posted Mon, 08/19/2013 - 21:21
804
How would you deal with this situation?
ad
I got some supposed pharma grade gear off a source on here which turns out to be 99% likely to be counterfeit. (checked online and with a couple of mates) I've been in touch with the source advising him of this and he has blanked my response with - "other's have been using it and had no issues reported".
I've tried being civil but to date i haven't had an email reply. What do you guys suggest I do now?
I didn't want to put a negative review for him in the first instance in case this was an oversight on his part but this is starting to piss me off.
how would you handle the situation?
- Bookmark
- 0
- 0
Keep the bottle, administer one cc of the AAS and have your labs drawn. Don't let the bottle out of your site, don't show or tell a lot of people, and keep it locked up. Keep communication with the SRC to a minimum. One cc will give you and idea of the strength. Sounds like the SRC has not had any issues, yet. Give them the benefit of the doubt, for now. Get your results. And from there, you have documented proof to post your review and rationale, if the results don't meet your quantitative analysis. Thanks for the heads up!!
angusYou put him on blast on his SI page and then if it isn't resolved that way then you post your review. But you need to have something that backs it up. having a couple mates tell you it's bunk isn't proof, its hearsay. You need bloodwork, mass spec, manufacturing numbers that don't check out, anything like that. Don't be the guy that just thinks his gear isn't legit so he posts a bad review. This was outlined just yesterday by a Mod, and this was how he said to do it.
Yes mate I wouldn't want to post a bad review just for the sake of it. As I said below the gear batch no. etc matches that of some that has been tested. the font is also incorrect on them. See my link below. Hopefully this will get sorted without having to resort to this
AnonNothing you can really do except help your brothers out by giving the details. Put your evidence together and let people know, so at least your mistake wont be as likely to be followed.
AnonI've said it for months, maybe years now.. 90% of the amps being pushed by the EU sources on here are fakes sold by a mass supplier who lives in Slovak or some shit.. dude has a mass operation counterfeiting them down to the "T." Gear is real, but you're paying for a pharma amp, with UGL at best quality.
angusah, that explains our last testing from the bayer primo that came in at 44%. Is that an example of what you're talking about? That was an impressive forgery.
x2 If he has definitive proof,he needs to leave a review now.
3 things you can do:
1) run it and take blood tests
2) send a sample off for mass spec analysis
3) toss it and call it a loss
Nothing you can do, this is underground shit bro not gnc, a certain buyer beware comes with the territory
ClassyChassisI would confront him on his SI page. Get it out into the open. But how can you be sure that it's 99% likely to be counterfeit? And by counterfeit do you mean a knock-off with actual gear content, just not pharma, or purely bunk? I mean, I don't see how you can accuse someone unless you've used it or had it tested. Just because of what your mates or someone online says is no proof of anything. But if you have something of substance to back up what you're saying, then I'd take it to his page and see what he says.
yes mate pretty certain they are counterfeit they are exactly the same as the ones in this link. karachi Sustanon 250. Same batch no. expiry date etc.Same error on the x.
http://juicedmuscle.com/jmblog/content/counterfeited-fake-and-real-sustanon
I've put the batch number in google and this seems to be widely counterfeited. I've given this info to the source and he doesn't want to acknowledge it.
ClassyChassisYeah, that doesn't look too good. That's a problem with 'pharma". It's often faked, but at least oftentimes contains actual gear. But if you have the same batch # then probably bunk. The source probably doesn't even know, not that that's any consolation to you. At this point, I'd just go ahead and post the review stating my case. Maybe save someone else. Since the source appears to want to just stick his head in the sand on this. Live and learn I guess. Just a thought, but you might want to consider a reputable UGL. Sorry man.