glucorellr 240ct
- Thread starter macro
- Start date
considering that glucorell uses the ONLY viable testing method, other than labiochems which is not as accurate (though its quite good, certainly suitable)... you and pretty much everyone else, including those selling r-ala, have no idea. This is not meant to be harsh, though that was your intention, it is just the truth.
as a note, very few manufacturers and resellers have 99% material, from experience less than 1 in 5 lots of raw material tested met standards.
for this reason every batch of material is tested even from a reliable manufacturer.
you should be very cautious in making claims about a topic on the basis incorrect and inadequate information.
as a note- the hplc method used by asta medica was innaccurate by their own admission as well as by the critique of the journal in which it was published. and they used a custom column which as you might guess is not being used by those that would purport to test using that method (innaccurate as it is).
as a note, very few manufacturers and resellers have 99% material, from experience less than 1 in 5 lots of raw material tested met standards.
for this reason every batch of material is tested even from a reliable manufacturer.
you should be very cautious in making claims about a topic on the basis incorrect and inadequate information.
as a note- the hplc method used by asta medica was innaccurate by their own admission as well as by the critique of the journal in which it was published. and they used a custom column which as you might guess is not being used by those that would purport to test using that method (innaccurate as it is).
Sir Foxx
New member
Ok, Macro, assuming all that you have just said is true(and I don't) explain the underdosing by almost 50% per capsule. Before you come back that the lab that tested it is bogus, the other R-ALA that was tested at the very least came out less than 1% short of what was supposed to be in the capsule. We can argue all day about this testing procedure over that testing procedure on the purity of the R-ALA but when it comes to weighing the amount of whatever was in a capsule and one is almost half off, the alarm bells ring. Because if the lab in question had messed that up they would have messed up the other R-ALA they tested too, but that R-ALA came out almost right on in weight.
And Macro I don't have a problem with you, I do have a problem with Ulter. You really shouldn't let him promote AF as his attitude and the way he comes across only hurts AF. You should be the spokesman, at the very least one can have a conversation with you, still disagree and not end up hating the company you work for.
And Macro I don't have a problem with you, I do have a problem with Ulter. You really shouldn't let him promote AF as his attitude and the way he comes across only hurts AF. You should be the spokesman, at the very least one can have a conversation with you, still disagree and not end up hating the company you work for.
grafixLSUalum
New member
macro check your pm's bro, also feel free to reply on the board if you wish to address the matter on the board.
sir foxx,
here is the plain and simple of the label claim testing.
the results provided were false.
the testing method used was innaccurate, and delineated thus in the journal in which it was published, though in all truth it is most likely that the testing was not even done.
every batch of glucorellr has met label claims both with respect to content and purity. the particular batch in question has been tested and retested by three reputable labs. Covance, NMR services, San rafael. all came out a 99+ to 100+mg, which is considered to be exceptional.
not surprising inquiries about the lab who provided the false results has yeilded offers of affidavits regarding the less than savory practices of the lab in question.
as a further note the HPLC test published in chirality and done by Asta medica used a custom chiral column, a column they did not sell to anyone in the US. The distributors for both lycrosphere and Daicell- the two largest column manufacturers were unsure if such a column could be made without extensive work on their behalf. And they also said that accuracy would be questionable.
here is the plain and simple of the label claim testing.
the results provided were false.
the testing method used was innaccurate, and delineated thus in the journal in which it was published, though in all truth it is most likely that the testing was not even done.
every batch of glucorellr has met label claims both with respect to content and purity. the particular batch in question has been tested and retested by three reputable labs. Covance, NMR services, San rafael. all came out a 99+ to 100+mg, which is considered to be exceptional.
not surprising inquiries about the lab who provided the false results has yeilded offers of affidavits regarding the less than savory practices of the lab in question.
as a further note the HPLC test published in chirality and done by Asta medica used a custom chiral column, a column they did not sell to anyone in the US. The distributors for both lycrosphere and Daicell- the two largest column manufacturers were unsure if such a column could be made without extensive work on their behalf. And they also said that accuracy would be questionable.
Similar threads
