PHARMACOM Jano test results

[Exhortae]

Nice I'm glad these samples gave better results .

Boldenone = 268.94 / 300 = .90%
Nandrolone = 291.08 / 300 = 97%

Both are passes this time, within the widely accepted +/- 10% of label claim. This is good to see.

Thanks again for getting testing.

I always defend the brand. But boldenone 300mg / ml at 268.94 is not a pass for me.

 

[Thorshammer]

I may have misread your post. It initially came across as bashing Jano, which tends to happen here when smaller brewers post testing that people don’t fully understand or that didn’t work out the way they expected.

I’m not a scientist, but I am an extremely experienced PED user and evaluator. Nothing goes into my body that hasn’t been properly tested, and I make a point of sharing those results here so others can make informed decisions.

I’ve been around this community for 30 years, and MesoRx remains one of the best resources available for anyone serious about understanding and perfecting their craft.

I never bashed him. I mearly did not understand the inconsistencies in results that were viewed with cult like logic instead of say hmm that doesn't seem right maybe someone made an error and we should look into this. And I'm getting hit with Jano is Christ this is blasphemy mindset. I have used jano multiple times as well as others. I also understand exactly what goes into the testing process and how sensitive quantative analysis is to the slightest errors and that pharma labs that tests GMP made products do still make mistakes and require retesting. I own and use analytical equipment and I'm probably one of a very few that actually do batch sterility testing exactly to USP71 guidelines. I take my craft extremely seriously. None of my results are here no one even knows the name of my lab not even in DMs I will not take this risk I'm not comfortable with it. But if I see an inconsistent results that should be questioned and a lab that maybe innocent like pharmacom I will voice the opinion hey maybe we should look into this before blasting a company falsely because I don't want it happening to me

I always defend the brand. But boldenone 300mg / ml at 268.94 is not a pass for me.

Definitely not if it is accurate but a 10% deviation is extremely easy to create if absolute diligence in the testing process isn't adhered to. Analytical testing on a quantitative basis is extremely prone to error at every stage of the process and why in real pharmaceutical testing no one ever tests a single sample it would be considered madness proffesionaly. I always send at least 5 samples. I have resulst from the same lab the same samples where I got a 92, 94, 94, 96 and 99 and those were probably all performed perfectly. 1 tiny bubble from an incorrect pipette technique can throw results that much. 10% is considered acceptable because that is a margin of error that is expected in a singke sample test and why multiple samples should be checked for work consistency.

 

[Thorshammer]

Guys the tested sample is reduced to a concentration in micrograms per ml and is very sensitive it isn't a magic machine that spits out gospel.

 

[janoshik]

you know how many times he has been called out for questionable tests and bias.

Could you, please, list out the times it turned out to actually be the case in the past decade?

But if I see an inconsistent results that should be questioned and a lab that maybe innocent like pharmacom I will voice the opinion hey maybe we should look into this before blasting a company falsely because I don't want it happening to me.

Inconsistent results and innocent company such as this particular case, where, if I'm correct it was later determined that the product tested was actually a fake?

Thank you for clarification and have a nice day.

 

[Thorshammer]

Could you, please, list out the times it turned out to actually be the case in the past decade?


Inconsistent results such as this particular case, where, if I'm correct it was later determined that the product tested was actually fake?

Thank you for clarification and have a nice day.

If three lab resulst from a sample were shown to you and only one seemed an anomaly would you dismiss the others and say this one must be correct because I like them or would you say hmm we should double check this because something could be wrong. I am not saying not to trust or use you in fact the opposite. I'm pointing out errors occur and immediately assuming things in a dogmatic manner based on bias and feeling is stupid and not science i would seriously hope someone of your caliber would agree with that.

 

[janoshik]

If three lab resulst from a sample were shown to you and only one seemed an anomaly would you dismiss the others and say this one must be correct because I like them or would you say hmm we should double check this because something could be wrong. I am not saying not to trust or use you in fact the opposite. I'm pointing out errors occur and immediately assuming things in a dogmatic manner based on bias and feeling is stupid and not science i would seriously hope someone of your caliber would agree with that.

All due respect, that is not an answer to my questions.

 

[Thorshammer]

People are interpreting this all wrong because of emotional bias. I'm pointing out things that do not line up enough to not retest.And I did not directly accuse you I said people have made statements that I have taken as a reason to zoom out with a bigger lens. There are simply inconsistencies in their arguments being used to condemn a company and I think it deserves further examination. Especially in a field with massive probability for error.

 

[Thorshammer]

All due respect, that is not an answer to my questions.

Maybe that comment i got a bit to aggressive with my reasoning in frustration. If you look back to the origin of this I was casually suggesting this doesn't make sense and there is holes that are extremely illogical and maybe we shouldn't rush to judgment but I have been met with the most illogical arguments based solely on bias and reacted. I apologize if it sounded like defamation. That was not the intent only that this dogmatic veiw of infalability is nonsense.

 

[janoshik]

Thank you, much appreciated.

I do agree that dogmatic view of infallibility is nonsense, that's why I take all concerns extremely seriously.

 

[Scruf]

I never bashed him. I mearly did not understand the inconsistencies in results that were viewed with cult like logic instead of say hmm that doesn't seem right maybe someone made an error and we should look into this. And I'm getting hit with Jano is Christ this is blasphemy mindset. I have used jano multiple times as well as others. I also understand exactly what goes into the testing process and how sensitive quantative analysis is to the slightest errors and that pharma labs that tests GMP made products do still make mistakes and require retesting. I own and use analytical equipment and I'm probably one of a very few that actually do batch sterility testing exactly to USP71 guidelines. I take my craft extremely seriously. None of my results are here no one even knows the name of my lab not even in DMs I will not take this risk I'm not comfortable with it. But if I see an inconsistent results that should be questioned and a lab that maybe innocent like pharmacom I will voice the opinion hey maybe we should look into this before blasting a company falsely because I don't want it happening to me.

Thank you for the clarification. As well I agree that multiple samples is the best way to go.

Having been here for a long time it is quite common for members to falsely accuse vendors and Jano. It appeared that was your intent, I am glad it was not. Thank you for the clarification.