The harm reduction question...

[readalot]

Still just crickets...

Guessing substance ID and purity percentage, right?

Assuming a vendor tests raws and gets back, for example, 90% purity, you’re ok with the vendor adjusting the raws used in the brew so that the final oil reaches the advertised mg/ml dose? That’s the only thing that matters to you?

You have no concern with what’s in the other 10% of the raws, right?

Just trying to clarify your position on the additional testing suggested by readalot.

See bold above. What's your answer Dear Reader?

Are you here only to ensure your gear has the labeled AAS concentration (gainz bro), or are you really concerned with improving and advancing harm reduction with ugl AAS use? Or something in between?

Incredible work by @lift4lyfe to distill this concept into a couple of simple, easy to understand questions. 90% too low?

Change 90% to XX%. What number evokes only "Yes" answers for you...

>= 95, 98, 99%?

 

[Cereal masturbator]

Cunt !
First

 

[trtbuilder]

If someone wants to do it, cool. We can see how it goes.

If they don't, it is what it is.

What I don't want to see is the same autistic person spamming every single thread on the forum until they get the answer they want.

 

[readalot]

And not always black or white. When using only the hplc id+quantitative assay can lead to significant harm reduction...

Janoshik Analytical laboratory testing services

Still good to have it posted out in the open if it is comfortable with you.

thinksteroids.com

Great example. Well done @X12349redpeppyir !!

Let's see who actually answers the questions.

 

[nightprowler7]

I hope all the heavy metals I'm injecting make me forget your piece of shit posts

 

[readalot]

First of all, MESO-Rx is not a source board that exists to connect you with a source. MESO-Rx is a harm reduction forum for AAS. The MESO community values harm reduction first and foremost.

“Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?”

 

[Mongo966]

View attachment 276041

Still just crickets...



See bold above. What's your answer Dear Reader?

Are you here only to ensure your gear has the labeled AAS concentration (gainz bro), or are you really concerned with improving and advancing harm reduction with ugl AAS use? Or something in between?

Incredible work by @lift4lyfe to distill this concept into a couple of simple, easy to understand questions. 90% too low?

Change 90% to XX%. What number evokes only "Yes" answers for you...

>= 95, 98, 99%?

I'm always surprised by how much shit you catch for bringing this up. I'm sure the vast majority of people who use meso appreciate what you're trying to do. Some of the louder guys want to bust your balls about it but I think that's just a social thing they're doing. I can't think of a good reason why any individual would not want to talk about this.
In the near future I expect people to start talking more and more about the impurities. Right now I think as a culture we're still feeling that honeymoon joy of being able to order from a batch that's been tested at all. That still feels like a privilege for most of us. Expect the novelty to wear off in the near future, and people will start to talk more on vendor pages about why their deca is testing at 95% instead of 99% and "uhh..by the way, wtf else is in my oil besides deca?"
But yeah right now it seems like nobody wants to really get into it.
I still don't understand the pushback you're getting about it though. It seems disproportionate.

 

[readalot]

I'm always surprised by how much shit you catch for bringing this up. I'm sure the vast majority of people who use meso appreciate what you're trying to do. Some of the louder guys want to bust your balls about it but I think that's just a social thing they're doing. I can't think of a good reason why any individual would not want to talk about this.
In the near future I expect people to start talking more and more about the impurities. Right now I think as a culture we're still feeling that honeymoon joy of being able to order from a batch that's been tested at all. That still feels like a privilege for most of us. Expect the novelty to wear off in the near future, and people will start to talk more on vendor pages about why their deca is testing at 95% instead of 99% and "uhh..by the way, wtf else is in my oil besides deca?"
But yeah right now it seems like nobody wants to really get into it.
I still don't understand the pushback you're getting about it though. It seems disproportionate.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts Brother. You bring up some good points on human psychology. We will see how this plays out. Looking forward to seeing the results from two of the subscribers who said they would participate. They seem way ahead of the curve. @Axle Labs @Stanfordpharma1

 

[readalot]

until they get the answer they want.

Just some answers to the questions would be a refreshing start. Let's start there.

 

[lonewolf54321]

I think I'm more likely to die from getting cancer from ingesting all the toxins from plastic water bottles than I am to be harmed from a couple % unknown material in raws or finished oils.
We are all aware of the mercury in many types of fish, especially in canned tuna, but I bet most here still eat more than the recommended amount.
We all here are aware that gear is highly toxic to our body....but I bet almost anything that nobody is gonna lower their dosage just because they read this sentence.
True harm reduction would be drop EVERYTHING except maybe true trt dose level. Anybody here care enough about harm reduction to do this? I bet not.

 

[Mongo966]

I think I'm more likely to die from getting cancer from ingesting all the toxins from plastic water bottles than I am to be harmed from a couple % unknown material in raws or finished oils.
We are all aware of the mercury in many types of fish, especially in canned tuna, but I bet most here still eat more than the recommended amount.
We all here are aware that gear is highly toxic to our body....but I bet almost anything that nobody is gonna lower their dosage just because they read this sentence.
True harm reduction would be drop EVERYTHING except maybe true trt dose level. Anybody here care enough about harm reduction to do this? I bet not.

I just don't see the logic here.
"I eat more tuna sandwiches than recommended so why would I care if there's mercury in my steroids?"
That's what you sounded like back there.

 

[lonewolf54321]

I just don't see the logic here.
"I eat more tuna sandwiches than recommended so why would I care if there's mercury in my steroids?"
That's what you sounded like back there.

And you sound like an absolute cunt. No surprise there.
Only a fucking retard would miss the obvious point.

 

[Mongo966]

And you sound like an absolute cunt. No surprise there.
Only a fucking retard would miss the obvious point.

LOL wow.
I said i didn't see your logic. You could have just explained it better instead of pissing your pants over it.
Do you tantrum like this every time you feel misunderstood? Like a grown-ass toddler?

 

[DECLAN]

Just some answers to the questions would be a refreshing start. Let's start there.

Do you ever wonder why you get so much push back on this particular topic? Have you been reading on what the other members are saying behind their obvious disdain and negative comments?

It’s sad to see that some would rather inject heavy metals because they find you annoying and pretentious.

I think you will find more support if they can relate to you but since you don’t even use the products, they question your intentions on this crusade. Are you trying to be the savior? How can you lead this if you cannot show by example.

Anyway, I am not judging your motives or your methods, this is just an insight from another stand point. As you can see, few vets are engaging in your threads maybe its not that they’re uninterested or do not care but rather do see more actions than just words.

Just my humble thoughts.

 

[JeffroCat]

I just don't see the logic here.
"I eat more tuna sandwiches than recommended so why would I care if there's mercury in my steroids?"
That's what you sounded like back there.

That pretty much sums it up.

 

[JeffroCat]

LOL wow.
I said i didn't see your logic. You could have just explained it better instead of pissing your pants over it.
Do you tantrum like this every time you feel misunderstood? Like a grown-ass toddler?

He can't explain it better. He'll just give you more emotional word salad.

 

[JeffroCat]

I hope all the heavy metals I'm injecting make me forget your piece of shit posts

Oh, the irony.

 

[readalot]

We are all aware of the mercury in many types of fish, especially in canned tuna, but I bet most here still eat more than the recommended amount.

This is a great point. Depending on your weight and the type of tuna you eat the estimates for number of cans (100 g drained weight per can) per week can vary between 1-2 (pregnant woman) to 25 (100 kg dude) to keep you in the reasonable intake limit (~3 mcg per kg bodyweight per week) If someone wants to lower their risk they can switch to herring/sardines. What makes these types of decisions possible is that the level of mercury in various types of fish has been measured.

We all here are aware that gear is highly toxic to our body....but I bet almost anything that nobody is gonna lower their dosage just because they read this sentence.

I sure hope they would or at least have a sound plan to minimize the cumulative AAS dose per year in accordance with minimum effective dose philosophy. I sure do.

True harm reduction would be drop EVERYTHING except maybe true trt dose level.

Excellent. I really like this comment. Thank you.

In short, by identifying and quantifying the impurity pile the consumer will be able to make educated and informed decisions about their health. Critical given that they are already dabbling in a higher risk area. Surely the consumer would want to choose the lower risk option if the option was available. No need to add to the risk unnecessarily by being ignorant of the composition.

Why fall for the perfect solution fallacy? If you want to run gear, run it. But it pays to know what's in it especially when people in this hobby already have multiple toxic penalty functions they need to track.

 

[lonewolf54321]

Majority of people here likely have body dismorphia or another similar condition....or they are obese. Both of these types of people that use gear unfortunately react similar to junkies taking other drugs....we know it's harmful but we still do it anyway. I bet most here could count on 1 hand the amount of people who stopped taking gear altogether (or true trt) BEFORE a health risk forced them to change. I highly doubt anything will change even if testing shows a small additional risk. We might mitigate risk a bit but we all still choose to pin toxic gear.

Now I'm waiting for that 1 fucktard "what if it's anthrax in there bro"....

 

[readalot]

First, thank you for your thoughtful comments.

Have you been reading on what the other members are saying behind their obvious disdain and negative comments?

Yes, I think so. I'd summarize it as "you don't use UGL, so why are you here?" AND "you are going to jack up prices if this is implemented by sources; we ain't paying more". The vocal members also want me to do initial testing first to document any potential problem to put "some skin in the game" so to speak. This would be a token gesture, but as we know you'd need more widespread adoption to get any real insight given the diversity of suppliers.

Are you trying to be the savior? How can you lead this if you cannot show by example.

Savior? No. I communicated the bare minimum additional testing I would need done before considering using ugl products. If that paradigm helps inform customers and gives them the info to make better informed decisions that would be wonderful.

If you go back to my original post in the Source QC thread it was a constructive set of comments and questions. It is unfortunate some sources and some vocal members decided to hijack it with the mentality of a 6th grade recess field.

I do hope the idea catches on. The ability for the consumer to have that data for a few bucks more per vial seems to be a worthy initiative in my opinion.