Sciroxx Labs Testodex Enanthate 250 - GC-MS/MS - 2016-01 - performed by ChemTox via AnabolicLab.com

I am not sure I understand the question in terms of the meaning of the word "labs". Are you referring to the "labs" as in the labs doing the actual testing or referring to the sponsors. In either event, the labs that are doing the testing will have no idea what samples are from who as they will be labeled in code to prevent any bias. In addition, they will not know what the actual total content of each vial is supposed to be.

Now from the sponsors end, the samples that will be sent to the lab will from trusted members who have already received an anonymous order from that sponsor, where the sponsor did not know that his order was going to be used for testing. In other words, TP has 3 different GH's he wants tested; greys, blacks with logo without batch number, and blacks with logo with batch number. So we will find members that the forum agrees are non-biased and trusted members, who already have these in possession from an anonymous order. All the samples will be sent to RP so he can verify they are what they are supposed to be, and then he will code them and send them all out to both the respective labs. Hope that answers what you are asking.
That is by no means reliable testing. If all samples are being sent back to TP before they are sent for testing then that means all samples sent for testing are under the control of TP. You may as well just have TP send all the samples himself. How would that process legitimize anything? What would then stop TP from sending in any sample with corresponding batch numbers that were not the ones been given back by "trusted customers"?
 
That is by no means reliable testing. If all samples are being sent back to TP before they are sent for testing then that means all samples sent for testing are under the control of TP. You may as well just have TP send all the samples himself. How would that process legitimize anything? What would then stop TP from sending in any sample with corresponding batch numbers that were not the ones been given back by "trusted customers"?

Racepicks, a fellow member, not the provider.
RP vs TP
 
That is by no means reliable testing. If all samples are being sent back to TP before they are sent for testing then that means all samples sent for testing are under the control of TP. You may as well just have TP send all the samples himself. How would that process legitimize anything? What would then stop TP from sending in any sample with corresponding batch numbers that were not the ones been given back by "trusted customers"?

RP, not TP!
 
I am not sure I understand the question in terms of the meaning of the word "labs". Are you referring to the "labs" as in the labs doing the actual testing or referring to the sponsors. In either event, the labs that are doing the testing will have no idea what samples are from who as they will be labeled in code to prevent any bias. In addition, they will not know what the actual total content of each vial is supposed to be.

Now from the sponsors end, the samples that will be sent to the lab will from trusted members who have already received an anonymous order from that sponsor, where the sponsor did not know that his order was going to be used for testing. In other words, TP has 3 different GH's he wants tested; greys, blacks with logo without batch number, and blacks with logo with batch number. So we will find members that the forum agrees are non-biased and trusted members, who already have these in possession from an anonymous order. All the samples will be sent to RP so he can verify they are what they are supposed to be, and then he will code them and send them all out to both the respective labs. Hope that answers what you are asking.
I'm sorry for the confusion. When I say "labs" I mean the labs that're manufacturing the products.

For example, Pharmacom doesn't know AL is going to test "X hormone" when that product is ordered. They also don't know it was ordered by AL. With that, there is a guarantee - in a sense- that the product tested is identical to that which customers are receiving. If the lab knows the product will be tested, they may send out a different batch to that buyer.

Also, as you know, I'd love to help in anyway possible.
 
Karl hasn't even come on here to speak for himself. What makes you think he is actually going to come on here and apologize??
As long as this gets fixed I don't care what happens. Its not like an apology is going to change my last cycle (which again i had amazing results but maybe it could be better, maybe... Who knows).
I just want this to be like the GH. there was an issue, it got fixed, and people frequently tested them so everything has been on line
 
Just saw the post on the chemtox raw data. The dilution issue for tpp could very well be valid. I don't know enough about the testing to say how plausible it is. But at least that's a more detailed response.
 
But don't you think the excuse about there being some vague testing limitation as to tpp, specifically, sounds odd? Does to me...
The more self-serving response would have been 'oops we forgot to run the anabolic steroid screen'

The more damaging response would have been 'our analytical method for tpp was unreliable'

Yet, they gave the second response.
 
I'm sorry for the confusion. When I say "labs" I mean the labs that're manufacturing the products.

For example, Pharmacom doesn't know AL is going to test "X hormone" when that product is ordered. They also don't know it was ordered by AL. With that, there is a guarantee - in a sense- that the product tested is identical to that which customers are receiving. If the lab knows the product will be tested, they may send out a different batch to that buyer.

Also, as you know, I'd love to help in anyway possible.

The sponsors know which products are being tested because they are paying for their own tests at Simec. But, your point about them shipping a different batch is understood and that variable will be eliminated as the samples we are collecting should already have been distributed to the customer prior to the onset of the sponsor committing to the testing.
 
The more self-serving response would have been 'oops we forgot to run the anabolic steroid screen'

The more damaging response would have been 'our analytical method for tpp was unreliable'

Yet, they gave the second response.
I suppose. If it was an "oops." I lean toward them pasting that laundry list of every anabolic that allegedly got cross checked on the pdf but they don't always do it.

That said, the more detailed response about dilution seems reasonable. I have no real opinion as to what they/Crimele did because frankly, I'm not expert enough in that area to know how reasonable the excuse is. Who knew testing for tpp ester was so difficult and apparently more sensitive than other esters or other compounds? And why? All questions I don't have answers to.
Either way, I think this whole thing has made the process better which is good for everyone.
 
God damn Meso is good for drama lately! Another thread for some good comments

bigstock-Popcorn-in-red-and-white-cardb-31858187.jpg
 
Back
Top