Nexaph testing

GimmeABreak said:
i recently sent two vials to be tested by Peptide Test from two different vendors. Tuk Angel (ASC) and SRY, the SRY shipment took about 10 days longer to receive so and I put the ASC vials in the a thermos in the freezer at about -3 degrees F (average). Both vials tested with great results. Not necessarily an A/B test but the ASC vial went through at least one freeze/thaw cycle. I plan to test again next October to see how they hold up after a year stored at -8.7F (I bought a dedicated freezer).

The results of both tests are posted on this site but they are impossible to find. For SOME reason lowly users like me are not permitted to post test results in the test results channel. I don't want to post again in the public square but can DM them if you're interested.
Click to expand...
Very interested, everyone makes on how fragile the peptides are and I've read reports swinging in both directions. I was trying to find info on degradation after extended storage but with the newness of this whole GLP research that's hard to find. I have about 18-24 months stash and was trying to decide buy more or not 🤔 I have a ways to go yet (probably take at least a year at this rate) and then I NEVER want to go back to the way I was.
 
noteablequotable said:
That was the impression I had based on comments I've seen but I've only seen comments. 100% ready to defer to you on that.

I think 98% is okay and I'm not mad about it. I don't think I've overestimated the value of purity at all.



You're in Peppy's right? There is currently a super long thread about them refusing to help a customer with their package. It's a great example of why I would never work with them.
Click to expand...
"purity" is super important, but you know that the "purity" listed on a hplc test result doesn't mean (tirzeptitide/everything else in the vial). In this case it means (tirzepetide/things that are very similar to tirzepetide)

So the purity number on the test is an indicator of degradation and current efficacy, but it doesn't indicate anything at all about safety.
 
noteablequotable said:
QSC honestly just doesn't care. People continue to buy from them when they treat individual customers poorly so they're basically getting away with it.
Click to expand...
QSC is a funny one. I've only dealt with them once and it was a pleasant and seamless experience. But I think people need to go into the deal with eyes wide open, and you need to read Tracy's terms of sale down to the letter. If it's not in writing, he's not doing it. If he put it in writing but it's not specific, for example "purity guaranteed" but there's not a percent value specified, don't expect him to make good. I do think there are some clear pro's to using QSC and I wouldn't deter a newbie to the gray world from making them their first purchase. They are probably the biggest seller by volume, and there are probably more third party tests floating out there for QSC products than any other vendor. Just based on the sheer volume of independent testing done, and the volume of reviews, I would be feel ok (definitely not warm and fuzzy!) pinning QSC peps without a test if I was desperate for a glp-1 and didn't have the money to pay for my own testing. I'm pretty confident that they aren't going to sell me something that will kill me. They have a long history of selling AAS to the muscle crowd that predates glp-1s so there's that history to go off of as well. Lord help you though if something goes wrong with your shipment, because there's a decent chance you just threw money away.

I'm currently debating stocking up on more tirz and probably won't use QSC though. I like diversity and the batch I bought tested at the low end of 99% and upper end of 98%. Not bad, but I think they can be doing better than that 🙄
 
geoguy78 said:
I do think there are some clear pro's to using QSC and I wouldn't deter a newbie to the gray world from making them their first purchase.
.....
Lord help you though if something goes wrong with your shipment, because there's a decent chance you just threw money away.
Click to expand...

The fact that they won't help you if anything goes wrong is exactly why I wouldn't recommend to someone new. Most people entering this space ultimately come here because because they don't have enough money to pay the sticker price being charged by pharmaceutical companies or MedSpas. Getting robbed on your first purchase because QSC doesn't care that you didn't get what you were promised is a horrible experience. I'd send someone to Skye or Tydes for their immediate needs before I sent them to QSC.
 
noteablequotable said:
The fact that they won't help you if anything goes wrong is exactly why I wouldn't recommend to someone new. Most people entering this space ultimately come here because because they don't have enough money to pay the sticker price being charged by pharmaceutical companies or MedSpas. Getting robbed on your first purchase because QSC doesn't care that you didn't get what you were promised is a horrible experience. I'd send someone to Skye or Tydes for their immediate needs before I sent them to QSC.
Click to expand...
Are there really that many people getting screwed though? Yes, it's a risk, but it doesn't seem to happen that often. And we're in a bubble here too, a couple forums and chat groups where the horror stories are inevitably going to come out and get amplified. I've seen Tracy act like an ass and treat a customer like garbage, there's no excuse for that. But I still put QSC in my "reasonably safe to do business with" category.

I really feel like domestic vendors like the ones you mentioned just overcharge for a false sense of security, but that's just my opinion.
 
geoguy78 said:
Are there really that many people getting screwed though? Yes, it's a risk, but it doesn't seem to happen that often. And we're in a bubble here too, a couple forums and chat groups where the horror stories are inevitably going to come out and get amplified. I've seen Tracy act like an ass and treat a customer like garbage, there's no excuse for that. But I still put QSC in my "reasonably safe to do business with" category.

I really feel like domestic vendors like the ones you mentioned just overcharge for a false sense of security, but that's just my opinion.
Click to expand...

I haven't documented all of the times QSC has screwed someone over but the folks over at Peppy's have been monitoring their behavior closely and actually have a warning ⚠️ on their vendor page.

Domestic vendors absolutely charge a premium but they also take very good care of their customers. I have first hand experience with that. USPS marked one of my packages from Skye as delivered without dropping off the box and I was really upset because that order wasn't cheap. I reached out to them and not only were they super nice, they promised to reship the package if it wasn't delivered within a few days. I waited and the box was ultimately delivered, but that kind of support is worth its weight in gold.
 
noteablequotable said:
I haven't documented all of the times QSC has screwed someone over but the folks over at Peppy's have been monitoring their behavior closely and actually have a warning ⚠️ on their vendor page.

Domestic vendors absolutely charge a premium but they also take very good care of their customers. I have first hand experience with that. USPS marked one of my packages from Skye as delivered without dropping off the box and I was really upset because that order wasn't cheap. I reached out to them and not only were they super nice, they promised to reship the package if it wasn't delivered within a few days. I waited and the box was ultimately delivered, but that kind of support is worth its weight in gold.
Click to expand...
those domestic vendor 800+% margins do make it easier for them to eat a reship. You’re right though, if you’re just dipping your toe in then skye et al would be a good place to start. But don’t get all excited and buy 30 vials from those guys, suck up the overseas experience when you’re filling your hoardy hole.
 
exploitedworkerbee said:
those domestic vendor 800+% margins do make it easier for them to eat a reship. You’re right though, if you’re just dipping your toe in then skye et al would be a good place to start. But don’t get all excited and buy 30 vials from those guys, suck up the overseas experience when you’re filling your hoardy hole.
Click to expand...
I would even go as far to say your first purchases as a newbie should be domestic while you continue to read and gather information. If you get screwed it’s not because there was a lack of information available.
 
peptideusername said:
That’s because, after the test is completed, the option to pay a little more and have the test result published is offered to the customer. And as @exploitedworkerbee pointed out (on another forum), that leads to cherry picking results. Have you ever noticed that there are only good test results on the public page of Jano’s website?

I would argue that right now, until that policy changes, the Jano site is one of the worst places to look for sources because you’re only going to find results that the vendors want you to find.
Click to expand...
I agree 100% with what you are saying and it's becoming more true by the day with Janoshik's public postings... Wasn't always as obvious as it is now though (it's a shame) I stand corrected.
 
On the reddit tirz telegram people are claiming Nexaph tirz degrades 1% per month.
 
beefsteak said:
On the reddit tirz telegram people are claiming Nexaph tirz degrades 1% per month.
Click to expand...
I’ve never seen a test below 98. Something. I guessing that several have been tested older than than a month. I have the 10mg batch that has been the subject of many discussions. He is sending replacement for it somewhere around November 26th. I hope someone ask for a donation of one of my vials to test 6 months down the road, that would be a really good indication of how or if it is degrading. I have about 7 months of compound in stock to use up first.
 
exploitedworkerbee said:
If they set a standard by saying they replace under 99% then by definition yes, 98% is substandard.
Click to expand...

Ty. I am just hyper aware of the fact that these conversations will outlive us and someone might read through in the future. Thought it would be helpful to confirm that the your issue wasn't 98% purity vials, but Nexaph changing their standards.
 
noteablequotable said:
Ty. I am just hyper aware of the fact that these conversations will outlive us and someone might read through in the future. Thought it would be helpful to confirm that the your issue wasn't 98% purity vials, but Nexaph changing their standards.
Click to expand...
Gotcha. Yep, i personally have no issue taking something that tests 98%, and I think that most people who do have a problem with it don’t have a handle on what the purity figure actually means.

That said, when vendors make purity promises they’re promoting the idea that high purity is critical for safety in order to sell a product, so they ought to be prepared to eat a little shit when they lower their purity standards.
 
Kjm1960 said:
I’ve never seen a test below 98. Something. I guessing that several have been tested older than than a month. I have the 10mg batch that has been the subject of many discussions. He is sending replacement for it somewhere around November 26th. I hope someone ask for a donation of one of my vials to test 6 months down the road, that would be a really good indication of how or if it is degrading. I have about 7 months of compound in stock to use up first.
Click to expand...
Did you reach out to him about the replacement? I also have some of the batch that is supposed to be replaced and wasn't sure if I was supposed to do something
 
Bbnp1 said:
Did you reach out to him about the replacement? I also have some of the batch that is supposed to be replaced and wasn't sure if I was supposed to do something
Click to expand...
From my understanding, they know who has this batch and will automatically ship replacement.
I will be looking for it 😁
 
noteablequotable said:
Ty. I am just hyper aware of the fact that these conversations will outlive us and someone might read through in the future. Thought it would be helpful to confirm that the your issue wasn't 98% purity vials, but Nexaph changing their standards.
Click to expand...
I envision professors several hundreds of years into the future poring over each post and comment made in the glp1forum. Folks will have Ph.D.s in interpreting DwightTheDelight's comments.
 
keangkong said:
I envision professors several hundreds of years into the future poring over each post and comment made in the glp1forum. Folks will have Ph.D.s in interpreting DwightTheDelight's comments.
Click to expand...

Listen. I'm just going to take that as a compliment so we can remain besties. I know what you are thinking too, "Dwight doesn't know what I'm thinking..." And you are right. Let that sink in.
 
noteablequotable said:
Nexaph promises 99%, ASC considers 98% acceptable and does not guarantee 99%. So far as I know if anyone contacts Cain about a vial that tests below 99% he makes it right (refund or replacement) and does spot testing by reaching out to other people who also purchased the same batch. Given all of the different factors that can impact purity I don't know what else we should ask for.
Click to expand...
endotoxin, sterility, product mass
 
GimmeABreak said:
i recently sent two vials to be tested by Peptide Test from two different vendors. Tuk Angel (ASC) and SRY, the SRY shipment took about 10 days longer to receive so and I put the ASC vials in the a thermos in the freezer at about -3 degrees F (average). Both vials tested with great results. Not necessarily an A/B test but the ASC vial went through at least one freeze/thaw cycle. I plan to test again next October to see how they hold up after a year stored at -8.7F (I bought a dedicated freezer).

The results of both tests are posted on this site but they are impossible to find. For SOME reason lowly users like me are not permitted to post test results in the test results channel. I don't want to post again in the public square but can DM them if you're interested.
Click to expand...
Looking forward to the testing you plan to do again next October! Generous of you to offer to share the COAs for the tests you've just had done on ASC and SRY. Which Sry product?
 
exploitedworkerbee said:
Apparently nexa/baba/ezp lowered purity guarantee to 98% for everything other than glp1s, guess they got tired of having to keep replacing all that substandard product they’ve been sending out.
Click to expand...

They have temporarily lowered the guarantee to 98% because they are having to use a new API. The API guarantees 99% but they don't know without testing a batch. Once the API has been confirmed as high quality I'm sure the guaranty will go back to 99%. There have been problems with API's in China recently, hence the need to switch.

GLP1 peptides are HIGHLY profitable therefore the API used for them is still the same with the same guarantees as before.
 
Last edited:
husla22 said:
They have temporarily lowered the guarantee to 98% because they are having to use a new API. The API guarantees 99% but they don't know without testing a batch. Once the API has been confirmed as high quality I'm sure the guaranty will go back to 99%. There have been problems with API's in China recently, hence the need to switch.

GLP1 peptides are HIGHLY profitable therefore the API used for them is still the same.
Click to expand...
they caught several sub-99 tests though, which seems to conflict with the “alls well this is just in case” story
 
husla22 said:
They have temporarily lowered the guarantee to 98% because they are having to use a new API. The API guarantees 99% but they don't know without testing a batch. Once the API has been confirmed as high quality I'm sure the guaranty will go back to 99%. There have been problems with API's in China recently, hence the need to switch.

GLP1 peptides are HIGHLY profitable therefore the API used for them is still the same.
Click to expand...
They lowered the purity guarantee for NON GLP-1 peptides, Tirz, Reta, Sema, etc are all still 99%
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending Topics

Latest Posts

Members Online

Total: 380 (20 Members & 360 Guests)

Forum Statistics

Threads
3,318
Posts
54,683
Members
7,187
Latest member
womanoftheyear

Share This Page!

Top Bottom