MESO-Rx Sponsor Primal Pharma - US Domestic

Just so I'm following (I see what you mean with wadding through the noise. Its like they are bots used to just shuffle pages)

The vendor has said he’s resold CN oil in the past 1 time, but is saying the newest batches are not CN relabels. When 3rd party testing occurs it hasn’t been consistent with the vendors results/testing.

Setting the inconsistencies aside (which could point to different batches or possible relabels), was there also a GCMS result showing it was EO or evidence that it is indeed CN relabel? I know someone sent a sample in, but I’m not experienced enough reading those reports to catch what stands out.



Primal dropped primo 100 and 200 in late December, claimed it was brewed in house with mig 812. Primal also provided a Jano for the raws as well as a gcms and hplc for the 200 that backed up his claims.

People were immediately skeptical of the 100 because it was dosed much more accurate than the 200 and was selectively omitted from GCMS testing.

@Magenzus then GCMS’d us and it came back different than the 200 and primals other recent testing.

The concern is not necessarily the contents of the primo 100 gcms, but rather, it doesn’t appear to be exactly as claimed and no direct attempt at an explanation has been made.

That’s the jist of it. Your mileage may vary on whether its a significant concern or not.
 
The concern is not necessarily the contents of the primo 100 gcms, but rather, it doesn’t appear to be exactly as claimed and no direct attempt at an explanation has been made.
I haven’t seen much of a clear explanation as to why it’s not what it’s claimed yet (100mg primo in Migoyl). I’ve a couple of vials and am interested. From what I can tell from my inexperienced research on lipids, I don’t see any evidence suggesting it’s not what primal claimed.
 
Primal dropped primo 100 and 200 in late December, claimed it was brewed in house with mig 812. Primal also provided a Jano for the raws as well as a gcms and hplc for the 200 that backed up his claims.

People were immediately skeptical of the 100 because it was dosed much more accurate than the 200 and was selectively omitted from GCMS testing.

@Magenzus then GCMS’d us and it came back different than the 200 and primals other recent testing.

The concern is not necessarily the contents of the primo 100 gcms, but rather, it doesn’t appear to be exactly as claimed and no direct attempt at an explanation has been made.

That’s the jist of it. Your mileage may vary on whether its a significant concern or not.
Thanks for this! Okay. Yeah this tracks.
 
I haven’t seen much of a clear explanation as to why it’s not what it’s claimed yet (100mg primo in Migoyl). I’ve a couple of vials and am interested. From what I can tell from my inexperienced research on lipids, I don’t see any evidence suggesting it’s not what primal claimed.

100
200

It's a pity these GCMS are not done consistently, some reports are really clean, clearly showing the oil type, none of these chemical names...and then you have some without even ba bb or..whatever.

The 200 is MCT, we overlap it with 100 - the same compounds are highlighted in yellow. The green compounds overlap with the ones found in veggie oil.

1769996681921.webp

Just see how clean this china oil report is, really well done...would make life so much easier to identify stuff..well...then you see the ones we have above. it makes a huge difference who runs the gcms at the lab..
 
Last edited:
Back
Top