+ 28 Mass Spec Explained~Sleight of hand exposed
It is time for a little education on mass spectrometry testing, I hope you all find it useful and for those that don’t perhaps you’ll find it interesting. I will keep it as simple as possible without getting too technical.
There are several different types of testing in the mass spectrometry world and we are gonna focus on two for right now. They are the most common results that we see here on this site. They are the HPLC Column test and the Spectrum test. While each one has its purpose and is useful in its own way, without being applied correctly they can be very misleading. At the heart of these tests is the molecular weight of the compound being tested. The spectrum test identifies all the ions within a sample based on their molecular weight within a predefined range. 0-800m/z is the range that all anabolic steroids fall between with the oil, BA, and BB being outside that scope. The molecular weight of the target compound is compared to a known sample to verify the compound is present. Once that is verified we take the quotient of the target compound (X) and the total of unknown ions that make up all the other molecular weights (Y) to arrive at a purity (X/Y). The density of the target compound relative to the suspension is again compared to a known sample to verify if the correct dosage has been made. While that measurement is accurate, it cannot be exact. That is more of a function of the HPLC column test.
The HPLC column test differs from the spectrum test in that it separates all the ions that pass through it and separates them into different groups where it then tests the purity of that individual group. This process is extremely useful for identifying an unknown substance in a compound, as well as it is very precise for showing a dosage. It does not calculate the amount of target compound compared to the other substances in the sample, therefore, the purity calculation that it performs is only on the target compound. (When I say target compound I am referring to the one that we are most interested in such as test or tren.) This purity percentage is very misleading since people think that it is an overall purity, which is not true. To oversimplify it:
Full Spectrum Testing: 10 people in a room, 2 blondes, 8 brunettes = 80% brunettes
HPLC Column testing: 10 People in a room, 2 blondes, 8 brunettes. 2 blondes are put in a different room and now = 100% brunettes.
Now that all that has been defined I get a lot of PM’s from people and sources that are excited because they just got an amazing find from a standup guy in China that wants to send them 99.9% pure raw material and has tests to prove it. When that raw material is put through the spectrum test they are always disappointed in the results, and rightfully so because they were sold on the idea that they had ultra-pure raw material. The problem is that our friends in China are running the HPLC column test, which we know isolates the target compound and then tests it for purity, and are selling it as a full spectrum test. You can spot a column test easily enough because the purity is always 98-99.9% pure. That isn’t to say that 97% isn’t possible with a spectrum test because we have seen that once or twice, but it is very rare.
So the moral of the story is that if you are in the market for raw material and you are being sold a Ferrari at Hyundai price, you might scrutinize the proof a little. Then take your newly gained knowledge and wield it so that you don’t become a victim.
- Bookmark
- 28
- 0
Took me back to chemistry class. Very impressive.
People here on eroids seem to have a lot more faith in blood work than mass specs, at least as far as TE/TC are concerned.
zschlitz1Shit is getting crazy lol but I think its a good turmoil.this is pushing for a safer and better quality product. I know I'm going to get bloods done on my next cycle and I encourage everyone to do the same. Its a safe way for all of us to keep each other and sources accountable. This is not s source site, its a community. I spend time on here to uneind when I get a second away from my 70hr work weeks and two kids.
AnonA priest, a professor, a doctor, and a chemist walk into a bar..... Lol
I will put in a couple cents of thought on this thread, I know diddly squat about mass specs, how they work, who is right and wrong, beats me. Eroids is a platform designed to protect members, not sources! So me personally when i see sources getting mass specs done, thats great and all but i dont believe it. to easy to send in a raw that they know is good and then use another to make their oils. while there is a couple of sources on here that i would trust, my experience and the information we have have on hand shows that most are not trustworthy.
with that being said when i look at mass specs the only ones I care about are the ones that are sent in by users to be tested.
there has been plenty of questions floating around about angus getting paid off by sources to protect them, and I can see where that can come into play and why people would think that. So how do we get around that?
my suggestion to any member sending in a sample for testing is to take off the label and color it, letter it, number it, whatever but make it so only you can match the corresponding icon to the source. so you get email mass specs for vial #1, you match that to proper source and product.
that would alleviate much of the suspicion.
maybe even angus for your own good suggest anyone sending in multiple samples to do this.
angusI suggested that very thing to goth. Send in two samples without labels. Make one plain oil. I'm down for anything. I protect no source, That isn't easily proved but I'm open to anything that can prove that without exposing the Dr.
AnonMaybe make it mandatory for all samples to be submitted as such from regular members? Just a thought. I don't know how much purity values are affected by what chemical is used to prep the sample, assuming every sample isn't prepped the exact same way.
Excellent points!............. may i add if a restaurant sold shit food over and over what would happen!... yep folks quit going there and the fucker goes bankrupt!.... if folks quit spending things MUST change, either for the better or sources crumble.
Agreed with all your points. Would also be nice to have the results easy to sort by source, date, results, product, user/source submitted, etc. From what I see, the way it works now, sources that post good results get a fast bump in sales but it slows down because people forget. Same holds true for bad results, sales will tank for a while until it goes to the "2nd page".
zschlitz1I thought the same thing. It would be easy to send in some good raws or a sample of good oil and sell something different. I'm going to get bloods on my next cycle for sure.
AnonDamn Angus you must really have something over Ashop!! Share it Nooka!! He obviously is trying to discredit you over some test of his you did. Share it:)
I do not want to discredit Angus honestly. He still can modify his testing methods and I will be the first one the back him when he will do. At the moment I presented only facts.
I do not ask anyone to believe me, would be stupid. Do not believe me please believe logic and mathematic. Until now Angus logic and mathematic failed.
Maybe because he is a middleman and he doesnt communicate good who knows. In order for this analyses to be credible he need to change the methods ( even continue using MS ) and provide more informations.
AnonI just think that perhaps this was handled a bit too dramatic. Angus is a good man. I know that because I've spoken to him numerous times man to man. He does what he does for the benefit of fellow members. I don't know you but I imagine you too care about the customers you sell to. Do you use anabolic androgenic steroids? If you do you can imagine why so many members care deeply about the mass spec. Regardless of whether you feel it is the best way to determine purity it does serve a purpose for the members of this site. It helps the little man. The average member deserves to know whether they are injecting a compound that is properly labeled and sold as such. Regardless of purity it does serve a purpose. Now Angus is stating that it does matter of fact show purity. Very few members know whether it does or doesn't. This conversation might as well be written in Chinese because most if us do not understand it. We do understand one thing for certain. Mass Spec is as good as we have as a method of testing the compounds we are injecting. You want the best testing done to determine your products purity. I get it. We all get it. Angus wants the same thing. He feels he's right. You feel your right. We only care about being safe from injecting something potentially harmful to us. We also want to be sure we paid for something that is what it is supposed to be. Out health is on the line. Instead of fighting publicly. You should work for the betterment of the site. You do not have to agree on who's correct. But the manner in which you conduct yourselves is what's causing the drama. Work together for the members. Don't turn our board into a Circus. Nobody wants that.
RustyhookerEvery posted test makes transparency. Not just here n there but EVERY tested specimine
I just need to get to the bottom of this shit............ SOMEONE is running the board! and it definitely is NOT the MODS at this moment in time.
AnonPM sent bro
Rustyhooker...
Rustyhooker....
So the primary question here is : can a steroid dissolved in an oil be tested for purity, and if so how?
If we get a mass spec chart in the m/z format and remove the known results for oil, BA, BB, and the target steroid, everything else is an impurity, correct?
RustyhookerIm still waiting for answer to question below answered. Every lil spike on that chart posted is a known substance. Or it would not appear. Llewellyn the PhD clearly demonstrated those spiked and named them.
angusWhich questions?
Yeah, every spike is a weight that represents SOMETHIING. Llewellyn went the extra step in identifying it.
Rustyhooker...
angusCan it be tested for purity? Yes, everything I've been told by the dr says it can using the method that he has laid out.
except for the analyte, yeah. That is how it has been drilled into my head.
HERE FOR THE BEGINING YOU HAVE A ANSWER FROM THE CHEMIST WHO WORK WITH THE PROFESSOR.
This answer is a reply to this post here named "Mass Spec Explained~Sleight of hand exposed"
If you look closely through your post "Mass Spec Explained~Sleight of hand exposed" , you will find the description of mass spectrophotometria method. This method may be used for the identification of an unknown substance (or substances) in a mix of substances, only if being guided by the standard which in most of the cases is a part of the equipment’s database.
Mass spectrophotometria may be also used for the process of appreciation of one’s substance concentration, only if being guided by standards bought especially for this product.
We have nothing against mass spectrophotometry as a method of analysis but if you intend to prove that you've done a correct analysis using this method, please provide us with following documents that are missing:
Regarding the “blondes and brunets” example
The Mass spectrophotometer will identify correctly 8 brunets and 2 blondes.. this is the primary identification. It is correct, but in order for one to obtain it, he should be guided by the standard which in most of the cases is a part of the equipment’s database. If there is no standard in the database, it will only show a result of 8+2, without details about whether they are blonde or brunet.
Later on, when trying to appreciate the mass of these people (blondes + brunets) we should be using a standard for each hair color in particular. ( you dont use any standard !!! all standard can be bought from USP online )
THE MASS SAYS THAT PEOPLE HAVE DIFFERENT HAIR COLOR.
The HPLC method identifies the substances being guided by a reference standard. We can separate the blondes/brunets/redhaired etc. using HPLC, not only one from another but also from each other by the lightness of the blondes or by the darkness of the brunets hair.
Both of the methods can be used for identification and dosage of substances. The problem is not the method, but the way it is interpreted.
Let us go through your statement you made in a post
You are wrong ! If a substance's “purity” is 50% and we use 200 mg of such a substance, the product's concentration will be of 100 mg/ml active substance + 100 mg/ml of IMPURITIES !!!
In your analysis of Trenbolone Acetate you say that the concentration is of 50 mg/ml out of the “claimed-to-be” 100 mg/ml, and the “purity” is of 11 %. The product’s concentration in this case would be 11 mg/ml.
Where the heck did you get 50 mg/ml ??? You should be having a result of 11 mg/ml.
==============================================================================
For the others two links you posted few minutes ago
He will write a answer ASAP. At the moment he is convinced that I deal with a freshman that copied some text from manual without understanding nothing. You will have his reply
Until now nothing even from what you said show you are right or you have any knowledge. But is good you keep comunicating with me because is the only way to prove who is right.
I will post answers for the links you posted ( pages copied from manuals ) as soon as I get them from people who are professionals
angusI can't believe how childish you are. He wrote it for his CLASS, not you. I'm sure you spent a significant amount of time searching for it on the internet to try to continue your slander.
And I suppose I've never used AAS either, huh? I just post pictures of other people and other peoples gear.
You are really thick headed. How many times do I have to tell you that I am not the dr and I do not run the tests? I play liaison between him and eroids. I put explanations in their most simplistic form so that everyone can understand. So sorry if they are too simplistic for your "professor", it is for the community benefit, not to appease your employees. So you've taken an overly simplistic explanation of something and convoluted it. Now it's clear as mud. Brilliant.
Why you don't answer to the part of my post where show you or your doctor doesn't know any analytics and mathematics ? Please comment to the part written by professor, what I have wrote is not important.
Regarding other two post he is writing now, there are miscalculations there. Remember what you said: he wrote for his class ! Do not forget this tomorrow we will have fun
angusI'm done playing your game. You are welcome to post your labs and tell people how you have over 103% purity and how your satchels are not leaking toxic PVC into the gear and how great you are and on and on, don't care. I'm here to help the community, not fight with you.
AnonBOOM!!!!! That shit is so toxic! Crazy
Welcome to my world!
angusI don't know how you do it every day. I just don't. You guys are machines.
BFG brainwashed us! Lol.....
I told you we should have had that luminous green stuff he injected us with tested?....... UNIVERSAL SOLDIERS got nothing on an EROIDS MOD lol...lol
Someone posted this link in a thread :
Look you see they refer to PURITY for the raws ( API ) not for the FINAL PRODUCT. There is no term of PURITY in final product. Maybe potency is for final product.
Also you see THIS LAB IS VERY GOOD. You see they mention the metods for testing ( USP )
You proved now that I AM RIGHT !!!
Testing protocols are developed based on guidelines delineated in USP <621> Chromatography and USP <851> Spectrophotometry and Light-Scattering, and are validated according to USP <1225> Validation of Compendial Procedures and ICH Guidelines.
USP means United States Pharmacopeeia !!!
You proved my point THANK YOU !
When ANGUS will test based on those methods I will respect him and his methods !!!!
This thread is now getting good and hot!........... let it rip, i want everyone to see this argument going down so that each and every one of you can make up your own mind at the end as to WHO and WHAT is CORRECT.
I have bag of pop corn, I'm watching the show.
I saw this now. I will let it RIP. Sorry I wasn't familiar with the expression.
..
AnonSeriously!! I like that this is open to be debated in public. There's many more questions than answers imo.....therefore, more opinions and information are better. That's one of the issues I have always had with this all along. I'm not saying the mass specs are not honest, well-intentioned or accurate....But the information is being given by one or two people, and it isn't being challenged...
Look, we're all doing this remotely over the internet, right? The same idea is behind why we joined eroids in the first place, right? Because "I" will have a better chance of landing decent gear by joining forces and trading information based on the experiences of others. It isn't flawless, but competition and dialogue are in everyone's best interest. Loving this!
Thanks for the response brother............ and YES something definitely needs sorting because I for one am getting fkn sick of all these results showing that MOST gear is fkn bullcrap!!... and i for one am seriously thinking about brewing my own gear just to satisfy myself that QUALITY RAWS can be sourced and bought and a quality product can be the end result..... i have open access to mass spectrometer use if i need it......... has it stands right now around here we ALL are at the mercy of SOMEONE!.... what i want to know is WHO?
angusGame on!
http://www.eroids.com/pics/steriod-purity-assesment-by-electrospray-ioni...
http://www.eroids.com/pics/estimation-of-steroids-concentration-by-mass-...
I am sending this to the doctor and I will get with a reply soon. I am very happy you come with a feedback. I will post answers to those threads directly there tommorow so I can let this thread RIP. Please do not forget you said those were written for his class.
I think is very simple for you to prove that you are good. Give your doctor contact to the professor you have already email and let them chat about methods. I will post results and conversations.
Until now the conversation between your doctor and professor is here
http://www.eroids.com/pics/stealth-trenbolone-acetate-hplc-tests-everyon...
and everyone can see the professor conclusion about your doctor.
If your doctor have nothing to hide put him in contact with my professor. I wait for a week and you just hide. If you have open agenda dont hide lets put everyhing in public
Nobody with PhD do some stupid analyses like you posted lets be serious. You have a freshman student with access to a MS.
angusI'm done arguing with your childish methods. You're like a kid throwing a tantrum. It is a National Holiday here in the US so I'm going to go enjoy it. I've already answered this comment the first time you posted it. You just keep cut/pasting it in different places.
Sorrry for bothering your holiday. I will wait for your answers tomorrow.
I sent those informations to the professor and I will get back to you with extensive informations
I only can make some comments from my level of a layman on some things here
CORECT. This is MS. It makes identification only who is brunettes and who is blonde. Can not tell what is the weight of each person. We look for the weight for each person right ( concentration ) Exactly what I have told. MS is used to identify what is inside and not how much.
This is a childish and wrong interpretation . I will get back to you here
http://www.waters.com/waters/en_US/MS---Mass-Spectrometry/nav.htm?locale...
Everyone can read there with attention: Who Uses MS? Please read carefully you will see that MS is for those who work with unknown samples for identification. I think this proves again I am right. MS is used for criminologists who doesnt care what is the purity of a cocaine but they want to know if cocaine is present so they can put a ass in jail. Also is use by scientist who make research. I don't see anywhere to say that MS is used for QUALITY TESTING IN PHARMACOLOGY . It say clearly is for : "Researchers and practitioners from various disciplines and subdisciplines within chemistry, biochemistry" Do you see anywhere pharmacology ? Do you see that anywhere mention that MS should be used for testing the quality of drugs ?
angusHow many times are we going to cut/paste this argument today?
What is wrong with you? Let me help you out, and this negates your whole statement
Pharmacology is the branch of medicine and biology concerned with the study of drug action,[1] where a drug can be broadly defined as any man-made, natural, or endogenous (within the body) molecule which exerts a BIOCHEMICAL and/or physiological effect on the cell, tissue, organ, or organism
Please come with arguments and explanations for everything I have writen. Dont paste here a text from wiki. We are talking about TESTING THE QUALITY OF THE DRUGS IN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY. The bible for PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY is Pharmacopeeia. According to Pharmacopeeia the accepted methods for testing drugs quality are MOA based on HPLC. Here are some scans from Pharmacopeeia
http://imageshack.com/a/img829/8063/addv.jpg
http://imageshack.com/a/img855/3277/nzk1r.jpg
http://imageshack.com/a/img840/2917/9z0m.jpg
http://imageshack.com/a/img841/9180/3vo9o.jpg
MS is used for identification ( to know what is inside ) but not for how much. We use HPLC to see HOW MUCH is inside. This is why HPLC is accepted.
You can use MS same way like HPLC but then machine should run in another mode using standards.
Angus, I've been trying to learn more about mass spec reports, and have been comparing the results of the normas amps you just did to some other test e you've done in the past.
On the Spectrum graph, the one with m/z, where do you get the number values to go with the concentration on intended mass /actual mass,
I noticed that on the normas labs. there were values around 801, and again at 900s.
Would that be the oil and BA/BB.
On the chromatogram graphs,I think one graph is what the compound should be, and the other two are from the sample. Do the color codes mean something? .
It is fascinating stuff! The youtube videos I watched were based on single elements, but explained the basics for me.
Good post angus
Biologic1Awesome write up, Angus. I have 2 questions?
First, purity scores are not synonymous with potency, yes?
A product, lets say test e 200 can have 50% purity score yet still contain 200mgs of test e, yes? The 200 mgs would just not be very pure, correct?
Second, and more importantly,in regards to the 2 blonds, do they have big tits?