Do you guys really have faith in Energy Control?

So first I'll post this SSB addressing the different test results on his speed on the Avengers forum

I've opened this account to answer all the questions about the quality of our products once for all.

As you know we synthesize the amphetamine ourselves and we've been offering the same pure product since SR1 and I can guarantee you that the quality has only gone up. So where's the issue? It's the same sloppy lab routine of the Energy Control lab we've been suffering through the years.

Around 6 years ago when we started in this business we were sending samples regularly just to see how good was our product and how to improve it. After some time we realized that there was something odd with the results so we decided to send two samples of the same product and the results were embarrassing (for EC). One of the samples tested at around 50 and the second at more than 70%. This was the moment when we decided to stop working with EC and invest in our own chromatography kit.

The next issue we had was when a good customer of us opened a thread on the Silk Road 2 forums where he stated that our amphetamine was adulterated with caffeine, he wrote this in capital letters. Imagine how awful was this as we always struggled to offer the best quality product to everyone and suddenly we received this kick in the ass. Cutting amphetamine with caffeine is the dirtiest thing you can do, I was so angry that I directly attacked this poor guy calling him a bullshitter. After some discussion he told us that the sample was analyzed in Energy Control, I explained the problem we always had with EC and he agreed to send them an e-mail. EC repeated the analysis and concluded that there was no caffeine in the sample (surprise...) and the bad results came from a cross-contamination from a previous sample. So sloppy. (You can find the post in the SilkRoad2 forums mirror if you wish)

And now, you've send 3 samples from the same batch, because we've been selling the same batch from 2015 to March 2016, and they have tested at 57%, 51% and 67% which is just plain ridiculous.

I've also seen that there were odd results with some meth samples, so it's not only with amphetamine.

Operating a GC-MS can prove to be a difficult thing and if you have low resources it can be even more difficult, so I understand the issues that EC may have. We don't have such equipment, our test methods are less trendy but much more reliable and easy to use. And as I told you in the beginning we synthesize the product ourselves and we've been doing it for a long time so we know exactly if it's diluted or not and I can guarantee you that a 50 or 60% figure is way off, just impossible. I can't tell you an exact figure because I really don't know, but I'm sure that no batch has gone below 95%.

You can believe me or not, I will understand if you don't. But I wanted to tell you the real story. We'll continue to offer the best quality amphetamine of the darknet like we've been doing for the past 5 years.

Greetings! SuperSpeedBros

Now this alone wouldn't be much to go on. But then what about all the meth results they've already admitted were wrong? That didnt sound right they had kept samples and were going to do it again. The amount you send in is only enough for 1 sample in the first place. That too raises serious doubts in my mind.

UK vendor Meerkovo had 3 different test results from them off the same brick of batch MK04. Ordinarily I would say possible. But one result of 78%, one result of 93%? Dutch_Coke_Reviewer's test carried out in the Netherlands found it to be 83%, which converted to EC's GC/MS method would make for 94%. I'm pretty sure MK04 was sent in twice because people didn't believe the first result.

There's been quite alot of other results I dont quite believe either. My buddy ordered meth. Stuff he said was shit tested at 95%. Stuff he said was much better at 46%. He knows his shit.

Do you guys really put that much faith in it? I dont anymore but I think the only way forwards is to have 2 seperate labs confirm each batch, or maybe 3. If not we are relying too much upon one service getting everything 100% right for us. We are not holding or own DN testing service to accountability on it's credibility of the results we agree on. Where as if we could get another lab or 2 (I know BIG ask!!) also testing, we could be more sure of what we are saying as a community is how pure.

Just some food for thought.


Comments


[21 Points] derechoprivado:

As a spaniard who have had the "pleasure" of meeting some of the people involved in EC i wouldn't trust 100% their % of purity nor their biochemistry knowledge. You should ask them their opinion about homeopathy and have fun


[14 Points] Vendor_BBMC:

Don't be too quick to demonize Energy Control. EC are a harm-reduction charity, not a marketing tool for us meth vendors. They do say that the results aren't quantitative, and to be fair they are totally accurate from an analytical chemist's viewpoint.

I've never seen a lab test result that didn't give a figure followed by a probable error eg "+/- 2%", +/- 20%" before.

EC don't make any promises, or even offer guidance like this with regard to their testing accuracy, so they're not breaking any rules if the results are absolute bollocks.

The thing is, I don't know what Energy Control actually have to say about these things. I only know what DNMavenger has told us they said. I haven't seen the actual testing result reports in most cases either, just the headline result from DNMavengers, sometimes followed by a corrected one.

I don't think anybody claimed the meth was re-tested. If I remember correctly, DNMavenger said that the (concentrated due to evaporation) meth calibration solution was tested against a new correct standard, and the meth results almost doubled because the calibration standard was almost twice as concentrated as it should have been.

HOWEVER this would only be accurate for meth samples tested on the day the problem was discovered and the stopper finally replaced.

As we all know, evaporation is slow, so over the weeks the stopper wasn't in place the calibration standard would have been getting more and more concentrated. Nobody will know what date the stopper wasn't replaced (or why it wasn't corrected the next time it was used), but earlier results will be just a little low, certainly not half of what they should be.

When I saw the first meth testing results, I thought they were made-up because they seemed too high. I expected DNM meth to be the same as street meth in the US, 25% to 40% methamphetamine, so I was suspicious they were all around the 50% mark.

Apparently they were too low! Everybody's results are in the 90% top 95% range! ie dirty, but uncut. I believe most US meth is cut, but fairly clean. Some of it is impure and also cut.

To my knowledge, no US vendor has ever claimed to sell uncut meth.

Did the cock and bull story about the "missing stopper" originate at EC? I don't know. I'm a former analytical chemist, I've tried to help, but I've found the Avengers to be dismissive and opaque. DNMavenger told me that I know nothing about chemistry, and I should go fuck myself.

If the meth results need to have 100% added to "correct" them, how accurate are the LSD results, where millionths of a gram of a large molecule is tested? I believe most of the avengers are good guys who share the same objectives I do, but I KNOW the two reddit mods are sinister shitbags running a shill army with a protectionist agenda, almost entirely funded by GRAMS.

Energy Control may be corrupt or shit, or both too Or Energy Control might be fine. GC/MS is well-established, well-understood technology.


[8 Points] mercilesssgirth:

fucking meth heads. EC is an established laboratory, ran by established physicians and technicians. This sub just gets dumber and dumber.


[3 Points] alfabi:

Any real chemist and I mean real chemist, no phony chemist who pretends to be on internet, can use simple inexpensive method during synthesis to ensure their product are quality, called TLC. Its a mandatory in any lab dealing with organic synthesis. It ensure reaction completitition while ongoing, sample drug isolation and separation and many other things.
Edit: my post has nothing to do with EC. Product quality should speak themselves.


[3 Points] hescos:

I myself am not concerned about the purity level, but whether or not it has LEVA in it, or other nasty cuts like ephedrine, tylenol, aspirin, etc. The difference between 89% and 75% is really irrelevant. So recently a raved domestic vendor tested at roughly 70% but had 12% leva, no thanks.


[1 Points] None:

zero faith at all. but i atleast thought the chemicals would match.


[1 Points] King_Unique:

Finally someone with the same problem as mine,

I produce my products myself. I never cut, no colors, no middleman no impurities i get the single strucrure of my products when produce which means are 100% pure and recently they collected a sample from me for mephedrone with another vendor in order to get purity results from energy control to see who has the best.

Well mine was voted from every single review as much better and HQ than any other vendor and results comes out as 61% (almost half purity for god sake and supposly should be 97-99%)), when i asked the official papers from EC the person who has send them said didnt have them because EC dont give. Aparently the other vendors results which it was the reason why the results took place dissapeared on the way somehow ! Yes thats what they said !

I am waiting results from University this time and another 2 different persons has send again to EC. Lets see how far this funny game with purity results can go.


[1 Points] None:

Are there any other labs?

The only other one I know is pillreports. But the DEA won't let them report purity, they are only allowed to report the active elements. You could get a pill that was 10% MDMA and 90% baking soda and they would report it as just MDMA.


[1 Points] Lucyintehsky:

So are people just supposed to take a vendors word for everything ? everyone can say that they test it themself. not sure where i stand on this as EC did have sloppy meth results. but vendors lie all the time so.


[1 Points] alfabi:

I did read a while ago how EC does not exchange btc to fiat. Their btc just sit in their wallet. They do not get a dime finance from btc. Although, that was many months ago and could be changed. Can EC make mistake, sure. They could have some issues what they need to correct. I think they noticed something is wrong and gave vouge in simple terms to chemistry naive explanation via avengers what happened and that they will look into it. This dnmavengers from EC explanation what EC alegedly stated is now argued by bbmc how is flawed (with his assumptions and additions while he is can't even read mz chart and ignorant about chemistry) while actually it could be just something stated by EC in laymans terms, easy to understand to ordinary users and not actual cause and explanation for test result because detailed reason for bad ec results is too complicated to address. Main issue with EC is trust in who publish results. They should start to publish it on their web site, no manipulation. Afterall, EC is only lab who make quantification (purity) test. Its only lab we got, for time being. EC is more focused to discover potentional harmfull chemical then purity test. Its harm reduction lab, not quality control for dealers. Finally, purity test is just one small factor. Vendor can change his product at any time and there is no way to know would you receive same batch from one being tested. EC should be used only if something is very wrong or suspicious with product what some vendor sells. If you are happy with a vendor product in the past, then no point in unwarranted mistrust and in sending it to EC.


[-2 Points] Selectivescammer1:

I don't anymore as i realised some of the products i got from vendors that was top quality came up poor in the ec test results, didn't make any sense, especially when other vendors with poorer quality got better test results, and i know quality when i take it, and some of their results seemed to be completely the wrong way round, so i lost faith in EC after this