The results are in.

[SAZHammer]

Got the results back from the blind test for the raw my friend and I got. Not as good as I had hoped. Got them from PPL.

 

[Simobbuilder]

You could do more effort on the title

Like PPL Test Cypionate raw HPLC Jano

Thank you for sharing, result is not that bad 94%

 

[Liska]

You'll never believe this test result! What happened next is surprising... ?!

 

[grey]

Not as good as I had hoped

I am idly curious what you were hoping for? You had 5.58% room for improvement to reach the (utterly unattainable) 100% purity.

The received wisdom for many decades has been to brew assuming 90% purity.

Virtually all raws being tested from sources I have seen (that are the actual compound they specified instead of some other random thing) are pretty much in the 94-97% range with the remainder being degraded hormone and some tiny amount of unreacted reagent (both unavoidable).

Sadly, results from pharmacy raws (delivered right from the same bloody Chinese factories) aren't available (at none I am aware of) but I would be STUNNED if their starting raws were more than ~1.5 % better on average.


There simply isn't much room between 94% and the non-theoretical ceiling of around ~98.5%.

The near endless faffing around you would need to do get to something like 99% would both vastly lower supply and vastly increase the price per gram.

Consider the math:
A prepared hormone blind-dosed at 250 mg/ml with 93% raws will yield a real dose of 232.5 mg/ml. Widely available, inexpensive, the "impurities" don't cause harm (see the harm reduction results from this very site).

Vice

A prepared hormone blind-dosed at 250 mg/ml with 98% raws will yield a real dose of 245 mg/ml. This is going to be more expensive, less available, and the impurities eliminated were already harmless.

Both prepared solutions are identical in terms of therapeutic effect at a difference of less than 12mg/ml.

Now, if I saw raw results down around 90% or lower? Yeah, I would start to be concerned as there would almost certainly have to be other things mixed in besides degraded hormone and unreacted reagent.

 

[Liska]

I am idly curious what you were hoping for? You had 5.58% room for improvement to reach the (utterly unattainable) 100% purity.

The received wisdom for many decades has been to brew assuming 90% purity.

Virtually all raws being tested from sources I have seen (that are the actual compound they specified instead of some other random thing) are pretty much in the 94-97% range with the remainder being degraded hormone and some tiny amount of unreacted reagent (both unavoidable).

Sadly, results from pharmacy raws (delivered right from the same bloody Chinese factories) aren't available (at none I am aware of) but I would be STUNNED if their starting raws were more than ~1.5 % better on average.


There simply isn't much room between 94% and the non-theoretical ceiling of around ~98.5%.

The near endless faffing around you would need to do get to something like 99% would both vastly lower supply and vastly increase the price per gram.

Consider the math:
A prepared hormone blind-dosed at 250 mg/ml with 93% raws will yield a real dose of 232.5 mg/ml. Widely available, inexpensive, the "impurities" don't cause harm (see the harm reduction results from this very site).

Vice

A prepared hormone blind-dosed at 250 mg/ml with 98% raws will yield a real dose of 245 mg/ml. This is going to be more expensive, less available, and the impurities eliminated were already harmless.

Both prepared solutions are identical in terms of therapeutic effect at a difference of less than 12mg/ml.

Now, if I saw raw results down around 90% or lower? Yeah, I would start to be concerned as there would almost certainly have to be other things mixed in besides degraded hormone and unreacted reagent.

I'm very curious to see proof of this correlation between price (whether cost of production or as reflected in price to customer) and purity you have woven into your post.

 

[SAZHammer]

I am idly curious what you were hoping for? You had 5.58% room for improvement to reach the (utterly unattainable) 100% purity.

The received wisdom for many decades has been to brew assuming 90% purity.

Virtually all raws being tested from sources I have seen (that are the actual compound they specified instead of some other random thing) are pretty much in the 94-97% range with the remainder being degraded hormone and some tiny amount of unreacted reagent (both unavoidable).

Sadly, results from pharmacy raws (delivered right from the same bloody Chinese factories) aren't available (at none I am aware of) but I would be STUNNED if their starting raws were more than ~1.5 % better on average.


There simply isn't much room between 94% and the non-theoretical ceiling of around ~98.5%.

The near endless faffing around you would need to do get to something like 99% would both vastly lower supply and vastly increase the price per gram.

Consider the math:
A prepared hormone blind-dosed at 250 mg/ml with 93% raws will yield a real dose of 232.5 mg/ml. Widely available, inexpensive, the "impurities" don't cause harm (see the harm reduction results from this very site).

Vice

A prepared hormone blind-dosed at 250 mg/ml with 98% raws will yield a real dose of 245 mg/ml. This is going to be more expensive, less available, and the impurities eliminated were already harmless.

Both prepared solutions are identical in terms of therapeutic effect at a difference of less than 12mg/ml.

Now, if I saw raw results down around 90% or lower? Yeah, I would start to be concerned as there would almost certainly have to be other things mixed in besides degraded hormone and unreacted reagent.

Since you put it that way i will admit that my disappointment is unwarranted. I have seen some results from other that bought their test c from PPL around the same time that came in between 96% and 97%. When it comes down to it 2% is not a big deal. But the higher the purity the better is always the way to go. With that at least I can now brew my TRT with confidence that I know what I am injecting. Dosage can be pinpointed with a little bit of math. All in all I am happy with what I have.

 

[SAZHammer]

You could do more effort on the title

Like PPL Test Cypionate raw HPLC Jano

Thank you for sharing, result is not that bad 94%

I should have put more thought into the title. My bad.

 

[grey]

But the higher the purity the better is always the way to go. With that at least I can now brew my TRT with confidence that I know what I am injecting

Definitely! Would be great to get consistency from batch to batch.

 

[Connor 25257]

That’s pretty pathetic. Wasn’t there a test from November 96%+? Test raws turning into trash too? Wtf

 

[SAZHammer]

That’s pretty pathetic. Wasn’t there a test from November 96%+? Test raws turning into trash too? Wtf

There was a guy who posted some results that bought his about a month and a half earlier from PPL as well and his came back at 96%. PPL Cyp Purity Results

 

[HorseManBaby]

You could do more effort on the title

Like PPL Test Cypionate raw HPLC Jano

Thank you for sharing, result is not that bad 94%

Right? Skipped over this thread for several days due to the title.