MESO-Rx Sponsor PCT 24X7 "1 stop shop for all day healthcare"

[UncleBuns]

The problem is that people are relying on one persons lab for HCG testing (janoshik) and as a matter of fact Janoshik is a very smart man who i have a lot of respect for. You may be unaware of it but this same issue has come up with Janoshik before and he has had discourse with a European HCG manufacturer who outlined exactly why he believes Janoshik's method of testing HCG is not accurate, (many many vendors have their HCG results come back half dosed or severely underdosed.) Even QDS had his HCG come back half dosed from Janoshik.

So either there is a giant conspiracy on to underdose a peptide, or Janoshik's testing for HCG is flawed. I will link Janoshik's thread here HCG discourse
it is a long read but well worth it to hear from an actual manufacturer of HCG. Here is one quote for the people who won't read all of the thread.
''

I want to get back to you regarding your HCG testing, I spoke to other HCG producers who produce it using chinese HCG raw material, also to some other big sellers of HCG who import HCG vials, they all get same lower results than the expected 5000IU, and results range in 3000-3500IU which is a very low result.

As an example I sent vial from same batch, which you tested a bit above 3000IU to Analiza Bialek lab, and they showed correct results of nearly 6000IU. Check attachment.

You should really recheck how you test HCG and what standard you use, because this problem I see is not only with my production HCG but its mainstream problem which you have which affects HCG sales, with your current testing everyone has to add 10000IU so you would show 5000IU in your testing.

I am not pointing to your oils testing or your HGH testing, I am specifically saying about your HCG testing.''
''Regarding why no-one us using HPLC method in pharmacopeia you are not correct, as HPLC would be much cheaper and easier method to determine HCG bioactivity if it was possible, everyone would use it, if it would be possible to validate it for determination of HCG bioactivity in production or testing purposes, but no-one uses it because it is not suitable method for this particular protein, due to huge variation in glycolisation pattern and that pattern has big influence to bioactivity, so one protein with the same amount of mg/ml with one glycolisation pattern can have very different bioactivity with the same amount mg/ml with different glycolisation pattern.
I would not agree that no one is using hplc in pharmacopoeia, for lot's of proteins HPLC validation is the best and most important step in determination of protein characteristics, but not all proteins are the same. And in this regard you can not measure everything using the same scheme.''

I've seen the thread you linked. I see you cherry-picked a few snippets to try and support your argument. Anyone who reads the first post of the thread for 5 minutes can see that the thread does not support your argument. The thread is actually posted by Jano. He lays out how the Analiza Bialek Test is definitely bogus. Odd that you didn't pull that snippet to put in your post. He even states the flaws in his method but he says that it is accurate within 10 or 20% plus or minus. Jano lays out why he uses the method he does and the benefits and downsides to his method. Analiza Bialek does not have a great track record and I seriously doubt that they could charge less money to do a very complicated test better than Jano.

The industry standard involves injecting live rodents then dissecting them and examining their organs. So I guess if you want the absolute most accurate test, you'd have to find a place willing to do that for you and I bet it would be extremely expensive.

Kind of odd that you link a thread and then cherry pick a couple things to try to support your argument. Did you actually read through the thread you linked and ignore all the evidence going against you? Or did you read it and decide to only pay attention to the few little things you thought support your argument?

The third Post in he does TLDR a which I am quoting directly here:

tldr is pretty much:
1) janoshik hplc hcg tests are best compared to other janoshik hplc hcg tests

2) results from janoshik hcg tests might differ from dissected rodent organ mass measurement tests, which is pharmacopoeia standard <- main manufacturers concern, as they believe these test would yield more favourable results than my tests

3) there are huge differences in results between janoshik hplc hcg test and other lab hplc hcg test, (thus I proceeded to explain why I believe the other lab hplc hcg test is shit, if not outright doctored)

4) there are tradeoffs with cost/value with hcg testing and that while I am not providing the pharma industry standard (the dissected rodent test) I believe I am doing best in what is everybody's (random rodents included) interest. tests with higher margin or error are better than no tests at all.

5) I put results in IU's while mcg's might be better suited, but then nobody could read the reports imo, so I steer towards "less correct" option in order to avoid even more confusion here.

Pretty much.

I mean, the manufacturer has been sent link to this thread, so they can provide their point of view as well. I really liked the discussion with them and made some changes based on that (the report comment on new hcg tests).

I really do appreciate constructive criticism.

 

[UncleBuns]

@emogothtiddy

Here is another quote from the thread about the AB test:

Given they are unable to even separate alpha and beta subunits I not only doubt their accuracy, I doubt their ability to conduct a proper test at all.

If there's any semblance of their result to the desired one, it's either accidental or doctored in my humble opinion.

And here is a quote of a test he did on legitimate pharmaceutical grade HCG. He happened to test this while that thread was active. It is dead on the money.

Got my hands on another presumably genuine pharma GH sample - Janoshik Analytical