I'm not sure if you're referring to me when you said some people believe LM isn't as accurate, probably not but I'll elaborate anyway since this topic interests me. My comment on 'preferring' people purchasing Roidtest over LM has to do with the business practices / conduct of the respective companies.
Beyond that I don't care for the differences between the products because neither one is a reliable way of determining hormone with any real accuracy.
Which is a whole other debate entirely by the way, whether or not a colormetric test is even capable of differentiating between hormones and esters with any real accuracy / reliability. I don't think its a coincidence that none of these companies are willing to put out the science or research they have behind their testing kits.
There was one guy who was making his own testing kit a while back who said he had all the info but it was too scattered or unusable to post or something like that. He fell off the map shortly after.
We have better tools available for testing. Costs more, but the HPLC doesn't lie.
No my friend, was not referring to you but Im glad you shine light on it. I actually posted a VERY GOOD read on labmax on the other forum Im listed at, with some very good and interesting facts on it. I would post here but it was literally a very long read. Maybe Ill try to dig up the link though. I actually had several guys PM me about it, thats why I figured Id throw it out there and maybe some would chime in.
To be very honest, My feelings on it are quite simple. How can a test so cheap and easy, determine instantly, all the way down to the ester profile of a compound? The other aspects I do not agree with is, why do some take 20 minutes to determine, others seconds, some you watch the coloration changes, some require UV, etc. You can see where I am going with this. Im not in any way, shape, or form trying to say the tests posted today I am trying to sway in my favor, but like I stated, we all know how many variances and contributing factors play into these tests. 3 drops too many can mean all the difference in the test passing or failing. Or, lets say you place the drops in, if you set the syringe down, go get your camera, take a picture, by that time, too much time has elapsed and test is failed. As you can see, so many variances and factors play into this testing.
Hey, Im all for it if it works, and it is accurate. However, sadly enough, it can be very lose lose for the supplier. So a member obtains a product, administers 4-5 generous drops into the test kit, that requires 2, posts the results, and instantly the extremely inaccurate test kit becomes the Judge, jury, and executioner at the suppliers sentencing trial. Now..... I understand it is an easy line of defense in any customers aid when it comes to simply seeing if an ester is present, but as a whole, this entire colormetric testing of esters, and the crude nature of testing still baffles me a bit. Once again, I am not bashing the testing or saying it is wrong, but there are simply so many factors that can come into play, of course I would be slightly leaning on the fence about it as a whole.