Epistane testing results
- 04-11-2007, 11:43 AM
- 04-11-2007, 11:44 AM
- 04-11-2007, 11:45 AM
04-11-2007, 11:53 AM
Before this thread reaches 20 pages, could someone explain what this paragraph means:
ThanksThe major peak found
has a retention time of 20.48 min and has a major ion of 270. The peak did not match any know
standard we have in-house, and did not match any compound in NIST or Wiley mass spectral
libraries; therefore we cannot identify the compound. A reference standard of the labeled
compound could not be obtained from our typical supplier. Using a similar compound, we
quantified the amount relative to a reference standard of certified 99 % pure analytical standard
of Testosterone to provide an estimated amount per capsule.
04-11-2007, 11:58 AM
A quote from PA on bb.com:
Bodybuilding.com Forums - View Single Post - Epistane Testing Resultsyes 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)
otoh this mass spectrum that mike posted here has a MW of 270.
all of this i knew for a long time as we tested it and saw the same thing
04-11-2007, 12:03 PM
04-11-2007, 12:16 PM
So in theory, each molecule of epistane weighs 288 units. But the most abundant substance in the sample tested weighed 270 units, which means that it is not the same thing as it was claimed to be. Correct?
Then they quantify the amount of that stuff, that apparently weighs 270, by comparing it with test, which weighs 288. I don't understand that part.
04-11-2007, 12:31 PM
04-11-2007, 12:35 PM
This was the labs response to me when I asked if the pills only contained 3.8mg of activeThat's the amount we found. The label says it should be 10 mg. But remember, it is referenced against a standard of testosterone and is probably close, within 20% of that value. We would need a pure standard of the substance to be closer.
04-11-2007, 12:40 PM
Thanks for posting the results Mike even though I'll have to wait to see what the hell it all means other than the basic stuff that's already been mentioned.
To everyone in this thread remember to keep it clean and discuss results etc without it getting dirty.
04-11-2007, 12:51 PM
04-11-2007, 12:53 PM
04-11-2007, 01:05 PM
04-11-2007, 01:05 PM
I haven't opened my bottle of Epistane yet... I wonder if I should take twice the dose as others. Or since everybody got their results on probably the same amount - maybe I shouldn't? Any thoughts on that? Thats my only question...
If everybody has had around 8mg per serving (2 caps) - with great results.. Maybe I should just stick to that...
04-11-2007, 01:07 PM
04-11-2007, 01:09 PM
04-11-2007, 01:13 PM
IBE sent that letter out to distributors claiming Havoc was 60% pure and their's was 95%. I'm curious what lab they used. This lab didn't have the standard for it. It has been over 2 weeks now and we're still waiting on a "coc" letter. If you notice in this report, the COC is clearly addressed so I me thinks IBE never had a third party test.
04-11-2007, 01:15 PM
This is a solid report on Epi and there's nothing to argue really. Also, remember that the low mg/cap is an "estimated amount" in the words of the lab that made this report, because it is not a real number but rather an extrapolated value based off a different standard. That means error is to be expected necessarily without a true reference standard to calculate from. More importantly, an internal standard is required in order to really quantitate anything. Without the % recovery from an internal, surrogate standard doped in both the blank injection and the sample injection, you have no idea what the system efficiency is anyway, so take that with a serious grain of salt and Alston would tell you the same thing if you contacted him. That number means squat and Mike is only trying to make it seem important so he doesn't look like a total ass (too late for that though) at this point after all this drama and no proof of anything now.
Nice try Mike, but you still didn't prove a damn thing was wrong with Epi. Now if you're smart, you'll move on and pray to God that IBE doesn't decide to blow the whistles on all your little buddies with their crappy results that don't even come close to the ones you posted for Epi. If you keep on after this though, you will get what you deserve, believe that.
04-11-2007, 01:20 PM
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)?
04-11-2007, 01:23 PM
didnt it say within 20%?
how does a lab even get a standard of pure legit stuff to test to?thats an honest question as im wondering?threats,anger,condem nation..how very VERY 'christian' of you.i am sickened by hypocritical 'christian' or other religious bull****ters such as yourself.
so its turn the other cheek,or an eye for an eye,depending on the situation eh?PLEASE REFRAIN FROM PERSONAL ATTACKS.
in regards to the majority of your post as a whole.
Last edited by yeahright; 04-12-2007 at 02:46 PM.
04-11-2007, 01:25 PM
If he can give a logical reason for why his product comes out with a 270MW when the other two compounds come out with a 288MW, then everything should be fine. Nobody I've spoken with, outside of an IBE employee, can explain how a compound with a 270MW CAN be epistane. If he can explain that, then the results will support their claim
04-11-2007, 01:26 PM
This test makes a strong case for Epistane being greatly impure. If that is not actually the situation, IBE and co. would be well advised to make a contrary argument that is at least as strong. Hand-waving about reading between the lines of 10 page locked threads is not such an argument.
04-11-2007, 01:28 PM
04-11-2007, 01:29 PM
288 is the molecular weight of testosterone BTW, a controlled substance that does not belong in a dietary supp. That ion is NOT in the IBE product and not my concern, that's somebody else's nightmare!
RTP already said they could not id 270 so who cares what PA says? He admitted to having no standard also.
04-11-2007, 01:32 PM
D, here is a simple question:
Can you give a logical explanation for why your product has a MW of 270? Given that a MW of 288 can be explained and justified as the correct compound. Both threads will end as soon as you can explain this. There will be no fighting after that.
04-11-2007, 01:33 PM
04-11-2007, 01:33 PM
04-11-2007, 01:34 PM
04-11-2007, 01:35 PM
04-11-2007, 01:37 PM
I think its time for IBE to make a rebuttal consisting of their test results/info/official statement
Similar Forum Threads
- By 1Fast400 in forum SupplementsReplies: 41Last Post: 04-11-2007, 02:04 PM
- By WATERLOGGED in forum AnabolicsReplies: 34Last Post: 01-30-2004, 12:28 AM
- By ex_banana-eater in forum SupplementsReplies: 14Last Post: 10-19-2003, 08:22 AM
- By TheTom in forum AnabolicsReplies: 6Last Post: 09-16-2003, 03:31 PM
- By GangstaJDog in forum AnabolicsReplies: 1Last Post: 08-24-2003, 06:26 PM