List of all Labor Day Deals
-
@Superpep For sure. We do have the opportunity to push for more accountability in testing. They are doing the bare minimum and should be called out. Like you say, to each their own. It's a matter of choice.
-
@Superpep Ugghhh I was about to order MOTS-C from Genpeptide because I am unhappy with the Nexaph test results and then I see a Freedom COA and one assay. Literally one vial tested. No sterility or anything else. Of course, the Freedom COA of the Nexaph MOTS-C showed 99.5%, the Janoshik is 97%. They posted both. I would have to be a complete idiot to order it from Genpeptide. It's just aggravating that these vendors don't get it, and the more we support the ones who don't take this seriously, the more they will do it.
@Stevepep Thank you for sharing your concerns. We at GenPeptide are aware of the community's requests for additional testing and are working on adding additional testing. We have a 4 month plan to introduce 7x testing for all peptides, and a short term 4 week plan to add two additional tests (endotoxins and heavy metals) to our top sold peptides.
-
@Stevepep Thank you for sharing your concerns. We at GenPeptide are aware of the community's requests for additional testing and are working on adding additional testing. We have a 4 month plan to introduce 7x testing for all peptides, and a short term 4 week plan to add two additional tests (endotoxins and heavy metals) to our top sold peptides.
@Genpeptide That is so great to hear and exactly what I was hoping for. I will be a future purchaser. It just doesn't get better than that
-
The truth is, we can make a difference if we hold the retailers accountable. If you don't, why would they change? Just don't order from a vendor who does half ass testing. This impacts all of us. If we stick together and hold these retailers to a standard, they have no choice but to meet it or have no business. We have the largest group of people in the peptide market of any group. There is no need to save a couple of bucks and buy something that has questionable testing just because you got away with it in the past. Quality is going down not up. Its time to be extra vigilant. We have two examples Studz and Genpeptide, two companies with stand up owners who agreed to the standard.
-
The truth is, we can make a difference if we hold the retailers accountable. If you don't, why would they change? Just don't order from a vendor who does half ass testing. This impacts all of us. If we stick together and hold these retailers to a standard, they have no choice but to meet it or have no business. We have the largest group of people in the peptide market of any group. There is no need to save a couple of bucks and buy something that has questionable testing just because you got away with it in the past. Quality is going down not up. Its time to be extra vigilant. We have two examples Studz and Genpeptide, two companies with stand up owners who agreed to the standard.
@Stevepep Who is to say what the standard should even be? IMO, a lot of these tests are pointless.
Janoshik himself has said he has never come across a failed heavy metal test. This is a lab testing thousands of peptides. What exactly are we accomplishing by continuing to test for it?
I’m all for conformity and endotoxin testing because those can actually tell us something useful about the product. But sterility testing is another one I’m iffy about
I could lyophilize a peptide under absolutely horrible conditions with zero regard for sterility, then run the finished product through a sterile filter and send it off for testing immediately. The sterility test could come back with zero microbial growth.
But does that prove the peptide was produced under sterile conditions? Not really.
At the end of the day, the test is only telling you whether microorganisms were detected in that particular sample at that particular point in time. It doesn't necessarily tell you anything about how the product was manufactured or whether contamination occurred earlier in the process.
We need to ask ourselves what these tests are actually designed to prove, rather than just assuming that more testing automatically means a better or safer product.
-
@Stevepep Who is to say what the standard should even be? IMO, a lot of these tests are pointless.
Janoshik himself has said he has never come across a failed heavy metal test. This is a lab testing thousands of peptides. What exactly are we accomplishing by continuing to test for it?
I’m all for conformity and endotoxin testing because those can actually tell us something useful about the product. But sterility testing is another one I’m iffy about
I could lyophilize a peptide under absolutely horrible conditions with zero regard for sterility, then run the finished product through a sterile filter and send it off for testing immediately. The sterility test could come back with zero microbial growth.
But does that prove the peptide was produced under sterile conditions? Not really.
At the end of the day, the test is only telling you whether microorganisms were detected in that particular sample at that particular point in time. It doesn't necessarily tell you anything about how the product was manufactured or whether contamination occurred earlier in the process.
We need to ask ourselves what these tests are actually designed to prove, rather than just assuming that more testing automatically means a better or safer product.
-
@Stevepep Who is to say what the standard should even be? IMO, a lot of these tests are pointless.
Janoshik himself has said he has never come across a failed heavy metal test. This is a lab testing thousands of peptides. What exactly are we accomplishing by continuing to test for it?
I’m all for conformity and endotoxin testing because those can actually tell us something useful about the product. But sterility testing is another one I’m iffy about
I could lyophilize a peptide under absolutely horrible conditions with zero regard for sterility, then run the finished product through a sterile filter and send it off for testing immediately. The sterility test could come back with zero microbial growth.
But does that prove the peptide was produced under sterile conditions? Not really.
At the end of the day, the test is only telling you whether microorganisms were detected in that particular sample at that particular point in time. It doesn't necessarily tell you anything about how the product was manufactured or whether contamination occurred earlier in the process.
We need to ask ourselves what these tests are actually designed to prove, rather than just assuming that more testing automatically means a better or safer product.
@Superpep maybe we should do no testing? The concept is to reduce risk as much as possible by testing multiple vials for ID, Purity and Content that gives us some idea about the variation vial to vial. If we can match that to a batch number, cap and crimp color that gives us a better shot that the COA represents the actual batch. Sterility is a no brainer test it lets us know if within the vial organisms will grow. Anything less and the risk factor increases substantially.
Your an adult do what you want but suggesting a race to the bottom is bad for everyone. Just because you have gotten away with not caring about solid testing doesn’t mean that will continue. So be careful
Also your understanding of sterility is far from fact. I am not going to get into thinking a filter is going to remove all organisms from a peptide manufactured in a horribly unsterile environment because it won’t and I filter.
-
The truth is, we can make a difference if we hold the retailers accountable. If you don't, why would they change? Just don't order from a vendor who does half ass testing. This impacts all of us. If we stick together and hold these retailers to a standard, they have no choice but to meet it or have no business. We have the largest group of people in the peptide market of any group. There is no need to save a couple of bucks and buy something that has questionable testing just because you got away with it in the past. Quality is going down not up. Its time to be extra vigilant. We have two examples Studz and Genpeptide, two companies with stand up owners who agreed to the standard.
The truth is, we can make a difference if we hold the retailers accountable.
Yes, and accountable for everything, not just testing.
Who is to say what the standard should even be? IMO, a lot of these tests are pointless.
Pointless or not, the standard should be OURS. We're the ones paying.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login