janoshik
Subscriber
Anabolic steroids are not among the most hygroscopic compounds, thus I deem that to be of little relevance. If requested, we can Karl Fischer it for 30 USD.
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
Source QC and C of A (do you have one?)
- Thread starter readalot
- Start date
Some more comments.
In the US the only legal/pharma source of ND is through compounders. And guess what? All of the ones I have used won't share a C of A on the USP raws for their product. They also won't share testing details on their finished product. For some of the smaller compounders there is probably no testing on their finished product.
So last time I checked a 200 mg/ml - 10 ml vial was 130 USD at a compounder. Used to be more. Stan is currently 35 usd per 10 ml vial. Are you thinking there is zero demand for a $45 to $50 ugl vial that has most likely been tested as well or better than compounded product and has the testing data to back that up?
Call me naive but seems to me there is a significant addressable market for this concept.
Good idea. At least with initial scoping we could use that to rule out significant water as major contributor to loss on drying.
Are you willing to offer a pricing package for the initial evaluation phase? There will be some iteration I imagine as the AAS raw picture across manufacturers comes into focus. Think of it as part of your new business development budget.
Pinnacle Elements
Member
If I’m brewing my own products anyways, is there any of this that the filter doesn’t sterilize?
We already discussed bacteria and fungus
But, if there are heavy metals in my raws are those making it through?
What are examples of residual solvents and would those be a concern also?
We already discussed bacteria and fungus
But, if there are heavy metals in my raws are those making it through?
What are examples of residual solvents and would those be a concern also?
Everything else discussed is going through sterilizing filter. Filtration takes care of the bacteria / particulates above filter size.
Residual solvent details here:
Source QC and C of A (do you have one?)
Almost. First you have to identify contaminants are present and what they are. Maybe will find nothing but unreacted androstane raw material (feedstock) and some side products that are structurally very similar to active ingredient. Maybe something else. Residual solvents need to be...
thinksteroids.com
janoshik
Subscriber
Not really, anything out of routine is a time drain, so the discount incentivizing that is directly contrary to our interests.
If it becomes routine, then it's we can talk, but I'm skeptical here based on my decade of experience.
I can understand that based on the feedback received thus far.
To clarify: you are skeptical that this additional testing will become routine? Or skeptical that this testing will be useful to harm reduction? Based on the context my read is your concern is the former
janoshik
Subscriber
skeptical that this additional testing will become routine
Thank you for your time.
Your HR LCMS is dedicated to gh/peptide testing, correct?
1. So you have indicated your GCMS is set up to screen for AAS side products/androstane raw materials/other assorted organics. Understood. Cost: 170 USD
2. ICP-MS expandable as needed. Cost: 120 USD
3. Residual solvent analysis not available via preferred GC methods since you would need significant investment on the injection system for lower boilers. Got it. Can you provide a little more detail on the moisture analysis? Karl Fischer? Loss on drying? Cost TBD. Need to understand what this 30 USD is doing.
Ok so as we see above a decent starter package will run ~500 USD to test AAS raw. Let's do some calculations.
Assume 1 kg of raw. At 2g per vial that is 500 vials. Let assume a conscientious source who samples from raw bag with 3 samples for testing (triplicate). That is 1500 USD on incremental impurity testing per batch. 1500 USD / 500 vials is an additional 3 USD per vial.
Let's take a relatively smaller source (5x smaller batch size):
200 g of raw powder / 2 g per vial is 100 vials.
1500 USD / 100 vials = additional 15 USD per vial.
@Pinnacle Elements
Not far off:
Source QC and C of A (do you have one?)
Also, as long as the product is filtered through a sterile 0.22ug filter- mold and bacteria will not pass through. It doesn’t matter if raws have mold in them. For reference - a water particle theoretically is the size of your thumb nail. An oil particle with testosterone dissolved may be the...
Rough order of magnitude
@Axle Labs
@Stanfordpharma1
@GoodLyfe
@Qingdao Sigma Chemicals
Any feedback on my assumptions? Improvements on the rough estimates given above? Yes triplicate is conservative approach. More confidence in the screening may allow that 5 (relatively larger source) to 15 (relatively smaller source) USD per vial to drop.
Update on #3. Loss on drying plus Karl Fischer. Not ideal but will allow determination of total residual solvents/volatiles minus residual water. No speciation.
To sum up
1. GC MS (variant heavy boiling organics) - 170 USD
2. ICP MS (metals / elemental impurities) - 120 USD (I am sure @janoshik can give a break on additional elements if whole USP panel is screened?) 30 usd per additional element is steep.
3. Non specific analysis for residual solvent estimate % (loss on drying plus Karl Fischer titration) - 30 + 30 = 60 USD
Total = 450 USD for impurity screening panel on raws
@Stanfordpharma1
@Axle Labs
@GoodLyfe
@Qingdao Sigma Chemicals
@homebrewers
AlexDavis43
Member
We've established "trust me bro" is not a good business model. Sources could just send their best batch or selectively post good results.
Blind testing means you send the samples in for testing.
You already offered to pay so maybe you're not convinced it's worth it, which would explain why you haven't done it yet.
You quoted my post on compounders. Was that just to respond to me or do your comments have something to do with that post?
You want me to send my pharma stuff for testing?
OR
You wonder why I haven't ordered ugl raws to test with the assays I identified above with input from Jano?
Yes I do believe this additional testing is worthwhile. I wouldn't be wasting my time if I did not. We will learn some things. Are ugl raws comparable to USP raws used in Pharma products? I don't know. I'd like to know.
I do know a ugl raw testing at 96% purity is not comparable to USP raw. See my Test Cyp example above.
The first place to apply these tests is to raws not finished product. Hence it I was to blind test the raw I would have to order the raw then send it in for testing. I have also found some pharma testing labs that can handle the residual solvents assay with GC. Waiting for a quote from them and what their controlled substance policy is.
Let me know if I am missing your point.
AlexDavis43
Member
Just send a sample for any of this testing. I'm unclear why you're still kicking the can down the road. Weeks now, and you still haven't sent a single sample for testing?
Thanks for your suggestion. Help yourself to the info I shared above if my pace is not to your liking.
I get my facts straight and get a plan in order before I do stuff. Also contacted additional labs who can do the residual solvent assay properly. Checking their ability to deal with controlled substances. I don't want to go off half cocked and have all the naysayers give me the see I told ya so. Fail to plan, plan to fail. Patience.
Also would need raw to send for testing. May do some of my pharma stuff as a control.
Last edited:
I see another well versed R&D scientist has weighed in yet again. Way to go @Spaceman Spiff . You missed a bunch of posts. Make sure you piss on those too lmao. Funny what you are disliking. What a joke.
The more little red dislikes the more I know I am on the right course. At least it is predictable lol.
The more little red dislikes the more I know I am on the right course. At least it is predictable lol.
Last edited:
AlexDavis43
Member
Just send anything for testing. Anything at all.
AlexDavis43
Member
You mean me, the Pickle Rick avatar? jk
Spaceman Spiff
Member
been talking so much shit this whole time and haven't spent any time formulating a plan for your own testing.
Easy to ask for things to be done when it isn't out of your own pocket.
lonewolf54321
Member
He only talks about testing.....
You actually DO lots of testing.
Spaceman Spiff
Member
for real.
this guy could send some of his compounding pharmacy gear for testing/heavy metal testing. He has it on hand.
He just hasn't bothered doing jack shit. Really pathetic.
A different variation of a keyboard warrior
I tend to agree with you. But that does nothing to change the harm reduction approach:
1, Identify potential problem. Is this a problem? How serious is it? It may not be obvious or immediately apparent.
2. Promote awareness of the problem. Do many people know about the problem? Education is important.
3. Address the problem. What can be done about the problem? Are there steps that can be taken to minimize the potential harm?
Harm reduction is a challenge at every step...
Evidence may suggest a problem but some will deny it exists or minimize its severity.
The existence of the problem and its severity may not be disputed yet few people know about.
Even when people acknowledge the problem and everyone knows about the problem, few care to do anything about with concrete steps towards minimizing harm. This may be because they don't care, it requires too much effort, or they feel helpless and don't think there is anything that can be done about it.
Harm reduction advocates must push ahead anyway. They always accept people where there are and work with them from that point.
Similar threads
