Epistane testing results - AnabolicMinds.com - Page 3

Epistane testing results

Page 3 of 10 First 123458 ... Last
  1. Registered User
    aspire210's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Age
    30
    Posts
    660
    Rep Power
    445

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by whitedevil74 View Post
    How is it a positive thing when a company is defrauding people, and lying about what they are putting in their product. Customers purchased this product believing that it was one substance and recieved another (God knows what) type of substance. It does not matter if it is effective or not, this is a matter of ethics.

    So what if somebody attacked PhatDaddy (I will never refer to him as a doctor because he is not) or his religion. He lied and deceived people for his own benefit and hides behind religion. That is not a way a christian is supposed to behave, I question the christianinty of any man who devotes his life to selling gray markjet steroids and research chemicals as well, I seriously doubt jesus would approve of this. He does not even have the guts to confront people on his own IBE forum. This is not a personal attack this is the truth. Prepare for lawsuits IBE.
    What happened to lack of personal attacks? Religion has no place in a discussion of steroid structure.

    Yes, you are right, Jesus hates steroids. We are all going to burn in hell for tasting the sweet nectar of testosterone.

  2. Registered User
    Nabeshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Age
    30
    Posts
    287
    Rep Power
    261

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by aspire210 View Post
    Please go ahead and lay out the math for the MW calculation for epistane then take into account the desulforization that will occur and produce a new MW. Unless you can do this yourself you are full of it. At least I'm not claiming to be able to do something I'm not.
    It is of absolutely zero consequence that you don't trust PA, as far as I'm concerned. In fact, it matters almost as little as your opinion of me. He's come up with a figure that a lot of respectable folk have accepted, and IBE has got nothing in return.

    The burden of proof has been met. The burden of rejoinder is now on IBE's shoulders.
  3. Advanced Member
    whitedevil74's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    554
    Rep Power
    376

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by evan View Post
    Personally i would like to see the effeCts(blood Chem) on the human body of one produCt vs the other, i dont Care what it was intended to be or even if the real Compound in the bottle is "extraCt of a dirty hooker". If the Compound is safe and works that is all i Care about and that is how i would like to make my ChoiCe

    I like to leave matters of semantiCs to lawyers and politiCans
    What is wrong with you?
    •   
       

  4. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2846

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Fast400 View Post
    PA tested your product and came out with a MW of 270. He tested the other two products, which are to contain the exact same ingredient and came up with 288. I test your product and come up with 270. Now, if PA tested the three products all the same way and came up with 2 different results (288 being the explainable number), why is yours coming up 270 (which has no logical explanation)?
    No, 270 has a logical explanation. The epithio group could easily leave and that would take the overall MW to around 270 depending on whether or not it took one or two protons with it.

    I'll ask my professor tomorrow if it is likely to do so.

    I actually don't know how 288 is explainable, to tell you the truth. That would be the number he would get if he removed an S-H from the total MW, and not the -OH. -OH almost always falls off during GC/MS as H2O (-18), which yields 270 M+ (molecular ion).

    I don't know why PA would say otherwise, honestly.

    Well, I'll take it to my professor tomorrow (Ph.D Ochem) or Friday. But, I know FOR A FACT that alcohol would come off as water (-16 for the O and -2 for the two protons).
  5. New Member
    cavefish's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  255 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Age
    29
    Posts
    48
    Rep Power
    156

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by macedaddy View Post
    He bailed because people were attacking him PERSONALLY! maybe if you actually read the thread you would see that they were attacking his religion! THAT ISN'T COOL ANY DAY OF THE WEEK!

    if you guys are gonna "debate" (not that i would even come close to saying it is one) then do it correctly and without PERSONAL ATTACKS!

    RPN (dsade) has behaved reputably thus far and Dr. D has behaved reputably thus far! looks to me like "others" have not.................
    Right, for whats its worth I don't agree with personal attacks and his religious preferances are none of my business or anyone elses. They should also play no role in how he does business. However Dr. D chose to give that clown a voice by responding to his post then running rather than choosing to ignore it and promoting an open dialog about the test results. I was very much interested in what he had to say about this now I don't know if he'll come back or not.

    As an excuse for exiting this thread, it stinks.
  6. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2846

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Nabeshin View Post
    The same way you can calculate the expected MW of dihydrogen monoxide without having any on hand.

    I'm amazed at all the IBE apologia. Forget everything except for the numbers --- the numbers are all that matter. Epistane should have a measured MW of 288, and it doesn't. IBE needs to explain why.

    All other points are moot until that is resolved.
    You're rusty on your ochem, my friend

    MW of epistane is 321.

    At the 17th Carbon, oriented axially, there is an alcohol functional group -OH. During mass spectroscopy the -OH pretty much always leaves and takes a proton with it. That's -18 AMU from the total MW of 321. That would be the first thing to go, period.

    That leaves 303 AMU remaining.

    Sulfur, located directly underneath Oxygen on the periodic table (and therefore possessing very similar chemical and physical properties) is also likely to leave (as evidenced by PA's numbers himself, 288 being 321 - 33.) Epistane has an epithio group at 2a,3a. This means that carbons 2 and 3 are bonded to a single sulfur equitorially.

    Sulfur has an MW of about 32 and it would strip a proton as well, making the total MW removed 33 AMU.

    303 - 33 = 270 AMU for the M+.

    To recap,
    Epistane contains two functional groups that would likely leave under GC/MS conditions. On is an epithio group and the other is an alcohol. When the alcohol leaves, it takes a proton with it making the total MW loss from the parent molecule 18 AMU. The epithio group would strip a proton with it as well, that takes another 33 away.

    So, methyl-epithiostanol = 321. - SH, -H2O = 270.

    An M+ of 288 makes little sense. He would have had to leave the -OH functional group on to get that weight, and -OH leaving and stripping a proton (coming off as H2O) is pretty much a given- I guess its "possible" for it to stay on, just very improbably from what I know.
    Last edited by kwyckemynd00; 04-11-2007 at 08:30 PM.
  7. Registered User
    Zero Tolerance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,328
    Rep Power
    787

    Reputation

    I have a feeling that whether this discussion remains open or gets locked right now - that we're all going to be in the same place no matter how many pages this discussion goes on.

    Save time and make your decision right now.

    Either continue to buy from IBE. Or don't.

    But don't waste any more time on this discussion. It will not go anywhere.

    Mark my words.. Remember page 3 and refer back to here next year when on the anniversary of the "lab results" thread comes upon us - still going on...
  8. Registered User
    aspire210's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Age
    30
    Posts
    660
    Rep Power
    445

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Nabeshin View Post
    It is of absolutely zero consequence that you don't trust PA, as far as I'm concerned. In fact, it matters almost as little as your opinion of me. He's come up with a figure that a lot of respectable folk have accepted, and IBE has got nothing in return.

    The burden of proof has been met. The burden of rejoinder is now on IBE's shoulders.
    IBE has offered a rebuttal, you refused to accept it. Go back to BB.com and worship PA, since you seem to follow him with blind faith. Remember, hes not allowed over here because he is a drama queen sometimes. Very intelligent as well, but a drama queen none the less.

    I just think its ironic that you can follow one man with blind faith, but will chastise others for doing the same. That and you pretend to know something about the chemistry of all this, but drop a nice cop-out when you are called on it. Good luck on your quest to rid the world of all that which is IBE. I'm going back to my real life for a while, maybe even go workout, but who does that on a bodybuilding forum anyway?
  9. New Member
    evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Age
    33
    Posts
    258
    Rep Power
    256

    Reputation

    Ones morals are there own, and need not be shared with any other individual, for that is their inherent nature.



    If i buy a product and i yeild positive and safe results, that is what matters to ME.

    All i want to know is if whatever is in epi(ibe) is workin better then whatever is in HavoC for the purpose of gyno reduCtion, even from if only an anneCdotal standpoint

    I will ask my question elsewhere as i am not one to engage in arguments, and this thread is going in a direCtion that is no longer of my intrest

    I will leave on a positive note sayin i hope this is resolved pleasantly and this whole situation was a big mistake as i do respeCt both Companies as well as every member on this board

    btw,
    aspire where did you find that avatar?
  10. Registered User
    aspire210's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Age
    30
    Posts
    660
    Rep Power
    445

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00 View Post
    You're rusty on your ochem, my friend

    MW of epistane is 321.

    At the 17th Carbon, oriented axially, there is an alcohol functional group -OH. During mass spectroscopy the -OH pretty much always leaves and takes a proton with it. That's -18 AMU from the total MW of 321. That would be the first thing to go, period.

    That leaves 303 AMU remaining.

    Sulfur, located directly underneath Oxygen on the periodic table (and therefore possessing very similar chemical and physical properties) is also likely to leave (as evidenced by PA's numbers himself, 288 being 321 - 33.) Epistane has an epithio group at 2a,3a. This means that carbons 2 and 3 are bonded to a single sulfur equitorially.

    Sulfur has an MW of about 32 and it would strip a proton as well, making the total MW removed 33 AMU.

    303 - 33 = 270 AMU.

    To recap,
    Epistane contains two functional groups that would likely leave under GC/MS conditions. On is an epithio group and the other is an alcohol. When the alcohol leaves, it takes a proton with it making the total MW loss from the parent molecule 18 AMU. The epithio group would strip a proton with it as well, that takes another 33 away.

    So, methyl-epithiostanol = 321. - SH, -H2O = 270.

    Dr.D is right on this one. I'm actually a bit appauled that PA would lie about it. An M+ of 288 makes absolutely no sense. He would have had to leave the -OH functional group on to get that weight, and -OH leaving and stripping a proton (coming off as H2O) is pretty much a given.
    thank you

    now take a bow.
  11. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2846

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by New Jersey's Science & Technology University
    (2) Alcohol usually have a very weak or non-existent parent ion peak but lose water to give a strong peak at (M-18) (see Fig. 17-11b). Cleavage of the C-C bond next to an oxygen is also common, and primary alcohols always have a strong peak at mass 31 due to the ion CH2=OH+.
    GC Mass Spectroscopy
  12. Board Sponsor
    rpen22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    3,702
    Rep Power
    11091

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00 View Post
    Dr.D is right on this one. I'm actually a bit appauled that PA would lie about it. An M+ of 288 makes absolutely no sense. He would have had to leave the -OH functional group on to get that weight, and -OH leaving and stripping a proton (coming off as H2O) is pretty much a given.
    Wow! Nice work Kwycke!
  13. Registered User
    RedwolfWV's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  185 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Age
    50
    Posts
    3,258
    Rep Power
    1986

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00 View Post
    You're rusty on your ochem, my friend

    MW of epistane is 321.

    At the 17th Carbon, oriented axially, there is an alcohol functional group -OH. During mass spectroscopy the -OH pretty much always leaves and takes a proton with it. That's -18 AMU from the total MW of 321. That would be the first thing to go, period.

    That leaves 303 AMU remaining.

    Sulfur, located directly underneath Oxygen on the periodic table (and therefore possessing very similar chemical and physical properties) is also likely to leave (as evidenced by PA's numbers himself, 288 being 321 - 33.) Epistane has an epithio group at 2a,3a. This means that carbons 2 and 3 are bonded to a single sulfur equitorially.

    Sulfur has an MW of about 32 and it would strip a proton as well, making the total MW removed 33 AMU.

    303 - 33 = 270 AMU.

    To recap,
    Epistane contains two functional groups that would likely leave under GC/MS conditions. On is an epithio group and the other is an alcohol. When the alcohol leaves, it takes a proton with it making the total MW loss from the parent molecule 18 AMU. The epithio group would strip a proton with it as well, that takes another 33 away.

    So, methyl-epithiostanol = 321. - SH, -H2O = 270.

    Dr.D is right on this one. I'm actually a bit appauled that PA would lie about it. An M+ of 288 makes absolutely no sense. He would have had to leave the -OH functional group on to get that weight, and -OH leaving and stripping a proton (coming off as H2O) is pretty much a given.


    Excellent post. THANK YOU!
  14. Registered User
    Nabeshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Age
    30
    Posts
    287
    Rep Power
    261

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00 View Post
    You're rusty on your ochem, my friend
    Man, I never had it. I'm a physics guy, remember?

    Dr.D is right on this one. I'm actually a bit appauled that PA would lie about it. An M+ of 288 makes absolutely no sense. He would have had to leave the -OH functional group on to get that weight, and -OH leaving and stripping a proton (coming off as H2O) is pretty much a given.
    Well now things are just totally ****ed. Your explanation makes perfect sense, so why did you have to be the one to make it? Couldn't D have rattled that off in his first post? And if you're right, then was PA being ignorant, incompetent, or malicious?

    Crikey.
  15. New Member
    Chemist2234's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    187
    Rep Power
    187

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00 View Post
    You're rusty on your ochem, my friend

    MW of epistane is 321.

    At the 17th Carbon, oriented axially, there is an alcohol functional group -OH. During mass spectroscopy the -OH pretty much always leaves and takes a proton with it. That's -18 AMU from the total MW of 321. That would be the first thing to go, period.

    That leaves 303 AMU remaining.

    Sulfur, located directly underneath Oxygen on the periodic table (and therefore possessing very similar chemical and physical properties) is also likely to leave (as evidenced by PA's numbers himself, 288 being 321 - 33.) Epistane has an epithio group at 2a,3a. This means that carbons 2 and 3 are bonded to a single sulfur equitorially.

    Sulfur has an MW of about 32 and it would strip a proton as well, making the total MW removed 33 AMU.

    303 - 33 = 270 AMU.

    To recap,
    Epistane contains two functional groups that would likely leave under GC/MS conditions. On is an epithio group and the other is an alcohol. When the alcohol leaves, it takes a proton with it making the total MW loss from the parent molecule 18 AMU. The epithio group would strip a proton with it as well, that takes another 33 away.

    So, methyl-epithiostanol = 321. - SH, -H2O = 270.

    Dr.D is right on this one. I'm actually a bit appauled that PA would lie about it. An M+ of 288 makes absolutely no sense. He would have had to leave the -OH functional group on to get that weight, and -OH leaving and stripping a proton (coming off as H2O) is pretty much a given.
    DANM YOU....you beat me to it....i hate being at class and missing all the fun...reps man
  16. New Member
    Chemist2234's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    187
    Rep Power
    187

    Reputation

    D didn't rattle it all off because he did in the other thread...but most people ignored it because they don't understand chem.
  17. Registered User
    Nabeshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Age
    30
    Posts
    287
    Rep Power
    261

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by aspire210 View Post
    IBE has offered a rebuttal, you refused to accept it.
    Where, pray tell? I don't even see a link to one in this thread.

    Go back to BB.com and worship PA, since you seem to follow him with blind faith.
    Do we really need to do this?
  18. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2846

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Nabeshin View Post
    Well now things are just totally ****ed. Your explanation makes perfect sense, so why did you have to be the one to make it? Couldn't D have rattled that off in his first post? And if you're right, then was PA being ignorant, incompetent, or malicious?

    Crikey.
    Dr.D has mentioned this before. I think he even referenced his post where he explained it all.

    He called the M+ long before these results were ever posted.
  19. Board Sponsor
    rpen22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    3,702
    Rep Power
    11091

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Nabeshin View Post
    Where, pray tell? I don't even see a link to one in this thread.
    This is a quote from D in the other thread that got locked. It's on page 17.

    "Let's think about results for a minute. For example, take a compound with a molecular weight of 321 that possesses an episulfide and a hydroxyl function, which are it's two most libel groups in a GC/MS fragmentation. When injected into a testing system (reference my GC/MS tutorial on p.10), what would be the most likely result? The parent less the hydroxyl less the episulfide which would strip a proton with it (320.53-17.01-32.07-1.01=270.45~270) leaving an ion which would resemble the non alcoholic version of DMT (2-ene). Also, imagine that this product is 99+% pure and that the results and logs are stellar by almost all who try it."
  20. Registered User
    Nabeshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Age
    30
    Posts
    287
    Rep Power
    261

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00 View Post
    Dr.D has mentioned this before. I think he even referenced his post where he explained it all.

    He called the M+ long before these results were ever posted.
    He said it's in the thread that got locked. That's a 22 page thread, and I can't get a search query on "270" to hit anything. This probably goes for everybody who was late to the party like myself. I wish he would have just quoted himself, but c'est la vie, the info is out there now courtesy of our local ice cream hog.

    My assessment of the situation is that neither 270 nor 288 is a terribly suspect MW. I'm not sure what impact this has on the 3.8mg of active per cap situation --- my guess is not much --- but that's far less serious.

    Where this goes next I have no idea.
  21. Diamond Member
    Jayhawkk's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  230 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Age
    39
    Posts
    12,789
    Rep Power
    11678

    Reputation

    Whitedevil stay off the ad hominem attacks.
  22. Registered User
    Nabeshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Age
    30
    Posts
    287
    Rep Power
    261

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by rpen22 View Post
    This is a quote from D in the other thread that got locked. It's on page 17.

    "Let's think about results for a minute. For example, take a compound with a molecular weight of 321 that possesses an episulfide and a hydroxyl function, which are it's two most libel groups in a GC/MS fragmentation. When injected into a testing system (reference my GC/MS tutorial on p.10), what would be the most likely result? The parent less the hydroxyl less the episulfide which would strip a proton with it (320.53-17.01-32.07-1.01=270.45~270) leaving an ion which would resemble the non alcoholic version of DMT (2-ene). Also, imagine that this product is 99+% pure and that the results and logs are stellar by almost all who try it."
    Thanks for digging this up.

    Now, remember that scene in Pulp Fiction after Butch sliced up the the first hill billy rapist and Marsellus blew the nuts off of the other?

    "What now?"
  23. West Coast Highland Athlete
    sean taylor's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  270 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    519
    Rep Power
    389

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayhawkk View Post
    Whitedevil stay off the ad hominem attacks.
    LOL..I am taking an ethics class...

    And morals are societal in nature...ethics are more individual in nature.
  24. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2846

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Fast400 View Post
    For those that wonder about the 288 reference, as PA stated:

    yes the results for havoc show that the stuff contains a compuond that has a MW of 288. 288 is the correct MW for the methylepistanol (it desulfurizes in the injection port to give 288)

    So the compound starts out with a higher MW, but when it desulfurizes in the injection port, it goes to 288.
    Ahhh! He did explicitly state it! That clears up a lot for me.
    Last edited by kwyckemynd00; 04-11-2007 at 06:33 PM.
  25. Board Sponsor
    rpen22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    3,702
    Rep Power
    11091

    Reputation

    It just got uncharacteristically quiet over at BB with your ar***** Kwycke.
  26. board observer
    Moyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Age
    31
    Posts
    879
    Rep Power
    572

    Reputation

    Thanks a lot kwyck.

    I was gonna ask what this means for Havoc & Hemaguno, since they had 288 according to PA, but I don't think we can take his word for anything right now.
  27. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2846

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by rpen22 View Post
    It just got uncharacteristically quiet over at BB with your ar***** Kwycke.
    LOL. I noticed the board shut down.

    You know what sucks though? PA and Carcinogen are much more knowledgeable chemists than I am. So, regardless of the fact that I may be right, if they decide to make me look stupid--they can. hahaha.

    There is a grad student (Ph.D student, chemistry) over there, whom I believe would be honest about it all, beejis60. He's already confirmed the 270 M+ is legit.

    I'm just waiting for PA and Carcinogen to get on and start trashing me, then it'll turn into a km00 gangbang on bb.com.

  28. Registered User
    Nabeshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Age
    30
    Posts
    287
    Rep Power
    261

    Reputation

    So if Epistane has the right stuff --- albeit underdosed --- then what the hell does Havoc have? Even if both products contain the same active, and even if that active is finicky about losing its hydroxyl in GC/MS, why would Havoc consistently yield a MW of 288 and Epistane a MW of 270?

    For ****'s sake, what the **** is in my pills!?
  29. Registered User
    somewhatgifted's Avatar
    Stats
    6'2"  210 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    4,390
    Rep Power
    2334

    Reputation

    Epi is what is had been since day 1, but some people have shown their chemical makeup in the process, this thread and the others, have only succeded in one thing name calling.
  30. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2846

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Nabeshin View Post
    So if Epistane has the right stuff --- albeit underdosed --- then what the hell does Havoc have? Even if both products contain the same active, and even if that active is finicky about losing its hydroxyl in GC/MS, why would Havoc consistently yield a MW of 288 and Epistane a MW of 270?

    For ****'s sake, what the **** is in my pills!?
    Its entirely possible its the same ingredient IIIIFFFFFFFFF, which I don't know, its possible that the Sulfur could leave the parent molecule and the alcohol could stay on, which would give an M+ of 288.

    From my "limited" knowledge, it is VERY UNLIKELY that an M+ of 288 would result because the alcohol SHOULD leave.

    There are tons of steroids with MW's of 288. Could be one of many things--and still, its STILL possible that you can get a result of 288.

    Nothing has been "proved" here, other than epistane WAS NOT disproved.
  31. Senior Member
    rugger48's Avatar
    Stats
    6'2"  245 lbs.
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Age
    44
    Posts
    1,061
    Rep Power
    45135

    Reputation

    I just thought Id throw this out there, if anybody has got MD magazine of may 2007 on page 338 there is a page and a half article on havoc and epistane. Pretty informative.
  32. Banned
    1Fast400's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    560
    Rep Power
    0

    Reputation

    I can't comment on the chemistry aspect. I've sent PA a link to the bb.com post. What KWY says makes perfect logical sense. That has been the issue and why I've asked, how do you get 270 when others had 288. I simply said I would get the results and post them, I have.

    With the MW solved, I'll be curious what is said about the content issue. The lab says that number is within 20% of being accurate. That makes those pills almost 5mg. If that was done, that would allow a company to make twice as many bottles from the same amount of material.
  33. Senior Member
    Bionic's Avatar
    Stats
    6'5"  227 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,685
    Rep Power
    985

    Reputation

    Now, you're accusing them of purposely under-dosing? Will this sh!t never end???
  34. Registered User
    Nabeshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Age
    30
    Posts
    287
    Rep Power
    261

    Reputation

    All of a sudden, epistane is starting to look like the control, not the variable, at least as far as the MW goes.

    Kwyck, chem is for masochists. I'm trying to decode this IUPAC nonsense so I can calculate the theoretical MW for my damn self. Insanity.
  35. Banned
    1Fast400's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    560
    Rep Power
    0

    Reputation

    Now, you're accusing them of purposely under-dosing? Will this sh!t never end???
    I'm not ACCUSING them of anything. I'm looking at an independent report that says their product has 3.8mg per cap (with an accuracy within 20%). That is looking at the facts in front of me and making a statement. Such that if a cap was to contain 5mg, instead of 10mg, you could double your production.
  36. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2846

    Reputation

    From my interpretation of the results, MM has a valid reason to suggest looking into the measured actives. It does clearly say that 3.8mg was recovered and 10mg is claimed.

    That, however, IS A VERY MINOR quality control issue in comparison to having the wrong compound altogether.
  37. Professional Member
    jminis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    4,023
    Rep Power
    2186

    Reputation

    Very interesting turn of events here. Kwyck well done.
  38. Senior Member
    Bionic's Avatar
    Stats
    6'5"  227 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,685
    Rep Power
    985

    Reputation

    Outstanding, Kwyke.
  39. Banned
    1Fast400's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    560
    Rep Power
    0

    Reputation

    Luckily my part here is done . I said I'd get the results and post them. I have. In closing (as there is nothing more for me to do at this point), I'd like to tell Neo, poopster and friction to please kiss my white hairy ass. I know we aren't supposed to attack people on here, but you dudes rode my ass for 2 weeks about posting results. I said I'd post them and I did.
  40. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2846

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Fast400 View Post
    Luckily my part here is done . I said I'd get the results and post them. I have. In closing (as there is nothing more for me to do at this point), I'd like to tell Neo, poopster and friction to please kiss my white hairy ass. I know we aren't supposed to attack people on here, but you dudes rode my ass for 2 weeks about posting results. I said I'd post them and I did.
    Well, you did what you said you would and that's all that should be expected of you.

    If you don't like IBE/Dr.D, that's your prerogative.
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Epistane testing results
    By 1Fast400 in forum Supplements
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 04-11-2007, 12:04 PM
  2. blood test result and why is my test so low?
    By WATERLOGGED in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 01-29-2004, 10:28 PM
  3. r-ALA testing results
    By ex_banana-eater in forum Supplements
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 10-19-2003, 06:22 AM
  4. Methyl-1-test results
    By TheTom in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-16-2003, 01:31 PM
  5. Injectable 1-Test results?
    By GangstaJDog in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-24-2003, 04:26 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