cockroach story. They could have paid off the health inspector.

I have no doubt that these scenarios may happen. Although some are obviously lower probability than others.

Similarly, I don't think anyone has any doubt that management is fully capable of health code violations as well:

http://www.foodsafetynews.com/restaurant-inspections-in-your-area/

So, your argument does nothing to change the dynamics of the management vs. consumer position.

I told you so, Granite.

 

[CensoredBoardsSuck]

This thread does not only contain just a review of a product, it's a mess.

THAT is something we can all agree on!

 

[Millard]

Millard, if you look back at my posts I actually agree with you. I have never said it wasn't possible he got some bad stuff, it happens in all walks of life. I originally was talking with Brutus about handling it differently is all. It has now devolved. A bvery simple and quick remedy would have been to send it in. You have to admit it's more than strange not one other person has complained since May?

Isolated results should always be confirmed. What I find particularly strange is that not a single other customer (from the presumably large customer base that has purchased this sources products) or anyone with a vested interest in disproving the findings has even attempted to replicate the findings using labmax - at least not publicly - following the initial report.

Using DDL/escstasydata for a qualitative confirmation that the orals contain the expected ingredient is a good first (or second) step but anyone who is really interested in settling the matter, especially those in management, should seek quantitative data from a real analytical lab.

The posting of this type of data is a much more professional way to respond than resorting to a series of disgraceful personal attacks in a transparent attempt to discredit the person(s) who posted the adverse report.

I expect that this data will eventually become available.

 

[graniteman]

Isolated results should always be confirmed. What I find particularly strange is that not a single other customer (from the presumably large customer base that has purchased this sources products) or anyone with a vested interest in disproving the findings has even attempted to replicate the findings using labmax - at least not publicly - following the initial report.

Using DDL/escstasydata for a qualitative confirmation that the orals contain the expected ingredient is a good first (or second) step but anyone who is really interested in settling the matter, especially those in management, should seek quantitative data from a real analytical lab.

The posting of this type of data is a much more professional way to respond than resorting to a series of disgraceful personal attacks in a transparent attempt to discredit the person(s) who posted the adverse report.

I expect that this data will eventually become available.

While we may differ on the idea of no other ''customer'' complaining or testing in your case, we are pretty much on the same page. As you see with the blowout even a lab will have to have a chain of custody method or people wil lcry foul.
For the record I believe ALP stated he's having things tested, will this please certain sects, of course not but I have seen similar issues he has dealt with and he publicly disclosed and removed items in question . Too bad things worked out this way IMO

 

[graniteman]

I told you so, Granite.

No Son, it's called grown men discussing matters. My point is as valid as Millards, one could very well put something in their food to get financial gain. You may be too young to remember when the woman put a severed finger in Wendy's Chili to sue them. It was ''investigated'' and found she put her husbands finger in the chili and she was jailed NOT rewarded.

 

[johnnyBALLZ]

No Son, it's called grown men discussing matters. My point is as valid as Millards, one could very well put something in their food to get financial gain. You may be too young to remember when the woman put a severed finger in Wendy's Chili to sue them. It was ''investigated'' and found she put her husbands finger in the chili and she was jailed NOT rewarded.

I have no desire to get into it with you on this fine Sunday afternoon but your analogies are horrible.. Apples and oranges, I'm sure that woman was suing for a substantial amount, not a free happy meal.. What are we presenting all of this in the open for? To sue a UGL?! Please..

If, as you say, all of this was for "financial gain" and I've said over and over again, we would've undoubtedly had success handling this in private with Karius..

There goes that theory for at least the 5th time in the past 15 days in this thread.. Stop recycling things that have already been responded to over and over again.

 

[Zaphod]

Wow what a mess. Two respected members, Labmax tests, and sending product out for mass spec.

This is why I trust the "big" sources even less than our "little" meso sources. They are pulling in enough profit to mass spec each batch if they wanted but would rather run blind and try to discredit anyone who calls them out.

Sad really...if I were treated like this with any company I did business with I would not only go somewhere else but also tell Every person I could about my experience. I could understand if this was an unsupported claim but its obviously not.

If this was any source based here at meso they would have already been ran out of town, and rightfully so.

I hope anyone considering ALP finds this thread. This situation was not handled correctly at all by the source. The members did the right thing posting it for All to see and for that I say THANKS to all involved. I had considered using them in the future...not now.

IMHO....but who am I.

 

[CensoredBoardsSuck]

No Son, it's called grown men discussing matters. My point is as valid as Millards, one could very well put something in their food to get financial gain. You may be too young to remember when the woman put a severed finger in Wendy's Chili to sue them. It was ''investigated'' and found she put her husbands finger in the chili and she was jailed NOT rewarded.

You are arguing against yourself. The fact that the finger in the chili incident happened so long ago that you have to wonder if I am even old enough to remember proves how rare those events are. It's the exception, not the rule. On the other hand, reports of restaurants serving food contaminate with insects, hair, etc. are a daily occurrence, as are restaurants being shut down for government health violations. Try again, junior.