Janoshik Analytical

[propionate]

@“Janoshik” what’s your estimated testing turnaround these days? I’m wanting to send in some tabs for testing but have heard a few people have recently had long wait times (month plus)

Thanks in advance

 

[Janoshik]

propionate" pid='62118' dateline='1563923298:

@“Janoshik” what’s your estimated testing turnaround these days? I’m wanting to send in some tabs for testing but have heard a few people have recently had long wait times (month plus)

Thanks in advance

Hello

7 days is the average. I don’t recall anybody having turnaround more than 14 days in over a year with routine samples, usch as AAS.

Would it be possible to let me know who has such claims or the report numbers involved?

Thank you.

• Jano

 

[zdawnz]

Do you test for mk677?

 

[Janoshik]

zdawnz" pid='65171' dateline='1565961813:

Do you test for mk677?

Yes, it’s one of the routine analyses.

 

[Janoshik]

JustSteve" pid='72294' dateline='1571416581:

Jano is great. Whoopsie, missed a compound the first time around but now that you mention it was supposed to have Mast E in it, it does look like Mast E is there… um… imma gonna guess 206mg??? O__o

How do you miss a peak on the GC?

I don’t even use GC, funny guy. Why don’t you come school me into my own thread?

www.janoshik.com/853.pdf

Care to provide more of your insights on the raw data of the sample? Let’s start with taking a wild guess about which peak is drostanolone enanthate in there.

 

[Dexter]

Janoshik" pid='72446' dateline='1571498781:

I don’t even use GC, funny guy. Why don’t you come school me into my own thread?

www.janoshik.com/853.pdf

Care to provide more of your insights on the raw data of the sample? Let’s start with taking a wild guess about which peak is drostanolone enanthate in there.

I think he meant HPLC and only you would know which peak is attached to Mast-E.

You’re the one that ran known standards and assigned peaks, how would any of us know this?

Jano there’s no problem with just being nice and explaining what you do, you are very defensive and you have attached your work to ego, but no one knows who you are, you are just bits typed out on a computer screen to us, why attach an ego to that?

Transparency is how you win trust. Not coming on here and laughing at the ignorance of people when they don’t posses your very specialized knowledge.

Besides I’d imagine you have at least an undergrad chemistry degree or higher, you’re a professional, you’re supposed to be at least an SD higher on the IQ curve then the average steroid junkie, you gotta be above all this and just calmly explain everything to the neanderthals.

 

[Masterofron]

Dexter" pid='72484' dateline='1571516811:

Janoshik" pid='72446' dateline='1571498781:

I don’t even use GC, funny guy. Why don’t you come school me into my own thread?

www.janoshik.com/853.pdf

Care to provide more of your insights on the raw data of the sample? Let’s start with taking a wild guess about which peak is drostanolone enanthate in there.

I think he meant HPLC and only you would know which peak is attached to Mast-E.

You’re the the one that ran known standards and assigned the peaks, how would any of us know this?

Jano there’s no problem with just being nice and explaining what you do, you are very defensive and you have attached your work to ego, but no one knows who you are, you are just bits typed out on a computer screen to us, why attach an ego to that?

Transparency is how you win trust. Not coming on here and laughing at the ignorance of people when they don’t posses your very specialized knowledge.

Um… I’m not tryna defend him or is testing in any way (everyone can have their own opinion on that) but jano doesn’t really hide dude… Plenty of people have seen him, and last time he went through some bullshit with Sparta, plenty of people saw his dick out, next to his lab equipment, time stamped… Basically all I’m saying is that he’s not this “hidden anon internet guy” you seem to think he is lol.

 

[Janoshik]

Dexter" pid='72484' dateline='1571516811:

Janoshik" pid='72446' dateline='1571498781:

I don’t even use GC, funny guy. Why don’t you come school me into my own thread?

www.janoshik.com/853.pdf

Care to provide more of your insights on the raw data of the sample? Let’s start with taking a wild guess about which peak is drostanolone enanthate in there.

I think he meant HPLC and only you would know which peak is attached to Mast-E.

You’re the the one that ran known standards and assigned the peaks, how would any of us know this?

Jano there’s no problem with just being nice and explaining what you do, you are very defensive and you have attached your work to ego, but no one knows who you are, you are just bits typed out on a computer screen to us, why attach an ego to that?

Transparency is how you win trust. Not coming on here and laughing at the ignorance of people when they don’t posses your very specialized knowledge.

There’s quite a bit of a difference between the two techniques and I asked the rhetorical question with explicit use of “wild guess” in it to better illustrate how exactly can one miss a peak in noise.

I’m fairly sure that is rather clear to most.

 

[Dexter]

Not being difficult just curious.

After you detected the small peak that you thought might be noise and assigned it to Mast-E, then how do you go about quantifying it? Do you do something to amplify the signal for Mast-E, can you get a reading off such a small peak?

I don’t run HPLC equipment so I wouldn’t know.

 

[Janoshik]

Dexter" pid='72488' dateline='1571518590:

Not being difficult just curious.

After you detected the small peak that you thought might be noise and assigned it to Mast-E, then how do you go about quantifying it? Do you do something to amplify the signal for Mast-E, can you get a reading off such a small peak?

I don’t run HPLC equipment so I wouldn’t know.

You zoom in, manually integrate it, check spectrum purity, choose suitable wavelength and quantitate.

In case that doesn’t work, you either shoot more sample in the HPLC or you modify the method, first by changing mobile phase - either gradient or even composition, or you modify stationary phase, or play with other variables. If that doesn’t work, you give up, because the costs are already far over the profit from a single sample and you offer a refund.

That’s the usual process with troublesome analytes.

 

[Dexter]

Janoshik" pid='72489' dateline='1571519348:

You zoom in, manually integrate it, check spectrum purity, choose suitable wavelength and quantitate.

In case that doesn’t work, you either shoot more sample in the HPLC or you modify the method, first by changing mobile phase - either gradient or even composition, or you modify stationary phase, or play with other variables. If that doesn’t work, you give up, because the costs are already far over the profit from a single sample and you offer a refund.

That’s the usual process with troublesome analytes.

So you have software that blows up the peak to integrate under the curve?

So with a peak so small how would you check spectrum purity, does it spill over into none distinct peaks. Not completely clear on this?

And I guess you set the wavelength to zero in on that spectrum of mast-e?

Increase sample size or just repeat the same sample and see if the test repeats?

Mobile phase impacts what arrives at the detector?

So did I understand this right?

 

[Wurrgle]

Hi Jano,

Do you have access to an ICP or any way of testing for heavy metal contamination?

…for that matter is this even advisable?

 

[Janoshik]

Wurrgle" pid='72938' dateline='1571890151:

Hi Jano,

Do you have access to an ICP or any way of testing for heavy metal contamination?

…for that matter is this even advisable?

Hello,

Yes I do have access to ICP-MS (or AAS and that thing thats done for mercury, not really sure how it’s called of the top off my head). However the waiting times are brutal and I don’t even advise people to have it done.

I used to have simple access to ICPMS a few years ago and none of AAS samples ever contained nearly enough to cause any sort of issues.

• Jano

 

[Wurrgle]

Thank you - if that’s the advice I’ll hold off.

 

[Janoshik]

u wot m8

 

[Dexter]

A question for Janoshik.

Lets say LE caught you with this blend:

TNE 4.5%
Test Ace 18%
Test Prop 18%
Test PhenylProp 15%
Test Cypionate 22.5%
Test Undecanoate 15%
Masteron-E 6.7%

1. Would they be able to tell what all of these are individually based on peaks and retention times?
2. Would this screw up the baseline with too many peaks in close proximity?

Lets assume this is both raw powder and oil.

Would the chromatogram throw LE off or would they use another form of analyses that would allow them to separate each of these esters?

This is a real blend that I have created on my own. Just curious if someone were to put more compounds together would it make it damn near impossible to determine for certain the analytes being tested and the quantification of each?

 

[Janoshik]

Dexter" pid='78647' dateline='1578628274:

A question for Janoshik.

Lets say LE caught you with this blend:

TNE 4.5%
Test Ace 18%
Test Prop 18%
Test PhenylProp 15%
Test Cypionate 22.5%
Test Undecanoate 15%
Masteron-E 6.7%

1. Would they be able to tell what all of these are individually based on peaks and retention times?
2. Would this screw up the baseline with too many peaks in close proximity?

Lets assume this is both raw powder and oil.

Would the chromatogram throw LE off or would they use another form of analyses that would allow them to separate each of these esters?

This is a real blend that I have created on my own. Just curious if someone were to put more compounds together would it make it damn near impossible to determine for certain the analytes being tested and the quantification of each?

LE doesn’t do that kind of stuff. They don’t care about concentration and can do with a HUGE margin error.

They either just point a raman or FTIR handheld machine on it and it spits out names of all the substances or they do GCMS, which again, spits out the name of substances. That covers 99% of cases.

FTIR, Raman and GCMS (the way LE uses it) is pretty much useless for determining concentration. They don’t care if it’s 50 mg/ml or 900 mg/ml, very little difference for them.

Also, 30 year old GC / GCMS can separate all those peaks to baseline without any problem.

 

[Dexter]

Thanks Jano.

 

[Janoshik]

Always happy to help.

 

[Supermanlet9100]

What information comes out of the testing done on oils and pills? I’ve seen sources post reports from you on the purity % of their raws, but that’s not the info I’d be wanting as a user.

Do you get the concentration (in mg/ml) of oils? Or equivalently, how much active ingredient is in a pill?

I’ll be looking to get some Primo tested soon (never bought it before now, and know it’s common to underdose or counterfeit). Also thinking about throwing in a couple other samples from my regular UGLs out of curiosity.