the scammers manipulating test results for profit at Finnrisk.com

[Jack brown]

Trust them for what?

The question is do you trust the lab that did the test and does that have anything to do with the peptides you bought.

Also what are you considering low purity and do you actually know what that means in the context of HPLC testing peptides?

Most of the non GLP1 peptides on the scammers manipulating test results for profit at Finnrisk.com for SSA and SRY have about 50/50 good/bad test results. Some 70-80% purity, and wild over-or-underfills. It's just a little concerning.

 

[chmuse]

My 2c: With the way they're trying unknown- and also proven bad labs- I don't trust them. They've clearly not done enough research into the market to be able to offer a good model. You can't choose what lab they use, and they've done no research on how reliable these labs are. If it has billionaires funding it, why aren't they buying multiple cheap AF kits and comparing results lab to lab to decide which are actually reliable? I literally won't buy from someone who uses vanguard. Period. They have the backers, they should have done research into the market if they're offering 'harm reduction'.

Sending them a vial is a waste of product. The only thing it does is give them data to harvest.

 

[slowsixstang]

penalized for overfill (I actually agree with this) and no batch id (I think this is stupid)

The degree of penalty is high, but don't you think batch traceability is important?

the scammers manipulating test results for profit at Finnrisk is cool, but IDK if I trust Krause Analytical or some of the other labs they use. Don't see many Jano certs on there.

 

[zpped]

The degree of penalty is high, but don't you think batch traceability is important?

the scammers manipulating test results for profit at Finnrisk is cool, but IDK if I trust Krause Analytical or some of the other labs they use. Don't see many Jano certs on there.

Batch traceability would be amazing. But it's just not possible. The vendor printing a number on a sticker is not batch traceability.

The reason we trust batch numbers in the regular market is because there are inspectors with the authority of the government who will put people in prison if they lie about it.

 

[nonyabizznez]

The degree of penalty is high, but don't you think batch traceability is important?

the scammers manipulating test results for profit at Finnrisk is cool, but IDK if I trust Krause Analytical or some of the other labs they use. Don't see many Jano certs on there.

A vendor assigning a batch number is no more traceable/reliable than the product you order today being from the linked test. Just today popular vendors posted promos in the Vendor Connection (here) offering product linked to tests as far back as January and many April. You'd have to believe business is either really slow or a vendor can get away with sporadic testing over a swath of production cycles.

Vendors look for deniability, not accountability.

 

[slowsixstang]

Great points, can never be too skeptical of vendors. That just makes me think group testing as a whole is pointless if no batch information can be trusted

 

[desinr-gal]

The discussions I've seen on Reddit state the belief that it exists to destroy the grey market, by discrediting the vendors, while simultaneously finding them out so they can be targeted by federal agenies. The backers being Big Pharma or Big Pharma funded.

Now, of course grey vendors who are being hurt would say this. So who to believe?

Given the recent Fed attacks I'm siding with the conspiracy theorists on this one and not going there to see the test results.

 

[nonyabizznez]

Great points, can never be too skeptical of vendors. That just makes me think group testing as a whole is pointless if no batch information can be trusted

When a group buy vendor receives a bulk shipment then distributes to individual buyers culling samples at random I personally have more confidence in the testing. The bulk order was placed at the same time, shipped at the same time and tested at the same time.

If you personally test a vial out of your kit the result is only for the unrecoverable vial submitted. You can't be 100% certain the remaining 9 vials even came from the same run. Lid colors? For a long time Amo used the same lid color (blue) on everything regardless of peptide or date of manufacture. Over the last couple months there were at least 6 vendors with orange top T30. Several group buy T30's had the orange top as well. At what point would a batch number be useful here? The origin of the raws or the individual lyophilizers or the vendors who claim to have their own factories who are just salespeople sitting on a laptop collecting crypto?

The first representation a vendor displays is an attractive Asian actress/model avatar they've selected to represent themselves. If you accept the reality might be your "Bella" or "Lucy" is actually a row of chain smoking dudes in a computer lab fighting over laptop space the value of 3rd party testing becomes more clear. Trust with a vendor is always temporary and fleeting.

 

[ZippityDooDah]

The first representation a vendor displays is an attractive Asian actress/model avatar they've selected to represent themselves. If you accept the reality might be your "Bella" or "Lucy" is actually a row of chain smoking dudes in a computer lab fighting over laptop space the value of 3rd party testing becomes more clear. Trust with a vendor is always temporary and fleeting.

Were you secretly recording my conversation at lunch yesterday?

Other than using "boiler room" instead of computer lab and my assumption that these men are all in their 60's, your description was almost verbatim!

 

[StonePny]

When a group buy vendor receives a bulk shipment then distributes to individual buyers culling samples at random I personally have more confidence in the testing. The bulk order was placed at the same time, shipped at the same time and tested at the same time.

If you personally test a vial out of your kit the result is only for the unrecoverable vial submitted. You can't be 100% certain the remaining 9 vials even came from the same run. Lid colors? For a long time Amo used the same lid color (blue) on everything regardless of peptide or date of manufacture. Over the last couple months there were at least 6 vendors with orange top T30. Several group buy T30's had the orange top as well. At what point would a batch number be useful here? The origin of the raws or the individual lyophilizers or the vendors who claim to have their own factories who are just salespeople sitting on a laptop collecting crypto?

The first representation a vendor displays is an attractive Asian actress/model avatar they've selected to represent themselves. If you accept the reality might be your "Bella" or "Lucy" is actually a row of chain smoking dudes in a computer lab fighting over laptop space the value of 3rd party testing becomes more clear. Trust with a vendor is always temporary and fleeting.

As a sensitive kind of gal, I used to think this and @ZippityDooDah were overly cynical and little jaded.

Now I'm sure it's not even cynical enough. You need to stay on your toes in this dystopian carnival

 

[BooneDonk]

As a sensitive kind of gal, I used to think this and @ZippityDooDah were overly cynical and little jaded.

Now I'm sure it's not even cynical enough. You need to stay on your toes in this dystopian carnival

True story.....

We might be running our own circus, but the monkeys and elephants are definately borrowed!

 

[ZippityDooDah]

As a sensitive kind of gal, I used to think this and @ZippityDooDah were overly cynical and little jaded.

Now I'm sure it's not even cynical enough. You need to stay on your toes in this dystopian carnival

Now you know how it feels to be one of my ex-wives.

 

[desinr-gal]

Being new, and perhaps not risk averse enough..I would like to hear about any bad batch experiences researchers have had. I hear about trips to ER but usually on reddit and those people made choices I would never make.. What are the likely bad batch scenarios? Not theoretical, but actual.

 

[chmuse]

Being new, and perhaps not risk averse enough..I would like to hear about any bad batch experiences researchers have had. I hear about trips to ER but usually on reddit and those people made choices I would never make.. What are the likely bad batch scenarios? Not theoretical, but actual.

Too much overfill. Too little pep. No pep. Wrong pep. Weird contaminates.

Some bad humanin supposedly sent people to the ER. I personally bought tesa that turned out to be MT2.

 

[FamousGoodkitty]

View attachment 8212 can someone help me understand this? if the purity is 99.61% why is the test score low? Is it because of the difference in quantity?

If I understand correctly, they "mark down" differences between the label (10 mg) and the test results (for example 11.590 mg), because for some of these peps that number is important to figuring out your dosing from that vial. I think they do take into account if the vendor's COA points out the difference and if they point out the difference when advertising the product - although you would need to check with the scammers manipulating test results for profit at Finnrisk on that. They are looking to ensure that the customer knows exactly what they are getting - 10 mg or 11.59 mg.

 

[zpped]

Great points, can never be too skeptical of vendors. That just makes me think group testing as a whole is pointless if no batch information can be trusted

Group testing is not as certain as individual testing, but it's always a tradeoff on how much risk you're willing to take. The kits ARE finished in batches. You just have no idea when one batch stops and another ends. Knowing about the the manufacturing and sales pipeline process allows us to make educated guesses.

Too much overfill. Too little pep. No pep. Wrong pep. Weird contaminates.

Some bad humanin supposedly sent people to the ER. I personally bought tesa that turned out to be MT2.

This is presupposing there is such a thing as good humanin (but also that vial almost certainly had nothing to do with it). Also, hows your tan, lol

If I understand correctly, they "mark down" differences between the label (10 mg) and the test results (for example 11.590 mg), because for some of these peps that number is important to figuring out your dosing from that vial. I think they do take into account if the vendor's COA points out the difference and if they point out the difference when advertising the product - although you would need to check with the scammers manipulating test results for profit at Finnrisk on that. They are looking to ensure that the customer knows exactly what they are getting - 10 mg or 11.59 mg.

Yeah, I am very vocal about overfill being an issue. But that is only under the condition that it wasn't known before sale. If the vender marketed it saying it was 11mg who cares if they called it a T10

 

[desinr-gal]

Too much overfill. Too little pep. No pep. Wrong pep. Weird contaminates.

Some bad humanin supposedly sent people to the ER. I personally bought tesa that turned out to be MT2.

I did see a couple of reports of bad tesa sending people to ER a month ago..

I am trying to guage the odds of this occuring I guess.

 

[chmuse]

This is presupposing there is such a thing as good humanin (but also that vial almost certainly had nothing to do with it). Also, hows your tan, lol

I don't use things that aren't tested. I'm as pale as ever. It's still sitting in my freezer, I should probably get rid of it.

 

[chmuse]

I did see a couple of reports of bad tesa sending people to ER a month ago..

I am trying to guage the odds of this occuring I guess.

Bad tesa? I missed that one. Got any deets?

 

[joseblo]

I'm glad to see some of my own thinking echoed here. The reliability of lot codes (or cap colors) could only be influenced by the original manufacturers in collaboration with distributors, and I just don't think they have any incentive (for security reasons). Even if they wanted to label, it would have to be with printed unique codes on the caps/bottles (though fluorescence labeling of the lyoph would be cool), and in my short time I've seen plenty of mistakes here which are so reputationally bad they must be screw-ups. Frankly, other than more testing/filtering I'm not sure the compounding pharms are that much better. I certainly had a batch from one I didn't trust (ended up alternating 2 sources for 4 weeks) never went back and tossed out jabs at $100 each.

When group buys get different color caps that are supposedly to be the same batch, you have to laugh or cry (I guess it's better than getting the same color for different peps). I almost think that with the data available on fill%, purity, and cap colors from different vendors over time there's almost enough statistical data to figure how many sources there are and which distributors use which ones. Maybe that's part of what the scammers manipulating test results for profit at Finnrisk is up to?