MESO-Rx Sponsor Primal Pharma - US Domestic

[SwolieGuacamole]

Been taking superdrol for 2.5 weeks. I am loving it, the pumps are nasty and the strength gain is awesome. Low key strained my pec the other day from going too heavy on bench, because I kept just adding weight. Its keeping me looking full and vascular, only bad thing is the last 5 days I've been hungry af after training. Usually I don't feel hungry but its making me want carbs all the time. Im gonna run it for another 2 weeks, started with 20mg pre workout now doing 40 mg.

Any acne?

 

[RockyP]

I never understood why it's so expensive compared to other orals. Sdrol and mtren is dirt cheap.

Me either. Let’s not give these raws vendors any ideas. If winstrol ever gets expensive I’m out.

 

[ackmack78]

When I was reading and asking for advice about ment, you and a lot of others had good advice out there.

One important thing I remember was how Aromasin would work with ment but Adex would hardly work at all… it was a very specific reason but I don’t remember well enough to speak intelligently on it.

I have to read a little more before pinning that ment. I seem to do pretty good with E, but this is uncharted territory…

When I ran ment adex worked perfectly fine for me and I was running it with 500 Test and aromatize like a pig even when lean.

I personally wouldn't run ment again because I would rather not guess at e2 and dose ai according to feels. If it wasn't for that I'd give it another shot, but personally it wasn't anything that tren wasn't to me in a bulk.

 

[Kylesmith1985]

Accutane landed today. Nice to see it’s pharma grade rather ugl caps or suspension.

 

[Elektrobot]

I dialed back my pointless posts and motherfuckers literally posted hitler and screamed at each other all day.

Good teammates always know when to step in

 

[monster8912]

Any acne?

Nah all clear on that, I must not be prone to it because I've never really had issues with it on cycle.

 

[Oldhand]

When I ran ment adex worked perfectly fine for me and I was running it with 500 Test and aromatize like a pig even when lean.

I personally wouldn't run ment again because I would rather not guess at e2 and dose ai according to feels. If it wasn't for that I'd give it another shot, but personally it wasn't anything that tren wasn't to me in a bulk.

That’s good news. I’m happy to hear you were able to managed ment sides even while being a high aromatizer.

I haven’t had to run an AI the last two years, but my guess is that streak will soon come to an end lol.

 

[Lilpiggy]

Also your MAST and TRE400 results were completely off when tested by 3rd parties, same as your TC50. If you claim it to be "Jano" variance, we can simply ask in his thread to verify about his variances, because it'd be a huge QC issue for his lab for such variances.

@Photon can you please direct me to these 3rd party results for MAST.

 

[readalot]

But you just don't speak the language of chemistry well enough to know what you're saying. Unfortunately, the usual crutch of AI doesn't speak chemistry fluently either and it's only confusing everyone further.

What the GC-MS screening showed was an unidentified peak that elutes where common plasticizers often show up. That’s not the same as confirming degraded plastic. Without a reference standard match, correct ion-ratio criteria, blanks, and an orthogonal confirmation, you can’t call it plastic.

...and an orthogonal confirmation? Wow, sounds good. Was going to let it be, but with the BS here today, what the hell.

I gotta admit you guys did ole @Photon dirty. Good bluff game though. And most can't tell who is bluffing. Some aren't using AI.

Yep, the wording on the test reports was problematic and a reference standard was never confirmed.

But riddle me this...if someone goes to the trouble of getting a definitive match on GCMS with a reference standard and the other goodies mentioned (m/z ratio sig, blanks, etc.), why would confirmation with an orthogonal method be required for a polymer additive / organic compound? Nice to double check? Sure. We ain't talking biologics here.

Who wrote that up @Primal_Pharma? Since you(r) (cl)aim (is) to raise the standards here, I would have expected dialogue to flesh the issue out further and get some definitive answers. Instead, there was well placed dialogue in multiple threads meant to shut down further discussion. Kudos.

What orthogonal methods do you and your team recommend to further explore this topic? Yeah, yeah, 250 an hour. I read that. Let's get serious.

 

[CHIEF M]

Been taking superdrol for 2.5 weeks. I am loving it, the pumps are nasty and the strength gain is awesome. Low key strained my pec the other day from going too heavy on bench, because I kept just adding weight. Its keeping me looking full and vascular, only bad thing is the last 5 days I've been hungry af after training. Usually I don't feel hungry but its making me want carbs all the time. Im gonna run it for another 2 weeks, started with 20mg pre workout now doing 40 mg.

Got ya I was going to start at 10mg and go from there

 

[Lilpiggy]

Confirming Mast P 100 & Test E 250 both are labeled batch P11 in latest shipment.

In other news switched to primal Test E 250 batch P10 and my hs-crp has gone down.

 

[Primal_Pharma]

...and an orthogonal confirmation? Wow, sounds good. Was going to let it be, but with the BS here today, what the hell.

I gotta admit you guys did ole @Photon dirty. Good bluff game though. And most can't tell who is bluffing. Some aren't using AI.

Yep, the wording on the test reports was problematic and a reference standard was never confirmed.

But riddle me this...if someone goes to the trouble of getting a definitive match on GCMS with a reference standard and the other goodies mentioned (m/z ratio sig, blanks, etc.), why would confirmation with an orthogonal method be required for a polymer additive / organic compound? Nice to double check? Sure. We ain't talking biologics here.

Who wrote that up @Primal_Pharma? Since you(r) (cl)aim (is) to raise the standards here, I would have expected dialogue to flesh the issue out further and get some definitive answers. Instead, there was well placed dialogue in multiple threads meant to shut down further discussion. Kudos.

What orthogonal methods do you and your team recommend to further explore this topic? Yeah, yeah, 250 an hour. I read that. Let's get serious.

Because one good GCMS hit can still fool you. Even with a clean library match, reference standard, and nice ions, you’re still relying on one separation and one ionization in a complex matrix. Coelution, in-source fragments, near-isomers, or matrix additives can mimic the target. An orthogonal check changes the rules of the game to see if the ID survives. Run the reference and sample on a different column and confirm identical retention and RI, verify exact mass and fragments with HRMS/MS, and for polymer additives add FTIR on an extract. If it’s suspected as a leachable, extract the closure or filter and see if the same signal appears. If the call holds across those moves, you’ve got a robust identification rather than a good-looking coincidence.

 

[CHIEF M]

Been taking superdrol for 2.5 weeks. I am loving it, the pumps are nasty and the strength gain is awesome. Low key strained my pec the other day from going too heavy on bench, because I kept just adding weight. It’s keeping me looking full and vascular, only bad thing is the last 5 days I've been hungry af after training. Usually I don't feel hungry but it’s making me want carbs all the time. Im gonna run it for another 2 weeks, started with 20mg pre workout now doing 40 mg.

Taking any extra health supps like glutathione ?

 

[monster8912]

Taking any extra health supps like glutathione ?

Nothing too special some tudca, milk thistle, coq10, omegas, thorne heart health complex and added in citrus bergamot when i started the superdrol. Haven't taken glutathione but not a bad idea to throw it in.

 

[CHIEF M]

Nothing too special some tudca, milk thistle, coq10, omegas, thorne heart health complex and added in citrus bergamot when i started the superdrol. Haven't taken glutathione but not a bad idea to throw it in.

Yeah was going to throw Tudca in for sure also seen omegas good I’ll throw in coq10 since I have it in lol milk thistle I’ve always read it’s useless but idk lol

 

[readalot]

Because one good GCMS hit can still fool you. Even with a clean library match, reference standard, and nice ions, you’re still relying on one separation and one ionization in a complex matrix.

One good hit between the (1) "complex matrix" and (2) BB "solvent" with same compound as solute (the "contaminated BB" that had PS piece submerged in it)? Matched to reference standard. Item (2) has no complex matrix.

The rest of your comments I appreciate. Some of this definitely overkill, but I understand you are talking broadly about what may be an additive vs a soluble polymer. I was specifically calling out the former (linked across product and positive control). Thanks for taking the time to give the community something to chew on. Especially for a soluble polymer. It is nice to see you have a responsive team at this hour.

 

[monster8912]

Yeah was going to throw Tudca in for sure also seen omegas good I’ll throw in coq10 since I have it in lol milk thistle I’ve always read it’s useless but idk lol

Yea I have read lots of conflicting things basically saying milk thistle is useless too lol I just take it out of habit

 

[sionnach]

Because one good GCMS hit can still fool you. Even with a clean library match, reference standard, and nice ions, you’re still relying on one separation and one ionization in a complex matrix. Coelution, in-source fragments, near-isomers, or matrix additives can mimic the target. An orthogonal check changes the rules of the game to see if the ID survives. Run the reference and sample on a different column and confirm identical retention and RI, verify exact mass and fragments with HRMS/MS, and for polymer additives add FTIR on an extract. If it’s suspected as a leachable, extract the closure or filter and see if the same signal appears. If the call holds across those moves, you’ve got a robust identification rather than a good-looking coincidence.

This guy fucks.

 

[sionnach]

Got ya I was going to start at 10mg and go from there

10 with 10 tne and I feel like a monster.

 

[Photon]

Because one good GCMS hit can still fool you. Even with a clean library match, reference standard, and nice ions, you’re still relying on one separation and one ionization in a complex matrix. Coelution, in-source fragments, near-isomers, or matrix additives can mimic the target. An orthogonal check changes the rules of the game to see if the ID survives. Run the reference and sample on a different column and confirm identical retention and RI, verify exact mass and fragments with HRMS/MS, and for polymer additives add FTIR on an extract. If it’s suspected as a leachable, extract the closure or filter and see if the same signal appears. If the call holds across those moves, you’ve got a robust identification rather than a good-looking coincidence.

There's no end to this.

Tldr good reports are gtg.
Bad reports are invalid. Nobody's going to spend a f load of money, break opsec just to prove it.

Sent samples but no results? Jano did not run it.
3rd party results off? Jano variance.
Adrol tested wrong? Jano API degradation.
Weird stuff in GCMS? Jano's testing isn't sufficient, we need to do "insert alot of tests" and spend alot more money to validate.

I probably shouldn't even bother posting in this thread at this point..