Diixencider
Member
Janoshik Analytical
janoshik.com
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
SRY Tirz 30 with disinfectant?
- Thread starter Diixencider
- Start date
Kralteramon
Member
I don't think it's an issue when the amount present is very low. It helps with preventing microbial contamination. It's commonly used in pharmaceutical injectable products. The devil is in the dose though.. I would just try to inject a small amount and see if you get a reaction, redness or swelling.
Ghoul
Member
A terrible excipient for GLPs. Destabilizing and serves no purpose in peptides reconstituted with BAC. It causes rapid aggregation and deactivation of GLP monomers.
No pharma GLP uses this preservative for good reasons. It's incompatible with the lipid tails GLP proteins use to extend their half life. In GLP multi use pens, they use M-cresol or phenol. In single use pens they don't use any preservative, which is best for GLPs.
In multi dose UGL vials, benzyl alcohol in the BAC serves as the antimicrobial.
I wonder if this was discovered incidentally, or Jano was given a heads up so it wouldn't interfere with an accurate purity measurement.
Yet more evidence UGL protein therapeutics are not pharma, regardless of purity tests, and substantiates the wide variation in effects reported between different UGL brands and pharma.
No pharma GLP uses this preservative for good reasons. It's incompatible with the lipid tails GLP proteins use to extend their half life. In GLP multi use pens, they use M-cresol or phenol. In single use pens they don't use any preservative, which is best for GLPs.
In multi dose UGL vials, benzyl alcohol in the BAC serves as the antimicrobial.
I wonder if this was discovered incidentally, or Jano was given a heads up so it wouldn't interfere with an accurate purity measurement.
Yet more evidence UGL protein therapeutics are not pharma, regardless of purity tests, and substantiates the wide variation in effects reported between different UGL brands and pharma.
Photon
Member
Is it really intended?
Or is it contamination..from cleaning the lab or vials?
Its the first time I'm seeing it on any report..I really think these vendors are using different factories, despite same pricelists..
Or is it contamination..from cleaning the lab or vials?
Its the first time I'm seeing it on any report..I really think these vendors are using different factories, despite same pricelists..
Ghoul
Member
I thought identifying something like this required specific techniques, meaning you have to be looking for it. Maybe it's not that uncommon, we're just not testing for it(maybe we should be). I don't know.
Peptides have to be specified, it's not like AAS where they can be identified starting with an unidentified substance.
@janoshik
Photon
Member
Semi blind testing is possible for both AAS and Peps.
A HPLC report is ran, an unknown spike was noticed, which was traced to being a disinfectant. It's probably not common which is why they looked in it.
You can read about it here -- Sample report by a lab Ive never used.
It would be great if Jano could include more details in his lab reports..
We indeed can automatically attach tons of useless generic data to each report, but I don't see the value other than it looking more sciencey.
HPLC report is ran, unknown spike is detected, turns purity to shit, vendor panics, pays ID of the peak, which is ID'd as a filler/excipient and thus discounted from the purity measurement.
Photon
Member
Have you seen this filler being used before in other Tirz samples?
Given we've only recently ID'd it, we haven't really been looking up until now.
We've seen all sorts of fillers, such as phenol, m-cresole, various amino acids etc
Ghoul
Member
Thank you sir, clears that up.
Could you tell us approximately how much of an impact on purity it had? Wouldn't seem like it would've been enough to set off alarm bells if only a small amount was present lowering purity by 1-2%, unless the vendor was certain it should've been 99% pure.
Compounds with different absorbance can have massive (or minimal) impact looking at particular absorbance ( 280 / 220 nm for peptides normalisation ), while providing very little information about the amount present.
I wouldn't be surprised if it was trace amounts wreaking havoc on the purity for low absorbance peptides.
Normalisation ( area % purity ) only works for compounds from same class with similar properties reflected in their absorbance (eg. peptides and peptide bond etc).
I wouldn't be surprised if it was trace amounts wreaking havoc on the purity for low absorbance peptides.
Normalisation ( area % purity ) only works for compounds from same class with similar properties reflected in their absorbance (eg. peptides and peptide bond etc).
Diixencider
Member
Well im gunna send it. Maybe it will cleanse my soul
Photon
Member
Hi @janoshik
Is it possible to list the main filler used going forward?
Some of these are not commonly used and are can be either harmful to the user or cause degradation to the peptide it is being sold with....This filler for instance, is not common and should not be used as a filler..
p-Chlorocresol, or 4-chloro-3-methylphenol (ClC6H3CH3OH), also known as p-chloro-m-cresol, is a potent disinfectant and antiseptic.
Last edited:
Ghoul
Member
I agree it's a good idea. Given the work involved it would be an additional service, but likely popular. "excipient characterization"
Stealth500
Member
it's hard to get solid answers on these additives searching online. Mostly when you search the specific excipient it will be a warning "do not use in injections" or "it is commonly used in injections". Not very helpful.
I will say that my entire life I have never had any known allergies to any medication. A lot of these chinese peptides cause itching and redness at the injection site and it doesn't matter which bac water I am using hospira or other. It is not only SRY or only me getting this reaction so to dismiss it as an allergy would be poor judgement.
I will say that my entire life I have never had any known allergies to any medication. A lot of these chinese peptides cause itching and redness at the injection site and it doesn't matter which bac water I am using hospira or other. It is not only SRY or only me getting this reaction so to dismiss it as an allergy would be poor judgement.
Kralteramon
Member
Alright... so apparently it's not great to have this stuff in our vials. I've just ordered some Tirz15 from SRY and wondering if I made a mistake here. I guess it's benign to inject but it might cause aggregates when I keep it reconstituted for "too long"? How would I know it went bad? Cloudy?
Whistles77
Member
SRY just (8am PST Mon 16th June) added an announcement regarding this on their TG's announcement channel pushing the burden to Jano. Not sure i understand the arguments presented.
Photon
Member
Might be these excipients..some of these are known irritants, some more potent than others. If it's listed on the tests, at least you can figure out which one irriates you the most and avoid it.
I might avoid SRY and HYB for peps for now. (HYB used to work at SRY) -- high chance the sources are the same. Didn't you get a terrible batch of Tirz from HYB?
Please share the announcement.
Whistles77
Member
Official Statement Regarding Recent Janoshik Testing Report Issues
To Our Valued Customers and Partners,
During recent purity testing conducted by Janoshik Analytical on select peptide products, we identified several concerning irregularities. In keeping with our commitment to transparency and accountability, we are issuing this public statement and taking appropriate corrective actions.
#### 1. Testing Delays and Data Inaccuracies
- Unacceptable Processing Time: Reports were delayed up to two weeks post-sample delivery—far exceeding standard turnaround times.
- HPLC Purity Calculation Errors:
- After we flagged discrepancies, Janoshik corrected the data *without explaining the cause of the errors*.
- Critical Issue: An anomalous peak at 274 nm (inconsistent with peptide characteristics) was erroneously included in purity calculations, artificially deflating results.
#### 2. Contaminant Identification Concerns
- We paid $170 for GC-MS analysis to identify the unknown substance.
- Our independent testing confirmed the compound as CAS 99-93-4.
- Janoshik's amended report (issued two days later) identified it as p-Chlorocresol but failed to provide:
- Molecular weight verification
- Rationale for attributing the 274 nm peak to this compound
- Our Objections:
- p-Chlorocresol is **a toxic substance requiring government clearance for purchase**—our decade of industry expertise precludes its intentional use.
- Janoshik’s opaque methodology (updating reports without evidentiary support) violates professional standards.
#### 3. Product Safety & Customer Assurance
- Minimal Distribution: Only a small batch was released, as pre-shipment in-house purity/potency testing ensured compliance.
- Customers Receiving Product: No action is required—we assume full responsibility for resolution.
- Ongoing Dialogue with Janoshik: We demand:
- Complete analytical data (MW, 274 nm peak justification)
- Explanation for contaminant inclusion in purity calculations
- Clarification on testing delays
#### 4. Our Commitment
- Zero Tolerance for Harmful Additives: All processes adhere to industry benchmarks.
- Enhanced Transparency: Implementing third-party verification protocols to prevent recurrence.
We urge Janoshik to address these concerns promptly and uphold their professional obligations.
SRYlab
June 15, 2026
*(Key improvements for U.S. audience: Concise phrasing, active voice, emphasis on accountability, and logical flow aligning with Western business communication standards.)
Kralteramon
Member
Nope it's still in transit, it's my first order with SRY. Too bad but learned something.
Similar threads
- Anonymous member 167394
- Steroid Forum
