posted Fri, 07/04/2014 - 06:57
35588
+ 16 Steriod Purity Assesment by Electrospray Ionization mass spectrometry
ad
Another write up by the Dr about how the machine that he uses is used for purity assessment.
MODERATOR LOCKDOWN UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE!
Ordered from:
- Bookmark
- 16
- 0
Those guys from San Rafael where good guys they had a good hand
If Angus' method is invalid, that would show up in the comparison testing. That's why I'd like to see it done. If not accurate enough, then I wouldn't bother using it. Unreliable test results would be worthless and only add to my difficulties in buying good gear.
...and you're telling me an FDA approved laboratory would send out reports with grammatical errors? namely "Trenbolone Elanthate" if they can't properly spell the report i read has the same credibility i would give one written with crayons. you need to stop beating a dead horse.
If is not a laboratory from USA but from another country on the globe sure that can be grammatical or spelling errors, They will ask a student to put in engish all the labs at the final
This is BTW not a US FDA approved lab, but other western country FDA proved lab
If I made a spelling mistake then I apologize, I don't check for grammer and pelling and as u may easily see I'm not a native English speaker.
If you suspect the credibility of the lab because they made a spelling mistake of the lab then check them, and their specified report.
I'm not sure how you conclude from a spelling mistake done by chance, to their knowledge in analytic chemistry. They offered a thorough explanation to their testing, and review on the profound mistakes in Angus testing, in quite freindly and clear manner, you may all check
As a comment there is no such ester as elanthate, so this is some very innocent typo error,
Let concentrate on the important issues here, and send the secretery of the lab to an advanced course in esters
i understand you are not a natural born english speaker.
however when im reading something that im supposed to trust and the person can not take the time to read it over to assure the name of the compound which is under analysis is spelled correctly i just see that as pure laziness.
Because if they are too lazy to ensure their report is professionally done, and yes that also means grammatically correct, then why should i trust how meticulous they are being with their testing?
I agree that a report should be flawless from any aspect, this completely has nothing to do with the accuracy and validity of their authorized test and supplied, pls show me where it was ? I may contact them and ask what this spelling mistake stemms from, the secretery may read something in hand writting wrong, or god knows what.
I wish you would question the basless explanation in Angus testing to this extent
It's on the only report you personally have posted. The explanation pages.
I'm not the authorized lab, I make typo errors all the time, I apologize, I just post here freely and don't check myself, so the shame is on me, I just brought the info and posted it, unlike Angus I have a clue (but no more) in chemistry, but I have no involvment in the lab, so don't reflect from my lazzyness to their professionalism
I did not mean your explanations. For someone who isn't using English as their second language I do not expect perfect responses on an internet board. What I am referring to is the actual lab report provided to you by the lab you used. I believe it was page 4 and 5 of the pictures you posted.
Again not your mistake but that of a lab who should be flawless with their reports
I will look, I apologize in their behalf, I more then think that this is just a typo error of the secretary who knows English but not an expert in esters
Thank u for the attention.
Is their explanation clear ?
What is to prevent the two SRCs from colluding to making sure their reports match each other, but will not match Angus?.
I am not keen on seeing two SRCs who both recently had bad test results having the sole power to discredit Angus.
If all three lab results match, or if angus and one SRC match, then problem solved. If the two SRCs match each other but not Angus then the problem remains.
When did I say I had a bad report from Angus lately? Where did you hear this information?
Sorry, should have been specific. Definitely not you. The other two SRCs in this discussion. My apologies for the confusion.
No problem bro, but I think everyone may have looked a little too deep into this matter now.
The main issue here is not Angus or people trying to discredit him, the main issue is are the lab tests accurate? I really hope that the results of both parties come back the same and then we can rest assured it's safe to trust Angus's lab reports and I will continue to use his services.
If they don't come back the same and there's clearly inaccuracies, then I will need to find another lab to conduct my tests.
I simply want to make sure I'm selling correctly dosed, high quality gear to everyone! This has always been my goal.
I personally feel that Angus motives are pure, and he's honest, I've learned that at least partially his services are invalid not accepted is science.
But anyhow - why would u trust the motives of a person who is moved by payment and glory, and not a SRC who has same motives and same if not higher responsibility and abilities
Never said I trust or don't trust Angus. I too have questions about testing that have not yet been answered. I was looking for a second lab to send samples to verify Angus' results before this controversy even started.
And frankly I am sick to death of hearing you and Alin call anyone who does not agree with you witless, gullible fools or Angus' yes men.
I am just fed up with getting bunk gear. It has come to the point that I have only one SRC I trust at all--and I have everything I buy from him tested too.
As far as motive, you and other large SRCs have millions at stake while Angus has only thousands. Not proof, but be real, you
SRCs have way more at stake here than Angus.
I've posted here that we need an indepenent lab to test, just like u "feel"
If a SRC has a big steak here then why would he fuck up for relative pennys (which is fucking materials), I agree and know that SRC mostly don't test the materials, but it doesn't mean that Angus use a reliable testing method or may not have his agenda, afterall no one is monitoring him ! You trust him like an authority, while the SRCs u question, this is your basic mistake, and this is what I protested and alerted about
If I trust him as an authority then why was I looking for a second lab? We are not as gullible and sheep-like as you may think.
In truth Alin's mudslinging and name calling in this thread made me want to defend Angus and to hope he was right. No one wants an asshole to win an argument.
AnonMore questions than answers seems to be the theme of this thread.
Ok got both addresses now. We will see results as soon as both parties have completed their analyses.
Alin and MD for presidents !!!!
Damn happy about this , cant wait see results
Dope
I sent Muscle-develop guy directly professor address. He will do HPLC tests according to pharmacopoeia for the products he has standards
If Muscle-develop is sending two samples of each product he will run also MS on each substance so you will see how a MS analyses should be so you have what to compare with Angus.
HPLC will be done very fast. After, he will run MS just for fun to see that Angus is doing a monkey business
Guys, I'm not sure why we go in circles, and how ignorent someone here may think we're. This is sciense. This is analytical sciense FFS. There is one results to to a test in science, moreveer that the parameters and methods are clearly defined in phamacopuia. We don't analyze here somehting new from the moon.
Now we should all ask for a parallel testing in 48 hours to 3 materials, in a blind manner, I'll try submitt the results to an authorized FDA approved (western country) lab to get a review.
Nothing more should be said.
alin raised the glove already and immediately
Totally agree
Yes totally agree, let's wait and see the results now! The debate can/will continue after this test. I am itching to see the reports.
Got Alins address, just waiting on Angus now.
agree
For obvious reasons certain standards are not obtainable. In such cases we use quantified reference standards that are of similar size and structure and yield the same reponses(peak area, abundance, m/z ratio). This is done everyday. Very often in the analytical lab we receive samples of unknown mixtures and concentrations and must determine 1) what it is.. and 2) how much.. Some of these are very complicated(40 plus different compounds) and to provide formulas based on samples we receive can cost thousands... this is how products are copied..someone sends us a sample.. we tell them what's in it and how much by weight.. and presto they have the formula and can produce it.. It's tedious and time consuming.
In your case it's very, very simple... You should be dealing with a mostly(hopefully) pure compound and some impurities. Not complicated. If you can identify the impurites, and IF the method being used can detect the impurities and the target compound, then quantitation is possible without reference standards.(not enough to certify an FDA regulated drug.. but it will work) But you must know how each compound responds at different concentrations.. Get yourself an FTIR, very reasonably priced, and very easy to use.. there are reference libraries of every known compound on the planet at a reasonable price.. Use this to ID your raws...If you cant get quantified reference standards, at the very least you can take raws you KNOW are good and mostly pure and use this as your reference standard to quantify with. You can even quantify with an FTIR accurate to +/_ 3%.. If you need better than that or you need to provide someone with a certificate of analysis..lol.. or you just want to know.. then submit it for HPLC or GC/MS.. My suggestion?? test the raws.. if you want to quantify.. test the raws..
the finished product will only be as accurate as the scales you are using.. and if someone has to make reference standards to quantify with. versus purchasiing KNOWN certified standards, which I promise you all aren't avaliable.. only those commonly produced by pharma companies,(try finding a standard for trenbolone) . then there is too much margin for error even with very expensive microgram scales..
You don't need to be that accurate okay..
All you really need to know is that :A) It is what its supposed to be and B) Its Mostly Pure
Formulate your product with this knowlege in hand and you will have a consistent, reliable product, and satisfied customers(Mostly)
Honestly if the raws you are getting are less than 95% pure then you need to get a new source. anything less than 98% is not really acceptable.. Ask the vendor for a certificate of analysis(C of A)..
You know you can actually check the purity based on melting points alone.. you may want to research that. just sayin.. but what do I know
Your remark on identifying unknown compounds is very interesting, it's called areverse formulation. We done it these week on the Nordipen (GH ready to inject) in order to asses what stabilize the GH there is a liquid form.
Your remarks on FTIR and determination by melting points may confuse more the members here if u ask me, these are more primitive techniques, and a very experienced analytic chemist is required to use accurately these methods, and they may give rough indication to the ID of the products, not for purity or potency of materials
Agreed. I am only stating techniques that are available. There are many methods to quantify..it is a matter of how much accuracy is required. If it were me and I was buying raws from China, .I would test everything on FTIR because its easy and fast,and I could buy one for under 10k versus spending 50k on a gcms. FTIR is perfect for identifying but not commonly used to quantify, but it can be(see beers-lambert law)
I sincerely hope that whatever methods are being used that a competent chemist is doing the testing.
FTIR will only help you to know which package is with TESTOSTERONE ENANTHATE and which package is with TRENBOLONE ( if it has his fingerprint in the memory ). Nothing else. No concentration no purity. If you want to deduct purity from FTIR then you are another guy who come here to lie and confuse people and help Angus
My friend LABRAT, I do not trust you. First because you are mixing truth with lies exactly like Angus. You just hibernated all this time when Angus was scamming people here and pooped out when Angus was under pressure. Now you come here same style as Angus TO HELP and sure some of the explanations you give are partially correct but also can copied from manuals or just explained in a wrong way by a guy who is not able to understand for himself. I suggest you if you want to prove you honest to wait until Angus is proved wrong or right then you can pop out again to offer your services. What do you suggest here ? Are you offering FTIR testing services ? Another method that is not conform with standards ? If you are such a genius I want to see your method in some manuals for quantitative analyse. FTIR is used to ID compounds as raws not as final product. Also you will never know what purity you have with FTIR. There are normal compounds fingerprints that are not recorded in the memory of a FTIR or a MS so if in the raw is such a compound you will not have a correct results
There is no standard which is not obtainable in this feild for at least 50 years.
I'm not familiar with FTIR in practice, but it will certainly help only with identifying the materoials, and not quantifying them. HPLC is more accurate. I'm asking on this regard.
We've been doing tests based on melting points when first got raw powders eom China on 2002. There is no direct formula to know exact purity % based on this, just a rough indication. Each impurity will effect dirreferntly the melting point of course
If you had to submit a sample of every lot of raws you received for an HPLC assay, unless money is not a concern, or unless you own an HPLC,, or LC /MS, it would be very expensive.
With an FTIR ,for example, you could take samples of raws that have been quantified by HPLC, etc..scan and save the spectra..you should have 3 known good reference standards..Once you have your library complete you can then take a sample of a new batch or lot of a raw..set the correlation at 95 to 98%, and if it passes your good, if it fails, reject the raw..send it back to wherever you bought it.
This is the best way to qc your raw materials..
you still need to periodically submit samples for purity assay.but if it fails FTIR. then you are saving money and time because there would be no need to do an assay for purity..
This is just for your information only, but it is exactly what we do in the world of regulated pharma. industry
Karl be careful. Labrat is doing the same tricks as Angus. Mixing truth with lies. FTIR can ID the raws but can not calculate its concentration. If the analyst make calculation of the concentration it will be a estimate based on same shit like Angus MS
This is one approach, it's interesting as in my operation we used it like 10 years ago like I said.
But this is far away from what members here should deman, there is a reason that the advanced technique involved HPLC.
If we may get back to our concerns here then the all argument is about the skills of the chemist who conduct the tests.
I think the members here should demand HPLC tests, done by an authorized analytic chemist. There is no way aorund it, if you want to apply advanced sicense for accurate results
Correct, but if you dont have access to the proper equipment, a rough estimate is better than no estimate.
The one can do synthesis for them
You are wrong here. You can be asked to ID the compound not HOW MUCH. I see you twisting truth I am more and more sure you are part of Angus team. MS is used only for ID noone will give you a product to be tested on MS and ask you concentration. Be serious. I have asked not only professor but 3 labs who have MS and asked them to do the concentration and they said NOT ON MS.
Calculating how much after Angus method with peak area is not correct and can produce huge errors. 50% for example but you can put any other number there.
I see you mentions GC few times. Do you know that this is used only for volatile compounds. Steroid are not volatile. Are you guys develop a method now based on GC or FTIR ?
So you have formula for testosterone base. Please write here how this is produced ( the synthesis process )
Are you gonna be the next Angus here ?
Now you are just being ignorant. Not volatile?..lol...okay at 760m Hg testosterone enanthate boils at 432.9 degrees celcius. Thats at atmospheric pressure. The gcms is operating at close to a vacuum..And in a vacuum the bp drops (educate yourself)more so with a turbo pump.,than with a diffusion pump. If you are trying to say that steroids arent volatile..then you are saying that the steroid would never go from liquid to gas, and never elute from the column to the MS. That means every gcms spectra that anyone can view at thousands of websites is all just a lie.
Listen, I don't know Angus from Adam. I agreed that from what I saw the results were questionable and could be innacurate..I completely agree with you there
The preferred method for quantifying? HPLC.. or LC/MS...?..definitely ..no dispute
Can you quantify with GC/MS. ?..yes and very accurately with reference standards..
Can you quantify without standards?..yes but you would have to know exactly what the impurites are.. would this hold up in court?..no
I work with 6 different GC/MS..an ICP/MS. 2 HPLC, 2 LC/MS , FTIR ,UV-VIs, the only thing we dont have is an NMR
We get unknowns all the time and we must Id and quantify..
I wish you the best of luck..I was only offering information about what we do in a real analytical lab...believe me, if I didnt know what I was doing I wouldnt have a job..and Ive been doing this for a long time.
You misunderstood him. He referred to Test E (in example) at normal standards.
Anyhow this is exactly what is so problematic here, each andd every guy, ignorant (more or less), may post anything, and worst - he may have an interest. This is why independent real lab should be the authority
Let me get a answer from professor about this.
You know what my friend ? I do not trust you ( only some moderators can confirm you are not part of Angus team ( another student )). You just hibernated all this time when Angus was scamming people here and pooped out when Angus was under pressure. Now you come here same style as Angus TO HELP and sure some of the explanations you give are partially correct but also can copied from manuals or just explained in a wrong way by a guy who is not able to understand for himself. I suggest you if you want to prove you honest to wait until Angus is proved wrong or right then you can pop out again to offer your services. What do you suggest here ? Are you offering FTIR testing services ? Another method that is not conform with standards ? If you are such a genius I want to see your method in some manuals for quantitative analyse. FTIR is used to ID compounds as raws not as final product. Also you will never know what purity you have with FTIR. There are normal compounds fingerprints that are not recorded in the memory of a FTIR or a MS so if in the raw is such a compound you will not have a correct results
So you are the guy who is working with Angus finally right ?
Why use a FTIR when using HPLC is the correct way ? I think is possible to buy a calibrated second hand HPLC. Also results will depend a lot on the analyst knowledge, experience and hand.
Anyway here you are right, 95% raws are bunk. Raws like Angus tested 85% or less are junk that would not be allowed even in veterinary industry.
Regarding standards, my professor does not have all the standards but he can do synthesis for the standard and impurities he need ( small laboratory scale ). He asked me to provide him androstenione and the acids he will provide because are controlled and I need to only pay. For testosterones standards is faster to make synthesis but for the rest this process can take some weeks.
The science is absolute and its not new technology. Its not complicated and if followed accordingly there are very few arguable issues. really..
Why are we fucking around with different methods ( FTIR, MS ) one more shady than another for this purpose and getting complicated and more complicated explanations ?
Things are simple: methods for testing steroids are in pharmacopoeia. standards can be bought from manufacturers of the raws or be synthesized Do the analyses conform to standards and stop fucking around.
This is what is required.
http://www.usp.org/pdf/EN/referenceStandards/certificates/1649007-M0J023...
angusI agree.
Addy sent.
angusAlin, I have responded to your dr. His email was in my Junk folder. Sorry about that, I didn't see it.
Dr. [Censored]
With all due respect sir I sincerely appreciate your willingness to do this but I am not the analyst. I am sure that is clear by now. The testing is run by a dr at the university who has a Phd. He did, however write this up as his intro:
"If they have any internationally accepted method for steroid analysis using mass spectrometry, I’d like to have it. Attached is my recent publications (in last four years) in peer-reviewed Journals using mass spectrometry tools. We publish 3 -4 papers a year, as I have been working in the field for the last 20 - 30 years. I welcome any suggestions to our existing method, the goal is to estimate the true values of the product as much as we can while not to be critical."
He is very excited to work with you as he was unaware of any international standard for testing steroids. I look forward to your suggestions for him to improve. And please ask any question technical or not so that we can determine any inefficiencies in our process. Thank you for your time sir.
Angus
Thats perfect. Let me see what professor say but seems you did not put them in contact. You sent him a email with some publications about MS in general ? So you wrote a email where you attached publications you gathered from INTERNET about MS. I assume you sent him tons of junk mail so he has what to spend time reading nothing on subject but in general about MS ?
I do not see anywhere answers for all the problems my professor found on your articles posted here
I think you wrote a email just to put dust in the eye. Lets see what will say me professor monday but from what I read here seems something like this.
Anyway my professor will ask him about everything will ask him questions about documents and analyzes posted here and are wrong and we will see the results.
Lets start
Ajax
angusNo I did not. I'm interested in getting a conversation started about testing and procedure. A very structured conversation that does not involve emotion. We just want to talk about the science. He is welcome to ask as technical of a question that he would like. I am more than happy to convey it and get a response. I think it would be best for all if you would stop with your conjecture and accusation. They are not productive. You have made your point very clear. If you truly wanted to get answers then you would focus on the science instead of convoluting the conversation with unrelated points.