Going Underground? UGL Lab Tests results

  1. Advanced Member
    ralph4u2c's Avatar
    Stats
    5'7"  202 lbs.
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Age
    28
    Posts
    759
    Rep Power
    527
    Level
    22
    Lv. Percent
    83.55%

    Going Underground? UGL Lab Tests results


    Going Underground?
    by William Llewellyn, with Ronny Tober (Sept. 23, 2008)



    There is no question about it. Underground steroid products make up the dominant share of the global steroid business now. What was once a market largely fed by real prescription drugs, is now one where small-scale underground manufacturing and home brewing operations thrive. The underground market does accomplish one very substantial thing – it allows the very large demand for these drugs to be met. It will be the first to admit, that were it not for the underground aspect of this trade, there would be far fewer drugs in commerce, and far fewer people with access to them. But this article is not about the availability of underground steroids. It is about their safety.

    Underground steroids are indeed everywhere. But are they actually safe to use? Are underground steroids truly equivalent to the prescription drugs they are to replace? Those in support of the underground business often herald their favorite brands. Who is to blame them when they have access to a company that can supply them the variety, and often great value, that can be found with underground steroids. Many readers will recognize that we have had a very active testing history at Body of Science. In fact, I suspect that no single magazine or online community has tested as much as we have. But we too have our limitations. Up until now, our testing has been focused solely on the steroid content of a product. In other words, we have been able to tell you if X steroid was present in Y amount, but that is it.

    The Labs

    In an effort to help consumers REALLY assess the quality and potential health risks of underground steroid products, BodyofScience.com and ANABOLICS undertook a detailed joint drug analysis project. This project focused solely on examining the quality of steroids made from underground facilities, and exceeded the normal scope of testing by examining a number of other variables often overlooked in dosage testing. A total of 14 underground steroid samples were selected for laboratory testing, which included products from Amplio Labs, British Dragon, Diamond Pharma, Generic Anabolics, Generic Pharma, Lizard Laboratories, Medical Inc., Microbiological Labs, Nordic Supplements, Shark Laboratories, SWE Supplements, and Troy Labs. Included in this list were drugs that were made from small underground manufacturers, mid-level operations, and even producers large enough to have their items assembled under contract by drug manufacturing facilities. All 14 samples were analyzed at a registered and licensed facility in the U.S.

    The Tests

    There were four specific areas of testing for this market analysis project. The first test was to look for the presence of toxic heavy metals such metals as lead, tin, mercury, and arsenic. Next, we commissioned the standard steroid quantification testing to see how these products were dosed. After this we looked to see if there were any unknown steroidal contaminants in the products. Pharmaceutical grade steroids will be highly pure. Unprocessed intermediary chemicals or other contaminants should not appear upon analysis. The presence of unknown steroidal substances signifies that lower quality materials (not made to pharmaceutical standards) were used. Finally, we examined for the presence of the flavoring agent 2,4-decadienal. This material is common to food products, and its presence demonstrates that food-grade oil (not highly pure pharmaceutical grade oil for injection) was used during product manufacture.

    The Results

    A detailing of the first 2 results from this testing series is available below, for all readers to see. Overall, the products examined in this study reflected extremely poorly on the quality of the underground steroid market. To begin with, more than 20% of the products (1 in 5) contained heavy metal contamination. While pre-market testing would have noticed this, if such products were ever found on pharmacy shelves in the U.S. it would trigger an immediate nationwide recall. Next, an examination of basic drug dosing showed many deviations. Approximately 35% of the products were actually significantly overdosed. While this was likely done in an effort to produce a stronger user response and loyal customer base, this is unacceptable and does raise many potential safety issues. The remaining results will be published in the upcoming release of William Llewellyn’s ANABOLICS 7th Edition (2009).


    Test #1: Heavy Metals Contamination

    Sample Contamination Result
    1. methandrostenolone None Detected (<0.002) PASS
    2. testosterone enanthate None Detected (<0.002) PASS
    3. testosterone enanthate None Detected (<0.002) PASS
    4. testosterone propionate None Detected (<0.002) PASS
    5. boldenone undecylenate Metals Found (>0.002) FAIL
    6. testosterone cypionate None Detected (<0.002) PASS
    7. boldenone undecylenate Metals Found (<0.002) FAIL
    8. trenbolone hexahydro. None Detected (<0.002) PASS
    9. testosterone cypionate None Detected (<0.002) PASS
    10. methenolone enanthate Metals Found (>0.002) FAIL
    11. testosterone cypionate None Detected (<0.002) PASS
    12. nandrolone decanoate None Detected (<0.002) PASS
    13. methenolone enanthate None Detected (<0.002) PASS
    14. trenbolone enanthate None Detected (<0.002) PASS

    Failure Rate: 21%


    Test #2: Dosage vs. Label Claim (mg/mL)

    Sample Labeled Dose / Actual Dose / Percentage of Claim / Pass Fail Status
    1. methandrostenolone 25 mg 115 mg 459% FAIL
    2. testosterone enanthate 250 mg 440 mg 176% FAIL
    3. testosterone enanthate 250 mg 408 mg 163% FAIL
    4. testosterone propionate 75 mg 127 mg 169% FAIL
    5. boldenone undecylenate 200 mg 240 mg 120% PASS
    6. testosterone cypionate 200 mg 204 mg 102% PASS
    7. boldenone undecylenate 200 mg 178 mg 89% PASS
    8. trenbolone hexahydro. 76 mg 190 mg 249% FAIL
    9. testosterone cypionate 200 mg 177 mg 88% PASS
    10. methenolone enanthate 100 mg 54 mg 54% FAIL
    11. testosterone cypionate 250 mg 171 mg 69% FAIL
    12. nandrolone decanoate 250 mg 228 mg 91% PASS
    13. methenolone enanthate 100 mg 78 mg 78% FAIL
    14. trenbolone enanthate 100 mg 0 mg 0% FAIL

    Failure Rate: 64% (+/- >20% of Label Claim)


    Conclusion

    The results are fairly self-explanatory. Even with just these two sets of tests under our belt, serious problems are evident. The heavy metals, of course, are alarming. The metals tested here are all known to pose specific threats to health when they accumulate in the body. Those metals considered inert (such as iron and aluminum) were not included. Heavy metals are common in chemical-manufacturing operations, but are normally removed through very careful product assembly and purification steps. They were likely found here because the raw materials used to make some of these steroids was simply made “cheaply”, without the expense needed to hit true drug-grade purity. This type of material could be considered “food grade”, and likely dominates most of the underground market.

    This article is certainly not meant to be an outright attack on underground products. Indeed, to many bodybuilders these products fill an important niche, which is very understandable. Indeed also, there are products to be found on the underground market that are made to high quality standards. In fact, these results should underline the other side of the coin, that it is possible for underground steroids to meet the level of true pharmaceutical grade drug purity. After all, some of these products did not have any unacceptable heavy metals, and were properly dosed. The very difficult trick, however, can be just finding them. Either way, I feel it is very important to be aware of the good and the bad of the underground anabolic/androgenic steroid market before you make any decisions. Stay informed. Stay safe.

  2. Elite Member
    nosnmiveins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Age
    27
    Posts
    6,833
    Rep Power
    3523
    Level
    54
    Lv. Percent
    21.29%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting ProPosting Authority

    damn i would HATE to have overdosed gear











  3. Elite Member
    Zero V's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  163 lbs.
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Age
    28
    Posts
    6,286
    Rep Power
    7014
    Level
    52
    Lv. Percent
    27.39%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting ProPosting Authority

    this is why you dont buy your gear from the guy in the corner wearing a trench coat in the summer....
    •   
       

  4. Advanced Member
    ralph4u2c's Avatar
    Stats
    5'7"  202 lbs.
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Age
    28
    Posts
    759
    Rep Power
    527
    Level
    22
    Lv. Percent
    83.55%

    Quote Originally Posted by nosnmiveins View Post
    damn i would HATE to have overdosed gear
    lol i agree to an extent but some of that gear is severely under or overdosed, high levels of metals, etc ... which can turn out for the worst.

    regardless, just another reason why you should try to stick to pharm. grade gear if possible, research, and stick to reputable sources .... as with anything in life for that matter. sometimes the extra few bucks at the time is worth it in the long run.
  5. Elite Member
    nosnmiveins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Age
    27
    Posts
    6,833
    Rep Power
    3523
    Level
    54
    Lv. Percent
    21.29%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph4u2c View Post
    lol i agree to an extent but some of that gear is severely under or overdosed, high levels of metals, etc ... which can turn out for the worst.

    regardless, just another reason why you should try to stick to pharm. grade gear if possible, research, and stick to reputable sources .... as with anything in life for that matter. sometimes the extra few bucks at the time is worth it in the long run.


    i def agree here. ppl who run test should stick to HG, other compounds are sometimes harder to find and more expensive though.....THEN get UGL, but from a reliable place
  6. Registered User
    jjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Age
    27
    Posts
    6,538
    Rep Power
    77391
    Level
    53
    Lv. Percent
    15.94%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by nosnmiveins View Post
    i def agree here. ppl who run test should stick to HG, other compounds are sometimes harder to find and more expensive though.....THEN get UGL, but from a reliable place
    Yes. Proof that you gotta be very carefull.

    The dose is a minor issue comparing to the heavy contaminants in some of them!
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. College Athlete tests results seem B.S.
    By brownstown89 in forum Sports Talk
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 02-26-2010, 07:32 AM
  2. Replies: 323
    Last Post: 01-17-2010, 05:20 PM
  3. Good results (blood tests scared me)
    By calibrated in forum 35 and Older
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-24-2007, 11:55 PM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-11-2005, 06:29 PM
  5. Sledge....Results of M1,4ADD Tests??
    By Skark in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-31-2004, 06:46 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Log in
Log in