Pristine Anabolics Intro

[janoshik]

Yea, just wanted to clarify when I though it might've been misunderstood.

I'm sleep deprived to the point I can't even sleep, so I'm not really sure if anything that I'm writing makes sense.

 

[bolder]

Personally I believe a source should send in raws for purity testing and to accurately dose each batch. A source could also send in random finished products to check and see that everything is what it’s supposed to be.

The finished product testing (for the most part) would be more on the customer to send in blind samples.

Now this is where the source should encourage that kind of testing from their customers and offer the incentive (store credit) to do so!

This way just makes the most sense to me.

 

[Brawny]

Personally I believe a source should send in raws for purity testing and to accurately dose each batch. A source could also send in random finished products to check and see that everything is what it’s supposed to be.

The finished product testing (for the most part) would be more on the customer to send in blind samples.

Now this is where the source should encourage that kind of testing from their customers and offer the incentive (store credit) to do so!

This way just makes the most sense to me.

Yeah this was my bad. I thought they could determine impurities from finished oils. Still awaiting response from W&M as well.

I have some NPP and Test E I’d like to get tested

 

[bolder]

Yeah this was my bad. I thought they could determine impurities from finished oils. Still awaiting response from W&M as well.

I have some NPP and Test E I’d like to get tested

I wasn’t directing it towards you my man! I was actually directing it towards @Trenity
He said he’d rather send in finished product but I respectfully disagree on that approach.

 

[Tizzousa]

Personally I believe a source should send in raws for purity testing and to accurately dose each batch. A source could also send in random finished products to check and see that everything is what it’s supposed to be.

The finished product testing (for the most part) would be more on the customer to send in blind samples.

Now this is where the source should encourage that kind of testing from their customers and offer the incentive (store credit) to do so!

This way just makes the most sense to me.

@bolder this is a great point. And this is why good sources offer credit for testing and bloodwork. Looking at it this way I agree testing raws makes most sense!!

 

[Tizzousa]

Yeah this was my bad. I thought they could determine impurities from finished oils. Still awaiting response from W&M as well.

I have some NPP and Test E I’d like to get tested

I’m with you though. I was under the assumption it could be done. I mean every report on anabolic labs say if it found any microbiological impurities? Guess that was wishful thinking

 

[Brawny]

I’m with you though. I was under the assumption it could be done. I mean ever report on anabolic labs say if t found any microbiological impurities? Guess that was wishful thinking

I’m still awaiting a response from W&M. I’ll definitely let everyone know yay or nay

 

[Trenity]

Personally I believe a source should send in raws for purity testing and to accurately dose each batch. A source could also send in random finished products to check and see that everything is what it’s supposed to be.

The finished product testing (for the most part) would be more on the customer to send in blind samples.

Now this is where the source should encourage that kind of testing from their customers and offer the incentive (store credit) to do so!

This way just makes the most sense to me.

Not trying to argue with you here, just trying to start a logical dialogue on the subject.

Isn't testing finished product kind of killing 2 birds with one stone?

For example...
Say I get a new KG of Test E. I make a typical 1000mL batch dosed at 300mg/mL. I mix my 300g of raws with my ba/bb/mct. That makes generally about 92 vials after filtering. If I send that in and it shows that my finished is dosed at 299.5mg/mL, doesn't that prove that the raws are pure and the finished product is dosed accurately? My logic is that's the best case scenario for me and the customer. I know I brewed it correctly and the customers that purchase those next 90 vials know exactly what they're getting in the vial. Is my logic flawed here?

Ideally, Mac's post is the perfect system and that's what I want to get to, but it's going to take a month or two to get ahead enough logistically to accomplish that.

 

[Trenity]

I’m still awaiting a response from W&M. I’ll definitely let everyone know yay or nay

Pretty certain that I read in W&M's thread that they will test for contaminants in finished product for an extra fee.

 

[Brawny]

Not trying to argue with you here, just trying to start a logical dialogue on the subject.

Isn't testing finished product kind of killing 2 birds with one stone?

For example...
Say I get a new KG of Test E. I make a typical 1000mL batch dosed at 300mg/mL. I mix my 300g of raws with my ba/bb/mct. That makes generally about 92 vials after filtering. If I send that in and it shows that my finished is dosed at 299.5mg/mL, doesn't that prove that the raws are pure and the finished product is dosed accurately? My logic is that's the best case scenario for me and the customer. I know I brewed it correctly and the customers that purchase those next 90 vials know exactly what they're getting in the vial. Is my logic flawed here?

Ideally, Mac's post is the perfect system and that's what I want to get to, but it's going to take a month or two to get ahead enough logistically to accomplish that.

Yeah this is what I was thinking essentially. IF a chemist is capable of checking for contaminants, then everything has been addressed

 

[MisterSuperGod]

Not trying to argue with you here, just trying to start a logical dialogue on the subject.

Isn't testing finished product kind of killing 2 birds with one stone?

For example...
Say I get a new KG of Test E. I make a typical 1000mL batch dosed at 300mg/mL. I mix my 300g of raws with my ba/bb/mct. That makes generally about 92 vials after filtering. If I send that in and it shows that my finished is dosed at 299.5mg/mL, doesn't that prove that the raws are pure and the finished product is dosed accurately? My logic is that's the best case scenario for me and the customer. I know I brewed it correctly and the customers that purchase those next 90 vials know exactly what they're getting in the vial. Is my logic flawed here?

Ideally, Mac's post is the perfect system and that's what I want to get to, but it's going to take a month or two to get ahead enough logistically to accomplish that.

What if you brew it then come to find out it's only 260 mg/ml?
Now you're stuck with ~100 vials that you'll likely have to discount to get rid of.

It would be smart to test raws first. Then compensate during brewing to account for purity loss. Send in a sample from the finished batch and you have all bases covered, pending the finished product comes back as expected.

Let's say you test the raws, but screw up during brewing, it happens, then someone tests your gear and it comes back underdosed, now you're stuck with an underdosed batch and will be scrambling to make it right with everyone that ordered.

The redundancy check of having both tested will save you more money in the long run, should something ever go wrong.

 

[Mac11wildcat]

Ideally, Mac's post is the perfect system and that's what I want to get to, but it's going to take a month or two to get ahead enough logistically to accomplish that.

The realistic ones among us realize this. If that is truly your goal nobody here will be disappointed. Slow and steady.

 

[88general88]

Yea, just wanted to clarify when I though it might've been misunderstood.

I'm sleep deprived to the point I can't even sleep, so I'm not really sure if anything that I'm writing makes sense.

Great hope you can still test under those conditions

With all joking aside I have been that same way for the last month it seems between the tren and dnp. I have basically had to roofi myself for a decent nights sleep

 

[bolder]

Not trying to argue with you here, just trying to start a logical dialogue on the subject.

Isn't testing finished product kind of killing 2 birds with one stone?

For example...
Say I get a new KG of Test E. I make a typical 1000mL batch dosed at 300mg/mL. I mix my 300g of raws with my ba/bb/mct. That makes generally about 92 vials after filtering. If I send that in and it shows that my finished is dosed at 299.5mg/mL, doesn't that prove that the raws are pure and the finished product is dosed accurately? My logic is that's the best case scenario for me and the customer. I know I brewed it correctly and the customers that purchase those next 90 vials know exactly what they're getting in the vial. Is my logic flawed here?

Ideally, Mac's post is the perfect system and that's what I want to get to, but it's going to take a month or two to get ahead enough logistically to accomplish that.

Discussions are fun man lol! That’s kind of what we do here to make things better for the community!
I will say you have valid points here. As a brewer I would think you would want to know what you are working with first.

@MisterSuperGod is on point with his logic I believe.

I think testing the raws could cost you less in the end. Like MSG said what if the finished product comes back under dosed? Are you going to change your price and labels to match what the product dosage test reports come back as? Or just not post the bad results and take it as a loss?
If you are confident in your brewing skills, even though a mistake can happen, I think raws testing would make more sense. Raws testing can’t be done by the customers so that’s entirely on you and will also keep your supplier accountable! This will also take out the variable that the raws are the problem making it easier to narrow it down if a problem arises.

I understand just testing the finished product to save some cash and to see what it’s dosed at ‘killin two birds with one stone’.
But...
If you offer a good incentive for customer testing then it will cost you even less wouldn’t it?
We know roughly how much a vial costs to brew. Pennies. Wouldn’t that be cheaper to just encourage customers to do the finished product testing randomly?

The main thing here is that you’re testing! You have to figure in cost, and find a system that makes sense and benefits you and your customers. Plus encourage customer testing with that process.

We know it will take a little time to get ahead on testing to the point you’re out in front of it. As long as you’re testing now it will get you to that place even faster imo.

 

[Mdubbs]

Discussions are fun man lol! That’s kind of what we do here to make things better for the community!
I will say you have valid points here. As a brewer I would think you would want to know what you are working with first.

@MisterSuperGod is on point with his logic I believe.

I think testing the raws could cost you less in the end. Like MSG said what if the finished product comes back under dosed? Are you going to change your price and labels to match what the product dosage test reports come back as? Or just not post the bad results and take it as a loss?
If you are confident in your brewing skills, even though a mistake can happen, I think raws testing would make more sense. Raws testing can’t be done by the customers so that’s entirely on you and will also keep your supplier accountable! This will also take out the variable that the raws are the problem making it easier to narrow it down if a problem arises.

I understand just testing the finished product to save some cash and to see what it’s dosed at ‘killin two birds with one stone’.
But...
If you offer a good incentive for customer testing then it will cost you even less wouldn’t it?
We know roughly how much a vial costs to brew. Pennies. Wouldn’t that be cheaper to just encourage customers to do the finished product testing randomly?

The main thing here is that you’re testing! You have to figure in cost, and find a system that makes sense and benefits you and your customers. Plus encourage customer testing with that process.

We know it will take a little time to get ahead on testing to the point you’re out in front of it. As long as you’re testing now it will get you to that place even faster imo.

Well said @bolder I'm with ya. Unfortunately most buyers dont test their products before injecting let alone run blood work while on cycle. Most guys are probably just scraping to get by and saving their pennies for their next cycle. @Trenity is already offering $150 for bloods and $250 for finished product testing. How many tests have been done by users since you opened shop? I'm not sure how much more he can offer, except to just do all the testing on his own.

 

[Kho]

Great hope you can still test under those conditions

With all joking aside I have been that same way for the last month it seems between the tren and dnp. I have basically had to roofi myself for a decent nights sleep

I’d pop a roofie for a good sleep lol

 

[bolder]

Well said @bolder I'm with ya. Unfortunately most buyers dont test their products before injecting let alone run blood work while on cycle. Most guys are probably just scraping to get by and saving their pennies for their next cycle. @Trenity is already offering $150 for bloods and $250 for finished product testing. How many tests have been done by users since you opened shop? I'm not sure how much more he can offer, except to just do all the testing on his own.

Truth! This is why I like discussions lol.

I know he offers incentives and it’s up to members to take advantage of that offer. @Trenity is doing his part in that regard.

The real goal here is to get out in front with testing. To get to the point where a big batch is being tested before it’s released to the market.

It’s probably more reasonable to test a few products at a time right now. Have a rotation to where everything offered can get tested. It truly doesn’t matter to me at this point if it’s only finished products getting tested.

Just as long as the end goal is to have raws tested before big batches are released.... To keep quality on point and keep the source accountable by offering incentives for customer testing.
That’s all we can really ask for as far as testing goes isn’t it?

 

[janoshik]

Great hope you can still test under those conditions

With all joking aside I have been that same way for the last month it seems between the tren and dnp. I have basically had to roofi myself for a decent nights sleep

I actually used to, but I set some boundaries for me. Won't work unless I'm well rested now.

Not worth the risk of mistakes, I'd rather be late with some work.

 

[Brawny]

Truth! This is why I like discussions lol.

I know he offers incentives and it’s up to members to take advantage of that offer. @Trenity is doing his part in that regard.

The real goal here is to get out in front with testing. To get to the point where a big batch is being tested before it’s released to the market.

It’s probably more reasonable to test a few products at a time right now. Have a rotation to where everything offered can get tested. It truly doesn’t matter to me at this point if it’s only finished products getting tested.

Just as long as the end goal is to have raws tested before big batches are released.... To keep quality on point and keep the source accountable by offering incentives for customer testing.
That’s all we can really ask for as far as testing goes isn’t it?

As a community, there should be members doing testing as well. Joedaddy has came in clutch on two different labs recently. The source should test and also the members as well. We shouldn’t blindly accept results posted by a source as gospel

 

[Mdubbs]

As a community, there should be members doing testing as well. Joedaddy has came in clutch on two different labs recently. The source should test and also the members as well. We shouldn’t blindly accept results posted by a source as gospel

Definitely... unfortunately the vast majority of this community are not. We need more Joedaddy's for sure. Asking a source to test their own products is great for accountability but can also be skewed by the source. Forming a committee or group of henchmen to vet and test the source would be nice but who has that kind of time and money. Plus I think we do a pretty good job of that individually. Meso definitely has that reputation for a reason.