Pharmacom Labs PHARMA NAN D600 - HPLC/TAMC/TYMC - 2017-07 - SIMEC via

Discussion in 'Steroid Lab Testing' started by, Oct 10, 2017.

  1. grey and Michael7 like this.
  2. Michael7

    Michael7 Member

    Thanks for posting , why does the test report say Test E when its Nandrolone that was tested.
    Bradly, RAre and Eman like this.
  3. We will ask SIMEC about this. We didn't notice this before publication.

    SIMEC generally only looks for the active ingredient listed on the label so we assumed this was nandrolone decanoate. SIMEC's reply will be posted asap.
  4. Johnny442

    Johnny442 Member

    Are the results deleted, or am I missing something? If so, why delete them? I think people wanting to use this product should know they're actually just using Test if that's what it says!
  5. Eman

    Eman Member

    Waiting on simec to clarify the results so they aren't misinterpreted I'm sure.
    Johnny442 likes this.
  6. Johnny442

    Johnny442 Member

    Ok, just curious. Thanks for the response!
  7. Millard Baker

    Millard Baker Member

    Yes, we need to wait for SIMEC to clarify. The report is confusing.

    The specification for testing the sample is 600 mg/ml nandrolone decanoate. The SIMEC report states that the sample complies (678.2) with the specification BUT the report also states that a testosterone enanthate analysis was performed and NOT a nandrolone decanoate analysis.

    It would be irresponsible to publish and disseminate the reports without clarification from SIMEC.
    Eman, Michael7 and Johnny442 like this.
  8. Eman

    Eman Member

    Although my guess is that the test enanthate part is a typo, I'm very curious to see what SIMEC says.

    Overall, the frequency of compounds being overdosed is really interesting. Goes to show that labs like Pcom that charge a premium price are shooting in the dark with respect to actual hormone content in there products... An amateur at home could achieve more accurately dosed products IMO.
    ickyrica and MisterSuperGod like this.
  9. janoshik

    janoshik Member

    I risk being ostracized for this, but I strongly believe sending a few blind samples with a known concentration to SIMEC would help clearing this up.

    From an analytical standpoint a trend like this would raise an eyebrow and get people looking for a systematic error. That's as neutral statement as I can make and I ain't trying to throw dirt here.
    Johnny442 likes this.
  10. Eman

    Eman Member

    I think I understand what you're getting at but I imagine this is beyond the scope of AnabolicLab.

    Are you suggesting to send the sample elsewhere to acquire the concentration?
  11. Wunderpus

    Wunderpus Member Supporter

    Hmm, maybe.... Not sure HOW accurate our home scales are... But, +/- .78mg's/ml is considerable...
  12. janoshik

    janoshik Member

    That depends on if you trust the "elsewhere" laboratory.

    I had a trustless approach on my mind - where you have no need to trust a 3rd party.

    Purchasing a raw material, accurately weighting it and using a graduated cylinder to dissolve it is a sure way to assess for that kind of systematic error.

    You weight 10 or more grams of nandrolone decanoate - a scale costing 20 dollars can weight that with very high accuracy. You can verify the accuracy by weighting coins. Error can be kept at around 1%.

    You put it into a graduated cylinder (or better yet, volumetric flask) and dissolve it. You can verify the accuracy of the cylinder by weighting distilled water.

    Now you have a solution which contains maximum of x mg/ml nandrolone decanoate. I say maximum, because if you don't have the raws tested, you can't be sure, but I don't think I've ever encountered seriously bad deca raws.

    If the result from any lab is significantly higher than x mg, you got the answer.

    If it's lower, then either the lab is bad or the raws were bad.
  13. Millard Baker

    Millard Baker Member

    First of all, there is no "trend like this". AFAIK, this is the only time a SIMEC report listed a sample analysis that did not match the sample specification. An isolated incident does not make a trend.

    Having said that, it appears SIMEC made a mistake: it either (1) made a clerical error (most likely) and inaccurately reported the analysis performed OR (2) performed the wrong analysis and failed to test the sample for nandrolone decanoate.
  14. janoshik

    janoshik Member

    I did not talk about the typo.

    Typos happen to pretty much everyone. God knows I've had a lot of those.

    EDIT: For clarification, I talked about occasions when the dosage is higher than expected.
    Millard Baker likes this.
  15. Millard Baker

    Millard Baker Member

    Now I see you were referring to the frequency of overdosed samples...
  16. janoshik

    janoshik Member

    Yes. I'm glad we avoided a misunderstanding.
  17. Millard Baker

    Millard Baker Member

    Clarification is always a good thing :)
  18. Millard Baker

    Millard Baker Member

    SIMEC's response:

  19. stone988

    stone988 Member

    Still waiting for all the fake gear results, you shills really suck cock!!
  20. janoshik

    janoshik Member

    B-but all gear is fake, if I don't become Arnold overnight, right? :D
    showstoppa likes this.