MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
QSC raw Bolde U 87% purity - GCMS
- Thread starter Sampei
- Start date
Looks great. Almost too clean. Like textbook. Janoshik should provide a short summary for each of these tests instead of simply printing out tentative library hits.
A short summary like? Can you explain better for simple minded individual like me? Thank you
Nothing on the GCMS results besides API, free hormone, the free carboxylic acid used for the esterified hormone, and two esters of the carboxylic acid which are most likely reaction products in the GC.A short summary like? Can you explain better for simple minded individual like me? Thank you
So nothing there besides hormone and carboxylic acid which are combined to make BU in the esterification reaction. So why shouldn't Janoshik provide this simple summary on every test or have one of his research scientists do it? Would be helpful to customer and improve education and literacy on these products.
Almost too clean. No precursor or side products at all.
The almost too clean worries me... Or better...it's the way you keep saying it xD
Why the purity is low then? What's the difference between this and another bolde at 96% for example.
What's the other 13% of the raw made of?
It depends how extensive the end product was filtered and crystallied. The impurities are unreacted products and possible new molecules formed during the test which is not relevant. The impurities are just the base hormone and the carboxyl fatty acid which is not dangerous at all. In fact, mct oil has hepatnoic and decanoic acid, decanoic acid which is used to make deca.
So I wouldn’t worry too much.
What I don’t understand is that the value for boldenone In your dara is 94%. So the sample is actually 94% pure not 87%.
Janoshik calculates HPLC purity as
Mass of BU / total mass
So think about the esterification reaction:
boldenone (free hormone) + undecylenic acid (carboxylic acid) ----> boldenone undecylenate (API, ester of boldenone)
The remaining 13% is unreacted feedstock. So the difference between this raw and another raw at 96% with a similar GCMS report would be product yield (conversion x selectivity) for the esterification step combined with sloppy final separation of the API (solvent extraction and crystallization).
There's no side products from the these results except the reactive artifact from the GC most likely.
Last edited:
This was covered in Project 3 of enhanced testing thread. The peak area purity by GC is not reliable if all the compounds have different vapor pressures and ionization in the MS. Skews the %ages. This is just a qualitative screen and tentative ID for organic impurities.
Last edited:
Thanks readalot you are great!
So looks like I can brew this EQ without much worries
Adjusting for a purity of 87%
Yes, the free carboxylic acid will be released from the BU in your body. QSC just gave you extra on the houseThanks readalot you are great!
So looks like I can brew this EQ without much worries
Adjusting for a purity of 87%
and charged you for 100% BU. You should at least get a pro rated discount to 98% purity. Lol.
Let me shoot a mail to Tracy... No wait.. ahahhaYes, the free carboxylic acid will be released from the BU in your body. QSC just gave you extra on the house
Anyway, very cool data set thanks to you and @bigMoJo! Post it to the Enhanced Testing Database if you don't mind.
janoshik
Subscriber
We're doing thousands of tests monthly and I too am only human.
Can't add a personal touch to everything, unfortunately.
This one was pretty straightforward too and has been explained on Meso on Bold U example before I believe so I hoped it'd not be necessary in order to save up a little bit of my time.
Anyway, it is a reasonable request, so what we're seeing is unbound undecylenate ester (methyl and ethyl ester of it).
So you have bold u, the unbound "u" part is floating free and during our processing or somewhere, the unbound ester, which is not ester anymore as it's not bound to boldenone, gained itself an ester (methyl or ethyl ester). This makes it very volatile, so even a small amount of methyl or ethyl ester can be very well seen on GCMS.
Then you have the "u" - undecylenic acid, which gained no ester. Undecylenic acid by itself is not very volatile, so even though you're seeing 0.95% of undecylenic acid and 0.94% undecylenic acid methyl ester, it is quite likely, they are not present at the same amounts, but rather that pure undecylenic acid is MUCH more abundant.
Then you have some unbound boldenone present - no ester and then ultimate boldenone undecylenate itself.
As undecylenic acid itself is not too volatile and is underrepresented, the TIC (peak area %) are not representative of real purity.
janoshik
Subscriber
Hey, you got it perfectly and ultimately there was no need for my input whatsoever!
Shame on me for replying post by post instead of reading the thread in the entirety outright.
janoshik
Subscriber
You can't interpret the % on the graphs as purity.
Purity is calculated ONLY as "measured amount/weighted amount."
Not % of the graph response. Generally, it doesn't work like that.
The data above strongly suggests the only impurities are unbound ester and bold no ester.
FastBun
Member
See… who else would simplify organic chemistry to a kindergartener level like you… see your value there…
janoshik
Subscriber
Not sure what you mean by filtered, but generally, it's pretty difficult to crystallize stuff that's liquid at room temp, such as bold u - at industrial scales the process doesn't really lend itself to it well, unless you are equipped for cooled operations.
About purity, it's been posted multiple times.
janoshik
Subscriber
eery
Member
Am i reading this wrong ordoes the test say 94% purity? where are you getting that 87% figure from?
94% for bold u is pretty good from the test results ive seen out here recently.
94% for bold u is pretty good from the test results ive seen out here recently.
