janoshik
Subscriber
With all due respect, despite such claim your post doesn't read that way.
I choose to not reply to it and the points made at this time unless you'll specifically ask me to.
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
MESO-Rx Sponsor Pharmacom Labs officials and our Basicstero.com store
- Thread starter PHL Official
- Start date
I choose to not reply to it and the points made at this time unless you'll specifically ask me to.
if you got only one blister without box, it does not. Codes are printed on boxes under a scratch-off layer.
Here is what i can say right now. If you remember a year ago we got info that China is banning steroids and there could be raws deficiency on the market. We have even filmed as a proof barrels fully stacked with raw powder to show that we gonna not disappear if this is the case and we proved that we have enough raws for a couple of years of operation. Oldies on this board should remember this situation and that video.
Anastrozol and letrozol are pretty specific products. All this time we did not buy any raws of anastrozol.We had stock and used same batch of raws for all anastrozol no matter where we gonna sell it. And we tested this anastrozol numerous times. That is why we are iron sure it is anastrozol, not letrozol. And no, it is not removed from the site. As i said, we are iron sure, it is anastrozol, not letrozol.
theseus2019
Member
Thanks for the info!If you tolerate EQ without issue, I find it is one of the best compounds. It will give lean quality gains -- for me similar to primo but more anabolic -- and, help control estrogen without the need of an AI. At a one-to-one ration with total of aromoatizing agents (such as 600mg test with 600 mg EQ) I find it completely controls E2 conversion after enough weeks for it to reach full levels (EQ is very slow-acting long ester). This is because the metabolite of boldenone is a pwerful anti-estrogen itself. Some of the bvold will convert to estrogne but the natural break-down metabolite of boldeneone will by far off-set this and more which in total will reduce overall estrogen coversion in a cycle.
I esxperienced this many time myself when looking at my won bloodworks and having very low E2 even though I had 600 mg test (on RT without an AI I would have high E2) because the EQ metabolite controled estrogen.
Just some info about EQ to share so maybe it may help you or others
avaliable at:
Code:https://int.basicstero.ws/pharmabold-300
How do you think Mix 4 + Bold 300? Can run them together?
randomguy87
Banned
So you are saying you are iron sure that it is anastrozolE, not letrozolE, because in the past you have tested it and it was good? Well the thing is it was just recently tested as letrozolE. So how are you making this bullshit up that it is all good without actually testing your current product right now? So if you are using your old stashed ancient raws you may want to make sure the guy brewing your shit can read correctly.
randomguy87
Banned
Also sure is funny anytime someone posts a lab analysis or blood test that sparks questions with the results your rep types up a novel with a twilight zone explanation of why the results may not be what they should actually be.
theseus2019
Member
Just curious, what evidence do you have to support your claim that they lied in the first place, and keep lying
not in the past. If i explained it bad, we did not buy any raws recently for over a year and we use all the same raws all this time to produce pills and we tested this raws numerous times. What i am saying this is not new raws each time but all the same raws we use and we test it before produce each our own new batch of pills and never had doubts it anastrozol
It was not an excuse at all. As I said, we need some time.This is not the end of the story and I am not going to bring this subject down in the middle of nowhere.
RThoads
Subscriber
@randomguy87 just for you 
but seriously, answer these questions since you seem so interested in this topic:
•Why do you assume the claimed result is valid?
•How do you know for sure what was actually sent as a sample?
•How do you know the testing service did not make any innocent mistakes?
•How do you know the customer did not make any mistake?
•How do you know the warehouse packers or shipper did not send the wrong product (the customer said he bought one blister without a box)?
•What makes this test result 100% valid without chance of error, but the other testing results incuding the source's testing on the raws not valid?
What makes you so sure of one side of this claim but not the claim of the other side; based on what?
•Why is it that your mind thinks the only possiblity is the source's production team made pill with teh wrong compound? why do none of the other pissibility have any chance?
•Please, also explain all the good HPLC results from accredited analytic labs?
such as: Pharmacom Labs Archives - Anabolic Lab
and:
IF a source was trying to rip off or scam, why would the source put a more expensive compound in the product? what motivation is there?
At least if there was no active agent in the pill, or some cheap filler, you could argue that it is about money, but that is not the case with this alleged claim here with a very specific amount of an expensive compound present (seems more like some error to me -- maybe a testing/detection error).
The claimed result even states there is 0.97 mg of an expesive coumpound. Why would the sopurce put such an accurate measured amount of an expensive compound if they are trying to scam?
The source knows products will be tested and encorages testing; and, they know a test looking for adex would not find any if it was not added.
What would be the point or wotive to measure some such an exact and accurate to label claimed dosage of some other expesinve compoound?
Doesn't it seem more reasonable the testing method detected the adex but reported it as letro?
Basicstero and Pharmacom have an excellent long-term track-record over many years. Notice how the claims and accusations are very rare. This source has thousands of customers a month; if the products were bad why don't we see hundreds of complaints?
Basicstero and Pharmacom have an excellent reputation that was earned from many years of thousands of satisfied customers and many good analysis results.
Pharmacom Labs Archives - Anabolic Lab
The source has explained the raws were tested:
Why does the recent claim count as 100% perfect and infallible to you, but all the others testing (some links above) and the source's own testing and other information do not count?
IF you still do not think there is any chance a testing result may have an error or someone can make a mistake, please explain why the billion-dollar big pharma companies have recalls? With all their testing and resources, the government agencies' testing and resources etc., after all that, they still find out there were testing errors later -- after all, everything ever recalled by the FDA was once approved by the FDA.
But you somehow have access to some 100% perfect info that may not be mistaken, how?
the good news is that the source has already stated they are looking into the issue and would like to work with jano to determine why or where any error may have occured:
Again, please understand and let it be clear, no one is accusing or blaming anyone:
but seriously, answer these questions since you seem so interested in this topic:
•Why do you assume the claimed result is valid?
•How do you know for sure what was actually sent as a sample?
•How do you know the testing service did not make any innocent mistakes?
•How do you know the customer did not make any mistake?
•How do you know the warehouse packers or shipper did not send the wrong product (the customer said he bought one blister without a box)?
•What makes this test result 100% valid without chance of error, but the other testing results incuding the source's testing on the raws not valid?
What makes you so sure of one side of this claim but not the claim of the other side; based on what?
•Why is it that your mind thinks the only possiblity is the source's production team made pill with teh wrong compound? why do none of the other pissibility have any chance?
•Please, also explain all the good HPLC results from accredited analytic labs?
such as: Pharmacom Labs Archives - Anabolic Lab
and:
Code:
https://int.basicstero.ws/index/resultsIF a source was trying to rip off or scam, why would the source put a more expensive compound in the product? what motivation is there?
At least if there was no active agent in the pill, or some cheap filler, you could argue that it is about money, but that is not the case with this alleged claim here with a very specific amount of an expensive compound present (seems more like some error to me -- maybe a testing/detection error).
The claimed result even states there is 0.97 mg of an expesive coumpound. Why would the sopurce put such an accurate measured amount of an expensive compound if they are trying to scam?
The source knows products will be tested and encorages testing; and, they know a test looking for adex would not find any if it was not added.
What would be the point or wotive to measure some such an exact and accurate to label claimed dosage of some other expesinve compoound?
Doesn't it seem more reasonable the testing method detected the adex but reported it as letro?
Basicstero and Pharmacom have an excellent long-term track-record over many years. Notice how the claims and accusations are very rare. This source has thousands of customers a month; if the products were bad why don't we see hundreds of complaints?
Basicstero and Pharmacom have an excellent reputation that was earned from many years of thousands of satisfied customers and many good analysis results.
Pharmacom Labs Archives - Anabolic Lab
The source has explained the raws were tested:
Why does the recent claim count as 100% perfect and infallible to you, but all the others testing (some links above) and the source's own testing and other information do not count?
IF you still do not think there is any chance a testing result may have an error or someone can make a mistake, please explain why the billion-dollar big pharma companies have recalls? With all their testing and resources, the government agencies' testing and resources etc., after all that, they still find out there were testing errors later -- after all, everything ever recalled by the FDA was once approved by the FDA.
But you somehow have access to some 100% perfect info that may not be mistaken, how?
the good news is that the source has already stated they are looking into the issue and would like to work with jano to determine why or where any error may have occured:
Again, please understand and let it be clear, no one is accusing or blaming anyone:
RThoads
Subscriber
People ask for information, details, explainations etc. then a few guys, we hardly ever see post here (and I do not even know if they are customers), jump into the tread/topic to call the information you provided "excuses."
They are just bashers -- if you did not explain anything they would bash and say "where is your reply? we would like to know more..."
but if/when you reply with the geuine details you have, they call it "excuses."
They will just hate on anything and they are not here to be productive.
It is easy to see who is actually currious to get more information and understand the details of a situation and who is just trolling or making drama.
What is strange to me is how they have the time with life so busy and so many other things most of us have to do.
magaboss13
Member
I ordered one 50 count blister pack and three vials of cyp.
RThoads
Subscriber
Yes, I also remember that other claim as well.
I think you just proved my point (see quotes below) because the guy was honorable and came back to explain the bad results were not accurate. OR in this case quoted below do you suddenly not trust jano's results and wikibolics was correct?
Which perfect testing is the true result? how does it work? is it only results that criticize the source count?
Do you notice how those rare complaints come and the accusers or ignorant/uninformed onlookers that jump in seem so confident in the source's "mistake" -- each time it is the epic and dramatic "exposure" -- and a small group is so critical of the source... but then they are all refuted with data or evidence (in many cases the original accuser was genuinunely just looking for info and later even states he or she was mistaken such as in teh example you remeber quoted here).
Then, the drama and info fades away. Never do I see the same hype and drama when the source is shown to be correct.
Why is it you seem to remember that accusation, BUT you failed to remember teh resolution and the FACT the one you posted teh claimn even came back and provided new information showing he feels the critique was incorrect. You failed to remember the part that showed Pharmacom was right.
In the end, this source's reputation speaks for itself -- just look at all the EXCELLENT HPLC results and thousands of satisfied customers.
Please think logically for a moment, would this source still be in business with this much demand year after year (it hard to keep things in stock with so much demand) if the products were not good?
Basicstero and Pharmacom have an excellent reputation that was earned from many years of thousands of satisfied customers and many good analysis results: Pharmacom Labs Archives - Anabolic Lab
Last edited:
RThoads
Subscriber
I understand. I apologize if the link to that thread to which I referred causes you any additional stress. My intention is not at all to bash you nor hurt your business. I tried to word things as respectful as I could and even stated I would consider using your service if I have a personal need to do so.
My only purpose of including that link was to show that anyone, you, some other testing lab (such as wikibolic which was shown to be in contradiction of some of your other results), myself & any source included, may have a mistake happen.
Maybe I did not pick the best way to show this.
Please, accept my apology.
No one here is perfect not without a chance of error; in the past if/when this source had any mistakes, it has been open and honest about it working to resolve the issue -- this case will be no different.
I do stand by my statement that any of us here may make mistakes and have errors (the source included -- no one is perfect as we are all human).
@janoshik please know, I have nothing personal against you, Pharmacom & Basicstero has no issue with you -- no one here intends for you to be teh topic at all -- I encourage testing and it helps us all so for that reason you are actually appreciated.
Basicstero is investing this thoroughly.
Hopefully we can all work together to determine the situation here.
I personally want to see this issue resolved and for us all to have a full understanding of what happened. I am also a customer and use these products -- not only do I care about everyone here, the business/source, but I use these products myself.
I will say it again in case people missed the previous statements:
please understand and let it be clear, no one is accusing or blaming anyone.
the source has already stated they are looking into the issue and would like to work with Jano to determine what may have occurred.
Again, my apology to Jano if it my post was came across disrespectful of him or his business.
If I were currently in need of analysis, I would consider using Jano's service.
janoshik
Subscriber
Thank you for the apology.
Indeed, I do realize that nobody is without error, including me, that's why I double checked that I have not made a mistake and provided all the data necessary and above to verify my work and have offered to make it all fully transparent and submit to public scrutiny.
Cheers
Indeed, I do realize that nobody is without error, including me, that's why I double checked that I have not made a mistake and provided all the data necessary and above to verify my work and have offered to make it all fully transparent and submit to public scrutiny.
Cheers
RThoads
Subscriber
Thank you.
You give access to a very important service.
I appreciate all testing regardless of favorable outcomes or not because, unlike guys saying "how they feel" or showing bloodwork (as if their snap-shot that moment of their individual physiological responce and metabolism of compounds is an objective anayltic method to evaluate product quality, which it is not -- and we have no way to know what they used or how they used it etc), actual analytic testing gives valuable data that may help us all greatly.
Similar threads
- Sticky
