MESO-Rx

Anabolic Steroids

Readalots Enhanced Testing

bigMoJo said:
I havn't gone through all the posts yet, so this may have already been addressed...

Someone correct me if I'm wrong. I believe vendors do HPLC testing per batch, whereas Readalot's "additional testing" is for vendor raws. These "additional tests" will capture endotoxins, etc. on vendor raws, thereby tests/results will be much less frequent.
Click to expand...
I'm doing the additional testing on raws in Project 1 and 2 as a demo. You'll also see some testing on finished oil in Project 2.

If I was a vendor I'd be doing HPLC / GCMS / intermittent metal, etc. on the raws and then some combo of the full suite on the finished oil (hplc, endotoxins, sterility, etc.).

I started with the raws for this demo so we could see what impurity is coming from where in a methodical fashion (what's in the raw vs what shows up in the finished oil?). And of course for orals you are exposed directly to the raw with no filtration. It's all a fun process to set up and justify/validate a QC program for UGL products over the internet .

Should we set up another thread for some type of collaboration like the discord folks? I've received DMs for monetary contributions but we should probably make decisions as a community here. I haven't accepted anything. I hope these demos provide some motivation. Would be nice to setup a spreadsheet to track adoption of this testing in the marketplace for potential customer reference.
 
Last edited:
B Ware said:
I’m also the guy who tested my Empower compound pharma Deca as I don’t trust most things. Anywho, it would be interesting to compare.
Click to expand...
Did you post those results? Would you mind sharing them? I also had/have Empower Deca.

edit: Readalot, thanks for sharing your results, I was asking about @B Ware's Empower deca, lol
 
Last edited:
readalot said:
I'm doing the additional testing on raws in Project 1 and 2 as a demo. You'll also see some testing on finished oil in Project 2.

If I was a vendor I'd be doing HPLC / GCMS / intermittent metal, etc. on the raws and then some combo of the full suite on the finished oil (hplc, endotoxins, sterility, etc.).

I started with the raws for this demo so we could see what impurity is coming from where in a methodical fashion (what's in the raw vs what shows up in the finished oil?). And of course for orals you are exposed directly to the raw with no filtration. It's all a fun process to set up and justify/validate a QC program for UGL products over the internet .

Should we set up another thread for some type of collaboration like the discord folks? I've received DMs for monetary contributions but we should probably make decisions as a community here. I haven't accepted anything. I hope these demos provide some motivation. Would be nice to setup a spreadsheet to track adoption of this testing in the marketplace for potential customer reference.
Click to expand...
Yes on the collaboration. Yes on the vendor spreadsheet. What are your thoughts on also developing a testing protocol with cost analysis? Since cost is the biggest concern, vendors and members would be able to see what these additional tests would actually add to the overall cost per vial (if possible). Vendors are not going to share how many vials they sell, but we can put together fairly accurate estimates.
 
bigMoJo said:
What are your thoughts on also developing a testing protocol with cost analysis?
Click to expand...
See here.

readalot

Post in thread 'Readalots Enhanced Testing'

Independent confirmation of the additional customer cost per vial for the "premium" line that has undergone enhanced testing of each batch:


There has been a lot of speculation and sensationalism thrown out by some. The math is pretty simple.
  • Like

<= 5 USD per vial would be additional testing cost (again depends on vendor batch size). Whether customers agree that this should be passed on to them was debated above and hopefully more to come. Some argue that some vendors already have plenty of margin to cover the additional costs without increasing prices.
 
readalot said:
See here.

readalot

Post in thread 'Readalots Enhanced Testing'

Independent confirmation of the additional customer cost per vial for the "premium" line that has undergone enhanced testing of each batch:


There has been a lot of speculation and sensationalism thrown out by some. The math is pretty simple.
  • Like

About <= 5 USD per vial would be additional testing cost (again depends on vendor batch size). Whether customers agree that this should be passed on to them was debated above and hopefully more to come. Some argue that some vendors already have plenty of margin to cover the additional costs without increasing prices.
Click to expand...
It seems steep to me. If you produce 500 vials per batch @ $5 increase per vial, that's $2,500 additional charged for the testing. That can't be right.
 
bigMoJo said:
It seems steep to me. If you produce 500 vials per batch @ $5 increase per vial, that's $2,500 additional charged for the testing. That can't be right.
Click to expand...
Original math with brackets...
readalot

Post in thread 'Source QC and C of A (do you have one?)'

janoshik said:
I'd recommend GCMS screening (170 USD) to resolve AAS API from side products and related molecules.

For this:

I apologize, but I'd need a tldr, we're running on the verge of our capability this month.


Already offered - 120 USD for As, Pb, Cd, Hg. Can be expanded as per request. ICP-MS.

We can do moisture analysis for 30 USD, which, while rather primitive, can easily identify abundance of residual solvents in a sample. Other than that, we can't run more elaborate test as of now without significant investments, as we're not focused on analysis of highly volatile samples.
Click to expand...
Thank...

Remember what I stated above, to do this properly requires testing raws and finished oil. It adds up unless there's an eventual package deal for testing.
 
Imagine the dollar signs running through vendors’ eyes thinking about raising their prices to accommodate more testing lol.
 
And pretty much nailed it here.

readalot

Post in thread 'Source QC and C of A (do you have one?)'

Pinnacle Elements said:
I believe very few people would buy a Deca vial for $120 with these COAs vs a Deca vial from Stan for $35 with the testing he provides already
Click to expand...
I think the more accurate comparison is $40 to 45 max with C of A vs $35 existing. My goal is to spell this out. Obviously depends on source volume.

Thanks for daylighting specifically.

Once I have the tentative numbers I will estimate.
  • Like
 
DECLAN said:
Imagine the dollar signs running through vendors’ eyes thinking about raising their prices to accommodate more testing lol.
Click to expand...

Let's see what the market will accommodate. I'm happy to pay 5 bucks more per vial on a 30 usd vial.

Empower charges 170 usd for same 10 ml vial.

Seems to me this whole thing creates a credible way for folks to access properly tested gear that simply can't be accessed through other routes. Where do you get pharma mast or primo these days? I can't find it.

And we know the additional testing cost so there will be pressure to not allow greedy vendor margins.
 
Last edited:
bigMoJo said:
Yes on the collaboration. Yes on the vendor spreadsheet.
Click to expand...
Awesome!

@Dkland
@Vanargandar
@everyone who DMed me with $$$ donation offer.

Should probably think about solid respected member who would control the treasury. I'm more an individual contributor not a project manager or COO. Let's just make sure any money gets to the right place.

A sibling thread make sense?

Sincerely,
Inadvertent Director of BD for Jano LOL.
 
Last edited:
DECLAN said:
Imagine the dollar signs running through vendors’ eyes thinking about raising their prices to accommodate more testing lol.
Click to expand...
And selling “premium” label for more than “stock” label. Even though they’re both from the same batch.
 
BigNoOne said:
And selling “premium” label for more than “stock” label. Even though they’re both from the same batch.
Click to expand...
If there is no feedback loop from this surveillance to clean up the raws then the project was a failure. My hope is through surveillance and eyes on the raw materials there is pressure back to the raws suppliers. Right now everything comes through at lowest possible production quality since there is no measurement besides HPLC on finished oil concentrations. You can't manage what you don't measure, etc. Everyone currently blind to what's in their vial. If the API concentration checks out then it is "g2g" right now. But is it "g2g"? What is "g2g"? That requires community agreed upon specs just like HPLC specs.

Why should any vendor or customer be fine with a 70, 80, 90% pure raw? Simple to clean that up. The big overseas suppliers are selling a shitty inferior raw to the UGL markets. This aint USP quality. Are there margins better on this?

We have a credible framework to leverage to build database and improve customer awareness. Why not leverage it? Genuinely curious?
 
Last edited:
readalot said:
Right now everything comes through at lowest possible production quality since there is no measurement besides HPLC on finished oil concentrations.
Click to expand...
You know this for a fact? There’s zero possibility that the raws are coming from the same batch that compounding pharmacies get?
readalot said:
You can't manage what you don't measure, etc. Everyone currently blind to what's in their vial. If the API concentration checks out then it is g2g. But is it g2g?
Click to expand...
So far so good.

The “crappy” raws that you tested are g2g. There’s no metals, no high levels of endotoxins, nothing harmful in the GCMS results. The ONLY thing off is…. The HPLC results (whenever they’re done) will likely be lower purity.
 
readalot said:
Awesome!

@Dkland
@Vanargandar
@everyone who DMed me with $$$ donation offer.

Should probably think about solid respected member who would control the treasury. I'm more an individual contributor not a project manager or COO. Let's just make sure any money gets to the right place.

A sibling thread make sense?

Sincerely,
Inadvertent Director of BD for Jano LOL.
Click to expand...
I vote for anyone but me……..
I am happy to contribute monetarily. But can’t be a treasurer. But I do support this endeavor.

I’ll add one thought that some won’t like. But hell…..everything is going to piss off someone somewhere.
Some are concerned about the price going up. The figure of $5/vial has been tossed out there. Personally I just don’t see that as a problem. And I know some do. But that’s ok. Q is more than happy to sell you cheap gear. Just swish it around and draw the oil fast so the floaters don’t jump up in your draw……….

Capitalism drives everything. Profit is King.
If $5/vial provides extra revenue for a vendor who is willing to do the extra work to make more profit……I’ll buy from them. If a vendor is willing to set up equipment, diligently test, and bring their UGL as close to pharma standards as possible, I have no issue rewarding them with my business. Some will agree with me. Some won’t.

Will one as big as Q do this? Doubtful any time soon.
Will GA? He’s shown a willingness to move that direction. Right now his domestic TE or TC is $15. Is $20/vial really going to be a deal breaker for anyone? I highly doubt it. In fact I can see a large segment of the community flocking to buy his stuff because of it.
 
Dkland said:
I vote for anyone but me……..
I am happy to contribute monetarily. But can’t be a treasurer. But I do support this endeavor.

I’ll add one thought that some won’t like. But hell…..everything is going to piss off someone somewhere.
Some are concerned about the price going up. The figure of $5/vial has been tossed out there. Personally I just don’t see that as a problem. And I know some do. But that’s ok. Q is more than happy to sell you cheap gear. Just swish it around and draw the oil fast so the floaters don’t jump up in your draw……….

Capitalism drives everything. Profit is King.
If $5/vial provides extra revenue for a vendor who is willing to do the extra work to make more profit……I’ll buy from them. If a vendor is willing to set up equipment, diligently test, and bring their UGL as close to pharma standards as possible, I have no issue rewarding them with my business. Some will agree with me. Some won’t.

Will one as big as Q do this? Doubtful any time soon.
Will GA? He’s shown a willingness to move that direction. Right now his domestic TE or TC is $15. Is $20/vial really going to be a deal breaker for anyone? I highly doubt it. In fact I can see a large segment of the community flocking to buy his stuff because of it.
Click to expand...
And just to mention the domestic vendors (Matrix/SHA) as well. There seems to be a lot of activity with some of those outfits adopting this. Hell SHA says he is practically shutting down his operation for a week to complete this testing. I say more power to them. Thanks for your feedback!

I commend the willingness to test...
 
BigNoOne said:
You know this for a fact? There’s zero possibility that the raws are coming from the same batch that compounding pharmacies get?
Click to expand...
And that is a great question. I know it (Project 3 Test Cyp raw) ain't the same as big pharma Test Cyp, but I don't know if it is similar to what compounders are using. We should run GCMS on a compounded test cyp and see. I haven't done that but B Ware has a great point.

If compounded raw and ugl raw are similar then I and many compounding pharmacy customers could save ourselves quite a bundle even after tacking on a few bucks to current ugl rates for stuff like nandrolone.

Then we could go down the rabbit whole on oxandrolone. Should be USP from a compounder, but is it?
 
Last edited:
readalot said:
View attachment 301730

You can compare against the big pharma COA in the Source QC thread. The big pharma one much more exhaustive. To your point @B Ware the compounding pharmacies may share raws suppliers with some UGL vendors. It's a great question.

B Ware's HPLC test on same product (different batch).
Click to expand...
Big pharma COA.

Notable difference in testing scope and specs vs 503B COA...

readalot

Post in thread 'Source QC and C of A (do you have one?)'

readalot said:
Could add in a few positive controls with pharma or compounded pharma products although the absolute concentration of impurities will be lower than in the raws obviously.
Click to expand...

Ok, I am going to start with the simplest example I could think of that may be of interest to members. Getting a C of A from Pharma isn't as easy as it used to be. This took a little work with persistence. I have sanitized some of the details from this one to protect manufacturer confidential information as per forum Terms and Rules.

This is an FDA approved Testosterone Cypionate product manufactured in...
  • Love

Easy to infer the raw for this product is >99% pure. We'd have to prove it though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

readalot
Enhanced Testing Database
2 3 4
Replies
69
Views
2K
ivandragovich
ivandragovich
B
Test & muscle fatigue
Replies
7
Views
301
lilhawk
L
Sampei
QSC HGH 36IU purple tops latest promo
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
readalot
readalot
H
EO issue
Replies
9
Views
178
Dirthand
Dirthand
K
Introduction
Replies
6
Views
62
keenpen
K

Sponsors

Latest posts

Back
Top