Qingdao Sigma Chemical finished injectable oils lab test - HPLC - Jano

[Qingdao Sigma Chemicals]

Hello,

As promised, we sent 10 random and blind vials samples, of our huge stocks of oils to @janoshik . Each compound of same batch is 4-8 liters stock/compound.
Batch was made after mid november of all oils below.
I am gonna share with you all resultts, with full transparency.
If you order from this batch and lab test didn't came out like these results = full refund of order + lab test fee

10 Blind samples sent to Janoshik:




Testosterone Enanthate : oil "1"







Testosterone Propionate : oil "2"






Testosterone Cypionate: oil "3"




Sustanon 250 : oil "4"




Boldenone Undecylenate : oil "5"




Nandrolone decanoate : oil "6"





Nandrolone Phenylpropionate : oil "7"





Trenbolone Enanthate : oil "8"





Trenbolone acetate: oil "9"







Primobolan Enanthate : oil "10"



Contact:
meso-rx@sigmachemical.com.cn
or:
qingdao.rep@protonmail.com

 

[limitphobic]

That’s what I’m talkin about hell yeah

 

[Qingdao Sigma Chemicals]

And all this products can be shipped US domestically via our well known reshiper service ^^

 

[Ryu82]

Nice to see some testing for sure. 10% under on a few items, spot on the rest and a couple ouchies for under. But with this, people can adjust as needed I assume given the cost ratios.

I should point out this is not a complaint, but a compliment as you did not cherry pick or hide anything.

 

[LondonBloke7]

So what should the deca and eq be? What is the label claim?

Looks like those raws are slightly out with those results

 

[blessed4789]

The 10% lower than expected results, is it brewing related, or related with the purity of the raws?

 

[Ryu82]

The 10% lower than expected results, is it brewing related, or related with the purity of the raws?

Or a mix of the 2. Eventually it would be nice to actually know what equipment they are using for brewing and how they calibrate it and adjust for low purity raws (given some of the test results and lack of compensation to adjust the dost)

 

[Qingdao Sigma Chemicals]

So what should the deca and eq be? What is the label claim?

Looks like those raws are slightly out with those results

Deca 183mg/ml instead of 200mg/ml and eq 163mg/ml instead of 200mg/ml.

Raws are very high purity, just problem of brewing, I think you all saw how our raws purity results looks like, previous batch of deca was overdosed, same raw.

Since we have fixed 15% margin error on oil dosages, all products are in range, except eq.
Eq is one of the purest raws and can often be very close to 100%, compared to other classic raws that are more close to 98-99%

 

[Ryu82]

So if someone order a kit of nandrolone decanoate at 183mg/ml they can squint and imagine its from the 229mg/ml batch. 50mg/ml is a bit of a swing. I mean yes, +/- 15% of the target of 200mg as you said, but whats to stop people from wanting to hold out until the next batch that they hope is 200+?

You should almost blow out your current stock and then jump into the "corrected batches" lol. Anyway, semantics.

Looking forward to seeing how things progress.

 

[Liska]

Eq is one of the purest raws and can often be very close to 100%, compared to other classic raws that are more close to 98-99%

Don't misinterpret this as an attack please, but this is the second time I'll be explaining this to you: No it's not, these finished test results reflect precisely the shortcomings of chinese HPLC testing - they do not test against pharmacopeia reference standards, which results in EQ for example testing at 98-100%, which is only possible if the raw material goes through an extra purification step that I've not seen anyone doing recently as it's complex enough to drive up the price of the API (to you as well) considerably. In reality, low 90's is as good as you'll get and much better than the average of high 70's to mid 80's presently.

Your Deca result reflects the reality of the raw material currently testing in the low to mid 90's range as well.

As Janoshik does test using reference standards that can detect these impurities accurately (as you can see on the raw data as well if you order it), at least use his services to test the raw materials that are generally or currently having purity issues - you could see this in Jet's test of your Oxymetholone as well. Alternatively you can adjust your recipe based on these (in case of Deca consistently) underdosed test results should you still have access to the same batch.

I know it's incredibly difficult to convince your company of the above being true as I've been in a similar position and there's a certain patriotism involved in using these 'state accredited' chinese testing facilities vs foreigner Janoshik, but please trust me and don't fuck up your credibility by insisting EQ is close to 100% purity - I know you're not being dishonest, just ignorant.

 

[LondonBloke7]

Deca 183mg/ml instead of 200mg/ml and eq 163mg/ml instead of 200mg/ml.

Raws are very high purity, just problem of brewing, I think you all saw how our raws purity results looks like, previous batch of deca was overdosed, same raw.

Since we have fixed 15% margin error on oil dosages, all products are in range, except eq.
Eq is one of the purest raws and can often be very close to 100%, compared to other classic raws that are more close to 98-99%

View attachment 158336

The raws are shit thats why your so far off, not rocket science.

 

[blessed4789]

Even if within 15% is acceptable to you, where would the 10% error margin come from? On a 7L 200mg/ml brew, you'd need about 1.4kg of powder, or 1.26kg for 180mg/ml. That would be 140 gram short.

I wouldn't suspect you to underdose it on purpose either, 140gram of EQ/deca isn't that expensive when compared to the profit you would get on selling 7L of it.

Some inaccuracies with your inhouse testing methods on your raws seem to sound more likely. I guess the only way to find out, would be sending those same deca and EQ raws to Janoshik

 

[Liska]

The raws are shit thats why your so far off, not rocket science.

You can brew accurately dosed products with any raws if you test them with a proper facility to be honest - we've all been dealing with EQ purity between 79-90% for years now. The Test P is the only surprising result for me since it's amongst the raws that 'always' tests 98%+ and they got the other 100mg/ml products within 5%.

 

[Qingdao Sigma Chemicals]

So if someone order a kit of nandrolone decanoate at 183mg/ml they can squint and imagine its from the 229mg/ml batch. 50mg/ml is a bit of a swing. I mean yes, +/- 15% of the target of 200mg as you said, but whats to stop people from wanting to hold out until the next batch that they hope is 200+?

You should almost blow out your current stock and then jump into the "corrected batches" lol. Anyway, semantics.

Looking forward to seeing how things progress.

Now only deca 183mg/ml available.

The second lab test I showed you is an old one.

There will no be no correcting on actual batch, deca will be sold at 180mg/ml.

 

[Qingdao Sigma Chemicals]

The raws are shit thats why your so far off, not rocket science.

If a deca third party hplc lab test of raw comes out you will see by yourself what's I am talking about.
The raws results you can chexk those who are published if you want an idea, it's always testing good.

 

[Qingdao Sigma Chemicals]

You can brew accurately dosed products with any raws if you test them with a proper facility to be honest - we've all been dealing with EQ purity between 79-90% for years now. The Test P is the only surprising result for me since it's amongst the raws that 'always' tests 98%+ and they got the other 100mg/ml products within 5%.

Because simply it has nothing to do with raw, but how brewing is not very rigourous.

Test cyp was tested +98% by jets, and result of oil came at 230mg insted of 250mg.

You can all conclude nothing on raws from these results of oils.

 

[Sustanation79]

Deca 183mg/ml instead of 200mg/ml and eq 163mg/ml instead of 200mg/ml.

Raws are very high purity, just problem of brewing, I think you all saw how our raws purity results looks like, previous batch of deca was overdosed, same raw.

Since we have fixed 15% margin error on oil dosages, all products are in range, except eq.
Eq is one of the purest raws and can often be very close to 100%, compared to other classic raws that are more close to 98-99%

View attachment 158336

The EQ result is shocking ,you’ve just admitted the Rawls are pure so for you to brew something then knowingly sell something that’s nearly 40mg underdosed tells me how ethical you are, other labs on here would pull the batch completely.

 

[Qingdao Sigma Chemicals]

The EQ result is shocking ,you’ve just admitted the Rawls are pure so for you to brew something then knowingly sell something that’s nearly 40mg underdosed tells me how ethical you are, other labs on here would pull the batch completely.

And also other labs here will post only good labs and hide the other ones when a batch is not well brewed.
At least with that you can adjust and customer knows that his eq is 163mg.
So if you are ready to pay extra 40$ per vial for a 16 missing mg, thinking that will add you some extra muscle, and ofc that you will never test, you are free to choose the lab that suite you, but here it's a 7$ eq 163mg vial tested and result is published with full transparency

 

[graciebjj]

Because simply it has nothing to do with raw, but how brewing is not very rigourous.

Test cyp was tested +98% by jets, and result of oil came at 230mg insted of 250mg.

You can all conclude nothing on raws from these results of oils.

This seems deliberately obtuse, you're admitting to fault in the brewing process but rejecting the possibility that the raws may be less pure than you advertise. Almost all testing of EQ raws over the past several months have had results in the realm of 75-90% purity, with only Chinese testing showing 99%+ purity. Do you think its a coincidence that your finished EQ results are so far off the mark?

Brewing is really very simple math at the end of the day, if you really want us to believe that your brewer is so incredibly incapable that they cannot simply weigh the correct amount of a compound, that's fine, we can go with that. But it would serve you better to perhaps be a bit more open-minded.

You have this mountain of evidence to suggest your in-house testing of raws is not accurate, yet you'd sooner just lay all blame elsewhere. This kind of attitude will not serve to fix your problems in the future.

And also other labs here will post only good labs and hide the other ones when a batch is not well brewed.
At least with that you can adjust and customer knows that his eq is 163mg.
So if you are ready to pay extra 40$ per vial for a 16 missing mg, thinking that will add you some extra muscle, and ofc that you will never test, you are free to choose the lab that suite you, but here it's a 7$ eq 163mg vial tested and result is published with full transparency

This is a great attitude but you might consider that if your products were accurately dosed people would pay exponentially more for them. $7 for 20% underdosed product will net you some sales but you might have twice as much business selling accurately dosed vials for $15. I'm sure you can do the math on how it scales - just don't use your in-house calculators. I recommend a trusty TI-84.

 

[MrLoop]

Trenbolone Enanthat only round 100mg /ml ?