Readalots Enhanced Testing

[BigNoOne]

@readalot you are very condescending and I am concluding my discussions with you. I don’t need any of this in my life. You can have your 5-person echo chamber back. That in itself shows you how absolute little support the community has for your projects.

$3,000 didn’t even buy you any likability on the interwebs.

 

[readalot]

@readalot you are very condescending and I am concluding my discussions with you. I don’t need any of this in my life. You can have your 5-person echo chamber back. That in itself shows you how absolute little support the community has for your projects.

$3,000 didn’t even buy you any likability on the interwebs.

You just put together a nice summary together (above) then had to do this. Why?

I appreciate your responses above. I'm not looking for an echo chamber.

LOOK at your response and comments to me over at the other place. WTF is that? Not condescending? Look at your comments in this very thread. Won't even read the details I've put in and then ask "Stump the Chump" questions you don't even really want an answer to.

Come on Bro. I thought you can take em like you dish em out.

Thanks again for the responses above. Take care.

 

[readalot]

Here you go @BigNoOne so you don't think I was completely full of shit on the GCMS/HPLC "waste of time"...

Post in thread 'Janoshik Analytical laboratory testing services'

Saturday at 8:46 AM

It was a good idea, thus I felt compelled to invest myself into such an investigation at my own cost.

Cheers

• janoshik

• 
• 

Credit and respect to Jano for looking at this. Shame we can't nail it down at the moment. RESPECT, Jano!

Both Millard and Janoshik provided their thoughts. I'll sleep just fine with my $3k "waste". Peace.

 

[bigMoJo]

Mandatory? No. We are not regulators. I think you need to quit using that strong language . It’s all VOLUNTARY. The UGL needs to see the value or they will side-step this at any opportunity.

I am very clear and consistent on this. Testing raws allows the UGL to hold the supplier accountable. If all UGLs did this, the results would weed out the shitty suppliers that are selling crap products.

See 1 above. This is a repetitive question.

No. Absolutely not. This is a terrible selection. GCMS is better for volatile compounds. Testosterone and other hormones don’t suspend in gas as easily. HPLC is better for the products we use.

No. I’m not telling anyone else what to do. Only a retard would filter gear that has shit floating in it. To be clear, if there are floaters, that is NOT useable. Toss it. Burn the UGL down. Floaters should be handled seriously by the UGL. Full refunds for everyone that had floaters. UGL needs to explain why that happened and what they are doing moving forward.

Many members use needle filters just as part of their injection ritual. That’s cool. Whatever they want to do.


No. That’s stupid. If you’re pushing for this then I’ll end my discussion now. Who is suggesting this? Panda use to sell “semi-finished” product that you needed to filter and vial. It was less than half the price. Nobody paying $30+ a vial should have to filter. So dumb.

If endotoxins are a legitimate concern then yes, vendors should be responsible for analyzing. But the results show endotoxins aren’t even close to being an issue.

It’s “buyer beware” for EVERYTHING we buy.

If metals are identified as a significant concern, the UGL should analyze their raws for metals. So far, the data does not support this.

If there’s no lab that can test, what else are you going to do?


The free market system determines what is done. You have DingDong selling $10 vials of testosterone. DingDong will lower their prices further before doing any of this testing. You’d have better luck talking a domestic into rolling out a “premium” line. Personally I don’t see that being profitable. Not enough customers in support of it. And before the fucking twats angerly mash the reply button and say “fuck yea, I’d support that” there’s like 20-30 people supporting that. Again, it’s not profitable.

Hey bro,
IMO, this is your most edifying and reasonable response yet. You won't get a BS response from me. In fact, THANK YOU for sharing your insightful feedback.

From many of the other posts I've read from you, it seems you've been in this game a long time and know many, if not all, of the players. Even if your stance is oppositional—to this or any other topic that may arise—sharing your specific views, I think, are valuable.

 

[readalot]

Hey bro,
IMO, this is your most edifying and reasonable response yet. You won't get a BS response from me. In fact, THANK YOU for sharing your insightful feedback.

From many of the other posts I've read from you, it seems you've been in this game a long time and know many, if not all, of the players. Even if your stance is oppositional—to this or any other topic that may arise—sharing your specific views, I think, are valuable.

A-fuckin-MEN.

Now we are getting somewhere. Hopefully "Big" doesn't take his ball and go home. He did a REALLY nice job on the comments.

 

[FunkOdyssey]

You’d have better luck talking a domestic into rolling out a “premium” line. Personally I don’t see that being profitable. Not enough customers in support of it.

Fuck yea, I'd support that!

And before the fucking twats angerly mash the reply button and say “fuck yea, I’d support that” there’s like 20-30 people supporting that.

Damn, you got me. You don't actually have any idea how many people would buy a premium line though.

On the one hand, you advocate letting the free market decide the value of enhanced testing. On the other hand, you have invested countless hours campaigning as persuasively as possible to prevent premium tested products from emerging in the market. Trying to kill the baby in the crib, essentially.

If enhanced testing is as worthless as you believe, there is nothing to fear from allowing it to happen. Insufficient people will purchase premium tested products, they will disappear as fast as they appeared, and we'll return to the status quo. Why not just sit back and smugly watch it unfold?

I am concluding my discussions with you. I don’t need any of this in my life.

Accurate - you don't need to be doing this with your life. A different hobby than arguing about testing steroids would better support your mental wellness.

 

[readalot]

@readalot
Maybe I am missing the point, but why not start up some group testing a la that discord server that does testing on peptides and such? Let people chip in a few $$ if they want to see some results from some of the tests, and let proposed tests with no interest die?

They’re doing some interesting tests on vial sterility (ks-tek vials from amazon), pen cartridge sterility, peptide counterion testing, etc., in addition to the standard quantity/mass/purity tests.

Basically, let the ‘market’ decide what tests are important or not, pay the additional $ for testing that there’s interest in, and then let that reflect on different vendors. There’s a lot of push to get the vendors to do all this extra testing, but if there’s a handful of customers interested and willing to chip in 10-15$ a test, wouldn’t that be the better way to go?

Again, just spitballing here, but there’s so much talk about why VENDORS should test, and there’s resistance from forum members who think you’re tilting at windmills, but then there are members like myself (I’m sure!) who would be willing to chip in a few dollars here and there if only out of curiosity to actually DO some of these tests. The reward is knowledge of the results, maybe 30 days before test results are released ‘publicly’, and a better understanding of vendor products than those who AREN’T in the know.

And people who are fine with the status quo don’t need to be convinced of anything.

Awesome idea! Thanks for sharing your thoughts and suggestions. After laying out the options and demonstrating some of the tests I hope that your idea happens if there is sufficient interest.

I appreciate it.

 

[BigNoOne]

Fuck yea, I'd support that!


Damn, you got me. You don't actually have any idea how many people would buy a premium line though.

On the one hand, you advocate letting the free market decide the value of enhanced testing. On the other hand, you have invested countless hours campaigning as persuasively as possible to prevent premium tested products from emerging in the market. Trying to kill the baby in the crib, essentially.

If enhanced testing is as worthless as you believe, there is nothing to fear from allowing it to happen. Insufficient people will purchase premium tested products, they will disappear as fast as they appeared, and we'll return to the status quo. Why not just sit back and smugly watch it unfold?


Accurate - you don't need to be doing this with your life. A different hobby than arguing about testing steroids would better support your mental wellness.

I’ll wait and see which vendor slaps a “Premium” label on vials and gets the “Enhanced” testing done. They’ll charge $5 more for those vials but those vials are the exact same as their regular line of vials.

The vendor that does that will “corner the market” consisting of you and the 4 other people in here saying this is all a great idea.

 

[readalot]

I’ll wait and see which vendor slaps a “Premium” label on vials and gets the “Enhanced” testing done. They’ll charge $5 more for those vials but those vials are the exact same as their regular line of vials.

The vendor that does that will “corner the market” consisting of you and the 4 other people in here saying this is all a great idea.

Why don't we team and help the vendors see the value of testing raws by HPLC. Care to find common ground as a first step? We seem to be making progress.

 

[BigNoOne]

Why don't we team and help the vendors see the value of testing raws by HPLC. Care to find common ground as a first step? We seem to be making progress.

Progress was made 4-5 years ago. HPLC testing is well-received for raws and finished products. You’re muddying the waters with all this “extra” stuff.

FIND SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE CONCERNING TO THE COMMUNITY AND YOU WILL BE SUPPORTED.

Unlike the smooth-brains, I’m NOT anti-testing. I’m against forcing these UGLs to do something that they don’t see any value in doing.

 

[readalot]

Progress was made 4-5 years ago. HPLC testing is well-received for raws and finished products. You’re muddying the waters with all this “extra” stuff.

FIND SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE CONCERNING TO THE COMMUNITY AND YOU WILL BE SUPPORTED.

Unlike the smooth-brains, I’m NOT anti-testing. I’m against forcing these UGLs to do something that they don’t see any value in doing.

HPLC testing for raws that go into finished oils is well received with vendors where? Are you kidding me now?

Are we playing a game here? Damn.

 

[readalot]

They’ll charge $5 more for those vials but those vials are the exact same as their regular line of vials.

I know of two vendors who appear ethical (their actions have demonstrated that) and may actually do something with the information they collect to course correct if needed.

These vendors may have provided me info I could have used to sink their whole ship if I wanted to. Hence why they may have trusted me with the info. Trust and ethics.

NO, the $5 per vial is not buying the exact same product. It is buying (1) data/surveillance and (2) QC feedback/action with an ethical domestic vendor.

Yes, hit me with your gullible commentary.

Are you going to work with me in good faith?

Sincerely,
BOY BLUNDER (hahaha, so funny, good one, you really got me, etc, etc).

 

[BigNoOne]

HPLC testing for raws that go into finished oils is well received with vendors where? Are you kidding me now?

Are we playing a game here? Damn.

I can rattle off at least 10 sources (not all here) that do it routinely. The problem here is that everyone let QSC grab a foothold. It’s the MESO infection.

 

[readalot]

I can rattle off at least 10 sources (not all here) that do it routinely. The problem here is that everyone let QSC grab a foothold. It’s the MESO infection.

So the math is 10 out of ________?

That ain't well received Brother based on the numbers one would fill in that blank.

So let's help MESO.

F QSC. Infection is correct.

You are welcome to join too @egruberman you genius. I'm still leaving you a chair at the next meeting.

 

[BigNoOne]

NO, the $5 per vial is not buying the exact same product. It is buying (1) data/surveillance and (2) QC feedback/action with an ethical domestic vendor.

It’s the same product. They aren’t buying super premium raws made by magical dwarves to be free of metals, endotoxins, bacteria, and whatever. It’s the same raws that don’t contain metals, endotoxins, bacteria and whatever because they never do. It’s never a concern.

They are paying $5 more per vial for the COA, the SAME exact COA that the vendor will use for multiple batches.

It’s really a windfall for the UGL. You’re giving them extra money. If I was a source I’d do your extra testing and laugh as I bank the extra money.

 

[BigNoOne]

So the math is 10 out of ________?

That ain't well received Brother based on the numbers one would fill in that blank.

So let's help MESO.

F QSC. Infection is correct.

10 off the top of my head

 

[readalot]

extra money

What extra money? The 5 bucks covers the testing cost. So they aren't going to test, or cheat and either fake the Jano reports or inflate their reported batch sizes?

 

[readalot]

10 off the top of my head

You and I know the number of vendors testing their raws in the UGL space is much less than 10%. Wouldn't you agree? That is far from well received. Certainly the <10% figure is accurate at MESO.

So what's your answer? Do you agree we should prioritize demanding (or asking in your mind) vendors HPLC test all their raws prior to brewing into product?

Prioritize this as next step?

 

[BigNoOne]

What extra money? The 5 bucks covers the testing cost. So they aren't going to test, or cheat and either fake the Jano reports or inflate their reported batch sizes?

When a source makes a batch, they filter and fill the vials. Labels aren’t applied until later. The Test E silver and Test E Gold are the same. Test E Gold gets a COA. That COA gets used for a very long time.

The cost of testing is paid for several times and then some. This is all assuming there’s even a market for the Gold label products.

 

[readalot]

When a source makes a batch, they filter and fill the vials. Labels aren’t applied until later. The Test E silver and Test E Gold are the same. Test E Gold gets a COA. That COA gets used for a very long time.

The cost of testing is paid for several times and then some. This is all assuming there’s even a market for the Gold label products.

Great the community will demand the vendor covers the testing if they want. I don't care either way. We get some data out of it. Good point we will need an ethical vendor. My hypothesis is there are some out there based on my relevant data collected.