Sending AAS samples to independent, accredited laboratory in Europe

[devildog93]

To say the results so far have been a surprise would be a big time understatement i think. This is not what the real world is seeing on a regular basis. I'm not trying to shoot the program down at all Millard, but this seems crazy. Any theories as to why this might be? I'm more than willing to think there might be a few tests that turn out better than we might expect, but all of them? It seems very odd to say the least.

 

[Docd187123]

To say the results so far have been a surprise would be a big time understatement i think. This is not what the real world is seeing on a regular basis. I'm not trying to shoot the program down at all Millard, but this seems crazy. Any theories as to why this might be? I'm more than willing to think there might be a few tests that turn out better than we might expect, but all of them? It seems very odd to say the least.

It's really not that much of a surprise to me but then again I've never really bought into labmax testing and have been wary of how to interpret blood tests simply bc you don't know any number of factors that can alter results, not the least of which is reverse scamming by the user.

Edit* you also need to consider this program is still in it's infancy stage. There's no telling what long term testing will show us

 

[Oregongearhead]

To say the results so far have been a surprise would be a big time understatement i think. This is not what the real world is seeing on a regular basis. I'm not trying to shoot the program down at all Millard, but this seems crazy. Any theories as to why this might be? I'm more than willing to think there might be a few tests that turn out better than we might expect, but all of them? It seems very odd to say the least.

Im sure skeptical ...something dont sound right .

 

[Oregongearhead]

Im sure skeptical ...something dont sound right .

Why continue testing ? Everythings overdosed !! (??)

 

[Docd187123]

Why continue testing ? Everythings overdosed !! (??)

You don't know that based off 1 or 2 rounds of testing. Consider the inverse ie labmax. Everything's bunk!! (??)

 

[Oregongearhead]

You don't know that based off 1 or 2 rounds of testing. Consider the inverse ie labmax. Everything's bunk!! (??)

Then Millard needs to test the lesser known UGL"s , because the big ones appear to be spot-on ....No more Pharmacom testing , they seem to pass everytime (so far)

 

[Docd187123]

Then Millard needs to test the lesser known UGL"s , because the big ones appear to be spot-on ....No more Pharmacom testing , they seem to pass everytime (so far)

The way the program becomes successful is repeated random testing on the same lab over time. A few positive tests now means nothing except these particular samples were good. It's statistics

Edit* I'm sure lesser known UGLs will be tested as well. And what I said above doesn't mean you can only test a few labs over and over. It must be randomized and repeated for all labs to get a good picture of the UGL market

 

[Oregongearhead]

The way the program becomes successful is repeated random testing on the same lab over time. A few positive tests now means nothing except these particular samples were good. It's statistics

Edit* I'm sure lesser known UGLs will be tested as well. And what I said above doesn't mean you can only test a few labs over and over. It must be randomized and repeated for all labs to get a good picture of the UGL market

Well , then we are going to be doing this for quite a while (right into my retirement) lol

 

[Docd187123]

Well , then we are going to be doing this for quite a while (right into my retirement) lol

Well you're OG in this game lol. It could help you for however long you decide to keep using AAS but it also will help the newer guys who are just starting. Fuck it, it'll really help everyone who decides to use, sell, brew, source, etc AAS

 

[Oregongearhead]

Well you're OG in this game lol. It could help you for however long you decide to keep using AAS but it also will help the newer guys who are just starting. Fuck it, it'll really help everyone who decides to use, sell, brew, source, etc AAS

What I take away from this is stick with the big guy UGL"s , they dose more correctly (most of the time)....

At this rate it should take 755 yrs to test all UGL"s....better bump it up to 50 tests a day , lol

 

[ironnut]

I think the real focus needs to be on the more expensive aas primo, mast, var etc... Why under-dose tren, test, npp the raws are already cheap and easily available. Even if they are under dosed the mgs are high in them anyway. I think it be much more eye opening to find out if a 10mg var tablets had any var in them at all.

 

[ironnut]

not saying dont test tren or test at all because randomness is the key here but maybe like one out of every 10 test or something and the rest of the focus on the exotics

 

[devildog93]

I guess what i am mainly questioning is the obtaining of the product that gets tested. It seems pretty damn fishy to test more than a handful of products and for all of them to come up smelling like roses. At some point it becomes more than just strange and starts to stink. Are the people rounding up product known by the sources? I don't necessarily mean best buddies type of thing, but do they have a working relationship, are they pro bbers, something?

I don't know, i'm just searching for a reason for what i think is out of the range of possibility. When do you start calling bullshit is what i am asking plainly.

I hate to say this, but if you get a 100% testing rate i think you need to question procedures somewhere along the line. I would go further and say that not only would it not be helping in harm reduction, but in my mind it would actually be hurting people. I hate to sound like someone doing nothing but looking for fault, but we know it is out there and that it is far from an irregularity.

I feel safe in knowing i am not a witch hunter here. I have experienced bunk gear more than once, so i am looking for reasons as to why we wouldn't see this in testing. Do we just get screwed by overseas sources? Do they say screw the U.S. ? Is everyone trying to clean up knowing this testing is going on...sounds a little far-fetched. Is the procurement flawed? Is Millard a good con man and the rest of us are just naive? At this point i'm throwing everything out there and leaning towards what sounds the most plausible. If i had to guess i would think the procurement to be the most reasonable guess.

Maybe i'm just too cynical, but i think GM would never have gotten into trouble if they produced product as reliable as what we have seen so far. At some point it is going to call the testing itself into question and people are going to start ignoring it like they do with assays claiming 99% purity from powder sources.

 

[insertnamehere]

For the record, I will explicitly state that the trusted buyers used for the first batch of samples are not at all well-known on bodybuilding forums or bodybuilding circles. They are not competitors and I don't think most even post at all on bodybuilding/steroid forums. Furthermore, they had never previously ordered from the reseller/source. Not only that, they had never previously used any of the products of the manufacturers selected for testing.

Millard, I grabbed this from that other active thread in the testing sub-forum.

I think you have some good starting criteria for how to evaluate trusted buyers in the above quote. Candidates must:

1. Not be well-known on bodybuilding forums or bodybuilding circles.

2. Not be competitors.

3. Not be active on bodybuilding/steroid forums.

4. Have never previously ordered from the reseller/source.

5. Never previously used any of the products of the manufacturers selected for testing.

Just thought I'd point that out.

 

[Docd187123]

I think the real focus needs to be on the more expensive aas primo, mast, var etc... Why under-dose tren, test, npp the raws are already cheap and easily available. Even if they are under dosed the mgs are high in them anyway. I think it be much more eye opening to find out if a 10mg var tablets had any var in them at all.

Test is the base of any cycle so it's importance is up there.

 

[Docd187123]

I guess what i am mainly questioning is the obtaining of the product that gets tested. It seems pretty damn fishy to test more than a handful of products and for all of them to come up smelling like roses. At some point it becomes more than just strange and starts to stink. Are the people rounding up product known by the sources? I don't necessarily mean best buddies type of thing, but do they have a working relationship, are they pro bbers, something?

I don't know, i'm just searching for a reason for what i think is out of the range of possibility. When do you start calling bullshit is what i am asking plainly.

I hate to say this, but if you get a 100% testing rate i think you need to question procedures somewhere along the line. I would go further and say that not only would it not be helping in harm reduction, but in my mind it would actually be hurting people. I hate to sound like someone doing nothing but looking for fault, but we know it is out there and that it is far from an irregularity.

I feel safe in knowing i am not a witch hunter here. I have experienced bunk gear more than once, so i am looking for reasons as to why we wouldn't see this in testing. Do we just get screwed by overseas sources? Do they say screw the U.S. ? Is everyone trying to clean up knowing this testing is going on...sounds a little far-fetched. Is the procurement flawed? Is Millard a good con man and the rest of us are just naive? At this point i'm throwing everything out there and leaning towards what sounds the most plausible. If i had to guess i would think the procurement to be the most reasonable guess.

Maybe i'm just too cynical, but i think GM would never have gotten into trouble if they produced product as reliable as what we have seen so far. At some point it is going to call the testing itself into question and people are going to start ignoring it like they do with assays claiming 99% purity from powder sources.

Let me ask you this, would you be just as cynical if EVERY test came back bunk or underdosed? The community as a whole seems not to be when every labmax or blood test comes back disappointing. They seem to expect it. Why then when the opposite is true are the expectations different?

 

[ironnut]

The other factor is does the qua

Test is the base of any cycle so it's importance is up there.

I understand that, but why underdose a compound that is fairly cheap to begin with an relatively easy to acquire. There is much more money to be made under dosing the others i have mentioned. And i pretty sure that will come to light if the more exotic aas get tested.

 

[Cml41987]

I guess what i am mainly questioning is the obtaining of the product that gets tested. It seems pretty damn fishy to test more than a handful of products and for all of them to come up smelling like roses. At some point it becomes more than just strange and starts to stink. Are the people rounding up product known by the sources? I don't necessarily mean best buddies type of thing, but do they have a working relationship, are they pro bbers, something?

I don't know, i'm just searching for a reason for what i think is out of the range of possibility. When do you start calling bullshit is what i am asking plainly.

I hate to say this, but if you get a 100% testing rate i think you need to question procedures somewhere along the line. I would go further and say that not only would it not be helping in harm reduction, but in my mind it would actually be hurting people. I hate to sound like someone doing nothing but looking for fault, but we know it is out there and that it is far from an irregularity.

I feel safe in knowing i am not a witch hunter here. I have experienced bunk gear more than once, so i am looking for reasons as to why we wouldn't see this in testing. Do we just get screwed by overseas sources? Do they say screw the U.S. ? Is everyone trying to clean up knowing this testing is going on...sounds a little far-fetched. Is the procurement flawed? Is Millard a good con man and the rest of us are just naive? At this point i'm throwing everything out there and leaning towards what sounds the most plausible. If i had to guess i would think the procurement to be the most reasonable guess.

Maybe i'm just too cynical, but i think GM would never have gotten into trouble if they produced product as reliable as what we have seen so far. At some point it is going to call the testing itself into question and people are going to start ignoring it like they do with assays claiming 99% purity from powder sources.

I think that everyone is skeptical about these tests coming back good because over the time I have been here there have been so many bad bloods coming back but most of the time it's from these shitty little ugl not these bigger ones like the ones that have been tested... I mean I think it's safe to say that these bigger ugl that have a lot of money behind them actually mean well at least most of the time and try to dose everythig correctly for the most part sure dot hey get bad bathes yes I'm sure they do wich like @Millard Baker said is why we have to keep testing them over time to get a real idea of the overall quality... But I think people have been getting burned by these little start up labs over and over consistently that now when good test come back thy r skeptical even f they are from the bigger labs. But IMO I have always believed that the bigger Ugl labs were more prone to have properly dosed gear.. I mean let's face it a company like pharmacom does not put as much money into a company like they have done ( and anyone who know anything can look at pharmacom and know that they have. Lot of money sunk into it) without having good intentions and being in it for the long run. These little fly by night labs don't give a shit about quality I mean sure most prolly would hope that their gear is dosed right but they don't have the money are resources to even think about trying to do any form of quality control ( mas specs) I truly believe once and if these little labs are tested we will really see some bad results that a lot of people are use to.. Because there are soo many little labs out their compared to the bigger ones that have the funds backing them like pharmacom and a larger percentage of people are using are have used those labs and got bad results... When you look at pharmacies reviews as a whole they have way more good than bad... Now look at let's say voo doo... They have been doomed from day one with tons of bad reviews.. So I think everyone needs to consider this cause to be honest with the labs that were tested I was not that surprised by the results... Now if they would have tested voo doo and others alike it would be a diff story and I doubt they would have had the same results.. Also @Millard Baker I think that the reseller where the product was purchased should be posted( with their consent wich I doubt they would mind) other wise what's the point if you can't know where it came from. I mean if the purpose is harm reduction as a whole then people should know where they can obtain quality are in other cases where not to go if the results reflect in a negative way. That's all

 

[Docd187123]

The other factor is does the qua

I understand that, but why underdose a compound that is fairly cheap to begin with an relatively easy to acquire. There is much more money to be made under dosing the others i have mentioned. And i pretty sure that will come to light if the more exotic aas get tested.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you other compounds need to be tested but think of the quantity of test purchased. I'd be willing to wager more test is bought than any other compound so while a scammer can make more money per unit volume scamming a more expensive compound, the sheer amount of test being bought and sold can make up for this. Consider also we tell all noobs to run a test only cycle. Every noob will only be ordering test on top of all the vets doing so also.

I'll reserve judgement on the more exotic compounds till we see the results

 

[rpbb]

The other factor is does the qua

I understand that, but why underdose a compound that is fairly cheap to begin with an relatively easy to acquire. There is much more money to be made under dosing the others i have mentioned. And i pretty sure that will come to light if the more exotic aas get tested.

I still want to see testing for testosterone, too many people come to the board and say their test is underdosed or bunk, and it makes it impossible to pick a supplier to buy from