# AAS Donating Members - Expanding Tests



## Racepicks (May 6, 2017)

I've been in discussion with Jano about expanding our testing to include bacteria and heavy metal testing.  I'm not optimistic about what I'm hearing.  The expanded testing will be more expensive and possibly time consuming.  It looks like it is definitely possible, but I have some concerns.  My responsibility is to protect the member's donations.  I want to be sure that what YOU are paying for is accurate and that your money is going to be spent on what YOU want.  If the majority of donors say that they are comfortable with what is currently being performed, we will continue this way.  If the majority of members say that they would like to expand the testing to include contaminants, then I will find a way to make it happen.  It may not be Jano, but I will do all I can to find a source to fulfill our needs.  Please give me your input....I want to hear from all donors.  If you donated to this project, I will guarantee you will not be flamed for stating your opinion.  I will make it my business to intervene in your favor.  THAT IS FOR ANY WHO DONATED.  If you did not donate, comment at your own risk!


----------



## Sully (May 6, 2017)

As with any human endeavor, what one wants and what one is willing to pay for are 2 entirely different issues. I want a Ferrari. I'm willing to pay for a Ford. Many here may SAY they expanded testing, but are they willing to PAY for it? Based on Jano's posts about the topic, I'm guessing not.


----------



## aon1 (May 6, 2017)

Lil' Sully said:


> As with any human endeavor, what one wants and what one is willing to pay for are 2 entirely different issues. I want a Ferrari. I'm willing to pay for a Ford. Many here may SAY they expanded testing, but are they willing to PAY for it? Based on Jano's posts about the topic, I'm guessing not.



That pretty much covers it


----------



## pesty4077 (May 6, 2017)

At what costs though? Double? Triple?


----------



## Racepicks (May 6, 2017)

pesty4077 said:


> At what costs though? Double? Triple?



Yeah, I guess more info is necessary to formulate an opinion.

*Option 1- Test for Compound Identification, Content in mg., Heavy metal and Bacteria.*

Jano requested 10,000 euros up front to purchase the necessary equipment,

*Option 2 - Test for Compound Identification, Content in mg., Bacteria.*

Jano requestes 3,000 euros up front to purchase the necessary equipment, then include Heavy Metal Testing later when he could recoup his investment of equipment he has already purchased.

*Option 3 - Test for Compound Identification and Content in mg.*

Continue with our current process.


----------



## pesty4077 (May 6, 2017)

At this point, Option 1 will be well over our costs. Unless you get another few hundred people donating, I don't see how we can justify those costs. Option 2 needs about 100 people donating $30. It is doable, but people might not be willing to go that far.


----------



## Racepicks (May 6, 2017)

pesty4077 said:


> At this point, Option 1 will be well over our costs. Unless you get another few hundred people donating, I don't see how we can justify those costs. Option 2 needs about 100 people donating $30. It is doable, but people might not be willing to go that far.



My thought exactly.  I have already informed Jano that $10.000 euros is not at all possible.  The $3,000 is certainly possible, but I'm not sure how practical or necessary bacteria testing is.  I am certainly not a chemist but, I feel someone cooking in their garage or basement in less than sanitary conditions could introduce bacteria to the end product.  Some may argue that the cooking process and the alcohol will eliminate that threat.  If I can be convinced that my apprehension is not justified, I can live with staying with the status quo.


----------



## bg091593 (May 6, 2017)

How much of a concern is it? I mean, I always thought the heavy metals in UG gear was more folk lore than anything else? 

Bacteria would be nice for peace of mind, but if it was that prevalent wouldn't we have threads about how it made them sick or how it gave them an infection?


----------



## formula1069 (May 6, 2017)

Lil' Sully said:


> As with any human endeavor, what one wants and what one is willing to pay for are 2 entirely different issues. I want a Ferrari. I'm willing to pay for a Ford. Many here may SAY they expanded testing, but are they willing to PAY for it? Based on Jano's posts about the topic, I'm guessing not.



:yeahthat:

Although I did drive a Ferrari the other day , that was fun and cool 

Option 3 stay with what we have now
Unfortunately and sadly we can't get $10.00 - $25.00 from Each member on this board and Pro M


----------



## janoshik (May 6, 2017)

Unfortunately, unless I'd take a loan starting both heavy metal testing and microbiological testing in a reasonable amount of time is straight up impossible for me. 

That's just financial limitation I got and I'm very unsure whether there is enough interest for me to get it paid off. Ever.
I'd love to do it for free, but as a small business I am I gotta make sensible decisions. Especially when I'm starting off my family, so I'm sure you all understand my position. I'm literally having 1/10th of a profit margin of laboratories like SIMEC, which were proven over and over again to half-ass their work (HGH and AAS as well). While this makes my services more available, it also decreases my financial freedom a lot.

Regarding the option two, I didn't request 3000 euros up front for equipment purchase. There might've been a slight misunderstanding. 

I stated, that if I get money for the next batch of testing (3000 euros is about what is in the treasury right now) up front (and I always request money up front except when working with Mr. Buck or other people I trust) I'd be able to buy the equipment necessary. It wouldn't be a payment for microbiological testing. The payment for microbiological testing would be 70 euros, so the price would be 80 euros for current testing + 70 euros for microbiological tests: total of 150 euro per test.



For the heavy metal testing, I am even more unsure whether it's a good idea to get equip for it, for it's much more expensive and I am imagining the interest might fade very soon after first few initial tests. Not sure the bit more independence that it would gain us would be worth it. 

Therefore I am continuing to contact laboratories which might be able to provide such a service that are already equipped for it. Got blown off by quite a few labs by now (hell, I'd be better of trying to test rocks for heavy metals, that's what most of them are doing and they won't accept other kind of samples as they are not equipped for those). 
There's one lab that got back to me with a positiv-ish answer and I gave them more details today and asked them for a quote for a batch of about 20 samples. Hopefully it'll be acceptable.


----------



## Racepicks (May 6, 2017)

racepicks said:


> *option 2 - test for compound identification, content in mg., bacteria.*
> 
> jano requestes 3,000 euros up front to purchase the necessary equipment, then include heavy metal testing later when he could recoup his investment of equipment he has already purchased





janoshik said:


> regarding the option two, i didn't request 3000 euros up front for equipment purchase. There might've been a slight misunderstanding.
> 
> I stated, that if i get money for the next batch of testing (3000 euros is about what is in the treasury right now) up front (and i always request money up front except when working with mr. Buck or other people i trust) i'd be able to buy the equipment necessary. It wouldn't be a payment for microbiological testing. The payment for microbiological testing would be 70 euros, so the price would be 80 euros for current testing + 70 euros for microbiological tests: Total of 150 euro per test.



Maybe I did misunderstand


----------



## problem (May 7, 2017)

Continue with our process. Although it would be nice to do option 1 and 2 ; how you gonna collect the funds? all us members are donating 20-50$ a piece. I doubt anyone wants to put more into it especially when donating members do not decide what sponsors are getting tested or compounds are getting tested.. we can vote but it doesn't mean it will happen.

I donated because I love what you guys do.. and I'm enjoy seeing tests; no matter what sponsor is; and helping our community.. that's about it


----------



## rAJJIN (May 7, 2017)

I like how it is now. It's a major step up vs these labmax tests and the other current methods.
Now member can can know what they are using and the dosage of it.
Girls can know if there anavar is anavar.

For metals or bacteria Could we not outsource it or have a licensed company go to a university? Instead of buying equipment we may not even need or use often.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## janoshik (May 7, 2017)

rAJJIN said:


> I like how it is now. It's a major step up vs these labmax tests and the other current methods.
> Now member can can know what they are using and the dosage of it.
> Girls can know if there anavar is anavar.
> 
> ...


My thinking! Still messaging the labs regarding the heavy metal testing. However, most are testing a different matrix (diff. kind of samples) or are fully booked for their own purposes or internal (therefore unable to invoice their work) so far. Hopefully over the next week I'll hear back from one lab that looks good. 

Regarding the microbio testing... I'm not sure anybody even offers this kind of services in my country, but I gotta admit, I haven't really looked.


----------



## Racepicks (May 7, 2017)

rAJJIN said:


> Instead of buying equipment we may not even need or use often.



This is probably true.  In my opinion, if we tested 20 samples in a random test for bacteria and heavy metal and found no problems, why continue with it.  But....I still want to see that first round.  Again, it is up to the rank and file, if everyone wants to continue the way we are right now, I'm good with that too.


----------



## Sully (May 9, 2017)

Racepicks said:


> This is probably true.  In my opinion, if we tested 20 samples in a random test for bacteria and heavy metal and found no problems, why continue with it.  But....I still want to see that first round.  Again, it is up to the rank and file, if everyone wants to continue the way we are right now, I'm good with that too.



I've been checking the results at https://anaboliclab.com for a long time now, and I've yet to come across one that tested above acceptable range for heavy metals. While I think it would be great to do it, I honestly don't have any real evidence to show that it's actually necessary. Despite what the authorities and media report everything they make an AAS lab bust, I'm not terribly concerned about heavy metals in my gear. I'm actually much more concerned about Deca causing early heart disease/ heart attacks.


----------



## Racepicks (May 9, 2017)

Lil' Sully said:


> I've been checking the results at https://anaboliclab.com for a long time now, and I've yet to come across one that tested above acceptable range for heavy metals. While I think it would be great to do it, I honestly don't have any real evidence to show that it's actually necessary. Despite what the authorities and media report everything they make an AAS lab bust, I'm not terribly concerned about heavy metals in my gear. I'm actually much more concerned about Deca causing early heart disease/ heart attacks.



I agree, Brother.  If you go by the results others have posted, it would be easy to conclude that all these AAS products have a very safe amount of heavy metals and no detectable bacteria.  But, I am a cynic.  That is why I say that if we test a handful of products, and they are free of potential risks, then why do more.  Let me ask you, what happens if we find some serious problems?  Someone posted that "Obviously, people are not dying, so it must be safe".  Heavy metals will not have a sudden impact on your health, it will make you sick over time.  How about the people who complain about swelling, pain, heat, etc. at the injection site?  Could it be the result of bacteria in the product?  I don't know, but let's find out.  Again, if the donating members don't agree, I'm OK with that too.


----------



## janoshik (May 10, 2017)

Well, I got a positive response from a lab willing to test our samples for heavy metals.

Which specific ones (heavy metals) would you like to have tested and how many samples, so I can ask for a quote?

Lead, mercury, arsenic and cadmium are a good base to start with.


----------



## Racepicks (May 10, 2017)

janoshik said:


> Well, I got a positive response from a lab willing to test our samples for heavy metals.
> 
> Which specific ones (heavy metals) would you like to have tested and how many samples, so I can ask for a quote?
> 
> Lead, mercury, arsenic and cadmium are a good base to start with.



Thanks Jano.  Let's go with those 4.  If it is cost prohibitive, maybe we can go with just microbiological testing.


----------



## janoshik (May 10, 2017)

Okay!

I'll ask for a quote for those and the 20 samples that have been mentioned.


----------



## LANDMARKCHEM_J (May 12, 2017)

That's would be great if you can get a accurate quote for 20 samples testing, we would like to be a donor, money or samples, all is possible, just to make sure the crowdfunding program is good to go and got enough people interests...


----------



## janoshik (May 16, 2017)

Finally got a final response from a lab accredited for heavy metal testing!

Cadmium - limit of detection 0.0005mg / kg 
Lead - limit of detection 0.0008mg/kg
Mercury - limit of detection 0.0001mg/kg
Arsenic - limit of detection 0.0002mg/kg

All accredited by national authority.


----------



## *Bio* (May 17, 2017)

LANDMARKCHEM_J said:


> That's would be great if you can get a accurate quote for 20 samples testing, we would like to be a donor, money or samples, all is possible, just to make sure the crowdfunding program is good to go and got enough people interests...



Product samples directly from the Sponsor are not allowed.  Funds for the testing are greatly appreciated!


----------



## Duluxx (Mar 4, 2018)

This is a great cause. Glad to have found this forum.


----------



## docholiday08 (Mar 4, 2018)

Contaminants would be amazing to test for. I got a bad batch from a sponser over at ASF and had an abcess which turned into a fistula. It would make me at ease getting back into the game knowing i'm not injecting bathtub batches into my body again.


----------



## *Bio* (Mar 4, 2018)

docholiday08 said:


> Contaminants would be amazing to test for. I got a bad batch from a sponser over at ASF and had an abcess which turned into a fistula. It would make me at ease getting back into the game knowing i'm not injecting bathtub batches into my body again.



That has been discussed but as I remember, the cost was quite a bit more.


----------



## docholiday08 (Mar 4, 2018)

Oh okay I see, I wonder if there is a kit out there that tests. Probably not very good but something is better than nothing ya know

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


----------



## Sub7percent (May 16, 2018)

Racepicks said:


> Thanks Jano.  Let's go with those 4.  If it is cost prohibitive, maybe we can go with just microbiological testing.





Hey RP, Jano - any updates here?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## janoshik (May 16, 2018)

Sub7percent said:


> Hey RP, Jano - any updates here?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



There hasn't been much interest since. 

Recently I have started cooperating with another laboratory that has much more sensitive equipment available, so I might get some quotes again. 

Feel free to remind me again


----------



## biggernbetter (May 21, 2018)

Sucks I just found out about this form.. Let's just say I will be staying here for sure. Testing!! Priceless


----------



## Sub7percent (May 21, 2018)

janoshik said:


> There hasn't been much interest since.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





I would be very interested in including this in the testing.  I mean it’s one thing to confirm the steroid but I would think more important to first confirm the substance doesn’t contain heavy metals?  I remember a while back hearing about this being an issue, can’t recall where though.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ironhammer (May 24, 2018)

Sub7percent said:


> I would be very interested in including this in the testing.  I mean it’s one thing to confirm the steroid but I would think more important to first confirm the substance doesn’t contain heavy metals?  I remember a while back hearing about this being an issue, can’t recall where though.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Oh i would feel safe and saying all the china powder is heavy metal contaminated. 
What from china isn't? I mean any protein powder, creatine or fucking vitamin... rice you name it is full if heavy metals!
So i doubt seriously aas powders are gonna be an exception to that. 
We can't even get the bastards to put the right substance and dosage in the goddamn bottles. Which is probably why there isn't a huge interest. Or at least i would assume most people don't want to know the truth. 


Sent from my SM-J327P using Tapatalk


----------



## lntense (May 25, 2018)

I have a feeling the gear would contain much more than people would think.


I prefer to just continue with the testing that is being done, but it can't hurt to get a quote to see what the cost would be.


----------



## Sub7percent (May 29, 2018)

Ironhammer said:


> Oh i would feel safe and saying all the china powder is heavy metal contaminated.
> What from china isn't? I mean any protein powder, creatine or fucking vitamin... rice you name it is full if heavy metals!
> So i doubt seriously aas powders are gonna be an exception to that.
> We can't even get the bastards to put the right substance and dosage in the goddamn bottles. Which is probably why there isn't a huge interest. Or at least i would assume most people don't want to know the truth.
> ...





Idk how the market really works.  Is there any Raws not prodicednin China?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ironhammer (May 29, 2018)

Yea but finding them and making sure they're not actually chinese resale is a problem. 
China has dominated the world market in everything. The have the supplies/high production and their low cost has priced every other supplier out of the market.
So what you find, if and when , will be harder to come by and more expensive. 


Sub7percent said:


> Idk how the market really works.  Is there any Raws not prodicednin China?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Sent from my SM-J327P using Tapatalk


----------



## Sully (Jun 1, 2018)

Ironhammer said:


> Oh i would feel safe and saying all the china powder is heavy metal contaminated.
> What from china isn't? I mean any protein powder, creatine or fucking vitamin... rice you name it is full if heavy metals!
> So i doubt seriously aas powders are gonna be an exception to that.
> We can't even get the bastards to put the right substance and dosage in the goddamn bottles. Which is probably why there isn't a huge interest. Or at least i would assume most people don't want to know the truth.



I would have some doubt about that assumption. There’s been an independent testing initiative that has been testing for metals in gear for a while, and so far as I’ve seen has yet to find any heavy metal or basterial contamination. 

See for yourself: https://anaboliclab.com


----------



## Ironhammer (Jun 1, 2018)

Sully said:


> I would have some doubt about that assumption. There’s been an independent testing initiative that has been testing for metals in gear for a while, and so far as I’ve seen has yet to find any heavy metal or basterial contamination.
> 
> See for yourself: https://anaboliclab.com


Which aspect is it you're in doubt of?
China powders likely being heavy metal contaminated ? Or interest in testing or what exactly do refer to?

Sent from my SM-J327P using Tapatalk


----------



## AnaSCI (Jun 1, 2018)

Sully said:


> See for yourself: https://anaboliclab.com



My question would be who owns/operates this site?
Any known verification of the individual(s) running it?

That type of testing is expensive and we looked into years back when we were testing with Amrit and the US lab.
Calculated out to next to impossible to be continuous with funding by the community.
So if this site is legit where is their funding coming from for the testing?


----------



## Sully (Jun 1, 2018)

They have a Gofundme page set up for it. I don’t know the specifics of who owns or operates it, though. It’s supposed to be independently run. They don’t take donations of gear, they order it directly from the source just like a regular customer so that the source doesn’t know they’re being tested. Several of the products have been shown to be underdosed as well as to be completely bunk. There doesn’t appear to be any rhyme or reason nor agenda at play by a certain entity, but it’s always hard to say for sure. 

As far as I can tell, the lab is in Europe, and I assume the people running the site are as well. The of the gear tested is predominantly available from international suppliers that are based in Europe.


----------



## buck1973 (Jun 1, 2018)

they  use  Simec which we all know from Switzerland   and  chemtox  in France.

They have been  testin  since  2016 They  have collected bout  70,000.00 since that time in donations 
There collection goals are usually 5000- 20000 
They have tested about 250 products since the start 

Makers  are the  majority of the  funds 
These are the top donors 

Pharma com store; 7000
Pharmacom Labs; 15000
Ashop; 14000
Naps gear; 14000


----------



## Foxman101 (Jun 7, 2018)

Buck sent you PM... mate


----------

