Testing products

[Johnny Cut]

i would also like people to find another lab to have stuff tested............

 

[Juice Authority]

Johnny -

I'll email you the contact info of a good reputable lab that you might want to use.

Do any Mods here have any thoughts, comments or suggestions on this?

 

[Juice Authority]

I agree. I am in, but the hardest thing, IMO, is getting people to actually send the money in.

I don't think so. Think about it. If someone really wants to get a specific product tested and now they have an option to do it at 1/10 the cost why wouldn't they? It costs anywhere from $75-120 dollars to have a prduct tested. That cost split between 10 or 15 is nominal and everyone benefits.

 

[Big BX]

Mostly UG labs. I don't think we need to test QV, Upjohn, and other established pharmaceutical companies. EF wouldn't have to be involved in the actual sending of the sample to the lab. One of us could do that.

EF would potentially be the forum for gathering the information on what product is to be tested, collects the money from those interested in having it tested (minus their fee of course), sends the funds to the lab to have the product tested and then displays the results in a specific forum. There are also many lab reports floating around out there that we can complile and create an online database that could be part of this particular forum.

I agree. I am in, but the hardest thing, IMO, is getting people to actually send the money in.

 

[JKerry]

i wouldn't have a problem throwing a couple bucks to the cause. as long as it's products that i have the potential to use.

jkerry

 

[Juice Authority]

Another thing guys...

If we have several people participating an equal amount of $$ to get this done we could actually get 10-15 products tested for the cost one would incur to get just one product tested assuming there are at least 10 to 15 people willing to through some money to the cause.

Normally it's one person that incurs the cost of getting a product tested then that person posts up the lab report and everyone benefits. This way if we all contribute we can get more tests done so if there a product that were interested in trying down the road we can make an educated, informed decision on whether or not to buy it. Usually you have to buy the product first then get it tested. By then, if the test comes back poorly you're not only the money you paid for the product, you're out the money it cost you to get it tested. That's a double wammy!

 

[SofaGeorge]

This idea has been floated MANY times in the past. It fails every time it gets running for the same reasons:

1. Fakes. The real TTykko cyp gets tested and gets a great review. Then the fakes hit the market with matching bottles.

2. Lot runs. Most UG AAS are made in very small runs... 1,000 bottles at a time. Most vet drugs are made in max 10,000 unit runs. If one LOT gets a great test... that does not indicate next months quality.

3. Selective testing. UG Labs chronically have a friend test a select bottle of their goods to insure a positive posted test.

4. Which product to test? Donation funds are always limited... and you've got 30 different donors all on different cycles wanting the $200 in the kitty to go towards testing their next cycle... but they are the only ones who want Brovel deca and IP masterone tested.

This is an idea that will eventually work. I'm not shooting it down. It will work when one site dedicates a significant resource to ongoing testing. It isn't going to happen with a bunch of posters chipping in their lunch money.

 

[Juice Authority]

This idea has been floated MANY times in the past. It fails every time it gets running for the same reasons:

1. Fakes. The real TTykko cyp gets tested and gets a great review. Then the fakes hit the market with matching bottles.

2. Lot runs. Most UG AAS are made in very small runs... 1,000 bottles at a time. Most vet drugs are made in max 10,000 unit runs. If one LOT gets a great test... that does not indicate next months quality.

3. Selective testing. UG Labs chronically have a friend test a select bottle of their goods to insure a positive posted test.

4. Which product to test? Donation funds are always limited... and you've got 30 different donors all on different cycles wanting the $200 in the kitty to go towards testing their next cycle... but they are the only ones who want Brovel deca and IP masterone tested.

This is an idea that will eventually work. I'm not shooting it down. It will work when one site dedicates a significant resource to ongoing testing. It isn't going to happen with a bunch of posters chipping in their lunch money.

sofa,

As always your input is appreciated. I do however feel that your points 1-3 can be avoided in its entirety and point 4 is definitely addressable.

1) Fakes. The real TTykko cyp gets tested and gets a great review. Then the fakes hit the market with matching bottles.

We would simply test of one of the TToyko Cyp products that are already in circulation.

2) Lot runs. Most UG AAS are made in very small runs... 1,000 bottles at a time. Most vet drugs are made in max 10,000 unit runs. If one LOT gets a great test... that does not indicate next months quality.

I don't see the value in testing vet drugs that are made by legitimate drug companies. This would pertain to UG labs only and the lab itself would not know that their product is being tested until after the test is performed.

3) Selective testing. UG Labs chronically have a friend test a select bottle of their goods to insure a positive posted test.

We would randomly decide on who sends the sample to the lab so it would be impossible to insure a positive result since the lab will have no knowledge of what vial/bottle is being tested.

4) Which product to test? Donation funds are always limited... and you've got 30 different donors all on different cycles wanting the $200 in the kitty to go towards testing their next cycle... but they are the only ones who want Brovel deca and IP masterone tested.

Instead of pooling the money in a "donation fund" the people who are requesting a certain product be tested would split the costs. EF can provide the platform for that discussion by simply posting a thread in the "lab request" forum and those that are interested in seeing the test results of that product would equally participate in the cost of getting it tested.

There is a solution here and it doesn't have to be so convoluted. When ordering from a UG lab, it's a crapshoot especially if it is a relatively new lab. The value proposition here is pretty straightforward and simple and I'm sure there would be plenty of people here that would want to see the lab report on a product before they spend their hard earned cash. It's like an insurance policy that you're actually getting what you're paying for. The fact that UG labs make products in small runs is all the more reason why we should get their products tested. The smaller the run the less margin for error.

 

[Citruscide]

I do see a problem with Elite Fitness's Endorsement of a AAS testing. At least from a legal standpoint... I mean, giving advice on cycles, explaining the effects and differences of the various anabolics is one thing... it is educational.

However, actually testing products and then posting results for people takes it a step further... if a member of the board were to do it, it wouldn't be an EF Endorsement, so to say, but rather, an individual (representing many?) who took time on his own to test AAS, preferably someone who lives in a country where this is legal?

Now, if a bunch of people wanted to pool together money to get various UG Labs tested, I wouldn't have a problem with that. And then people, after the fact, who wanted the results, could chip in. I don't think it'd be fair to the people who paid for everyone to get the results.

But as far as a forum which would be dedicated toward this... I'm not sure how I feel about it... on one hand, it is highly informative... it is information... but on the other hand, it is a more physical involvement than sheer information, because EF would be taking part in the "handling" of the AAS for testing purposes... rather than a 3rd party member.

With that being said... I also agree with SG's "batch" point... different batches yeild different results... however, batches do tend to be SOMEWHAT stable... there is much evidence to the contrary however.

The best testing usually comes from member usage... if 50 members are using a particular product and are getting dynamic results... it is usually a good indicator that the product is good. It is usually what I go by...

Hope this helps JA.

C-ditty

 

[wetback]

I would be willing ot kick in. $50-$100 is nothing if you know it's ligit.

How do you usually get it tested ??? Is it a mail order type of thing or a local pharm type thing ???