valk labs test c underdosed??

[passamj20]

Hey guys just got done with labmax results and initial color for vial a was almost spot on according to color chart then went to vial b for UV test and only a small amount of green iridescence. What do you guys think??

 

[passamj20]

Sry wasn't able to upload video so tried a bunch of pics... and I should be able to get a pic of vial a in the light. Forgot about that

 

[Colt44]

How much did you drop in and at what time did you take the photos?

 

[mercury]

hard to see the fluorescence but looks like the right thing something between yellow and green but more yellow.

sometimes the UV light reflects from the glass vial and gives false impression.

all the shit is underdosed this is why you have to inject twice more

 

[passamj20]

How much did you drop in and at what time did you take the photos?

Dropped in 4 25 guage drops and took a video about 3 min long and the pics came near the end of that.

 

[passamj20]

hard to see the fluorescence but looks like the right thing something between yellow and green but more yellow.

sometimes the UV light reflects from the glass vial and gives false impression.

all the shit is underdosed this is why you have to inject twice more

Haha yeah i hear you on that... I definitely had a glare but there was some green.

 

[Dr JIM]

For the reasons described (green, blue, some reflected yellow, shades of yellow etc) in this thread alone, LM is NOT a reliable means of determining CONCENTRATION, period.

Yet LM may be capable of ascertaining whether a specific AAS is PRESENT, and SHOULD be a very reliable assay to RULE OUT the presence of ANY AAS.

 

[passamj20]

For the reasons described (green, blue, some reflected yellow, shades of yellow etc) in this thread alone, LM is NOT a reliable means of determining CONCENTRATION, period.

Yet LM may be capable of ascertaining whether a specific AAS is PRESENT, and SHOULD be a very reliable assay to RULE OUT the presence of ANY AAS.

Dr.jim appreciate your post... i was under the assumption of concentratin based results from testing straight powder like lm did with a real defined glow and ccolor vs not as much color or glow thanks for the clarification

 

[MythotiK]

Yes, the "glow" is an indication of how concentrated it is...If you put 85% pure Test E into a test vial, it glows like the moon...As you cut it, the "glow" will start to decrease..

Check my test of Asylum Test P...

 

[passamj20]

Thanks yeah based on your vid definitely does... if only we all got results like that by these ugl's

 

[Dr JIM]

Until LM produces literature DOCUMENTING it's ability to differentiate an AAS concentration, this suggestion is a sales ploy, period!

If you know anything about analytical chem you would KNOW reagent testing is FULL OF FALSE positives. Which means contaminants OFTEN cause a "reaction" to occur.

REAGENT tests like LM, were originally developed to CONFIRM THE ABSENCE of a particular substance (drug, narcotic, PED, etc) and NOTHING has changed since their introduction many YEARS ago.

Why hasn't LM posted ANY LITERATURE ON MESO? Bc many mates have bought into the notion AAS testing can be CHEAP, NOT !

Look your asking UGL to prove their product is GTG why should LM be any different!

 

[Dr JIM]

Hey I'm not knocking LM at all and will be the FIRST in line supporting this product when they reveal the results of comparative studies.

What's that mean? It means you study a sample using LM and then you compare it to a KNOWN and well accepted standard such as HPLC.

This process usually begins with pure samples, followed by concentration changes and on to the addition of various "contaminants".

Of course the idea is to try to "trick the test" into generating a glow, shine, color change etc.

You don't think some UGL are already working on ways to "trick LM"?

Let's not forget there is BIG MONEY in selling BUNK GEAR!