Perhaps the “obvious error” is more of a personal bias to be right than actually being right. I have to admit I take exception to this statement that essentially you are saying some long time testers like myself, and others I will not name, but exceptional testers all the same, are wrong and we never actually did any research! That’s a rather disingenuous statement not even knowing what we have and have not tested.
Unfortunately androtics has a habit of saying that pretty much all competition is “black hat” or evil which, regardless if its a strategy to alienate and ostracize for business purposes is true or not (Phil Stone included), prevents many members that have tested that molecule from sharing our research here. A few of us have an extensive private database on every molecule androtics and many other companies sell, but do not share because of the limitations on who we can talk about here without repercussions. We respect Androtics enough to value their business model and will not divulge this information.
Jasmin has said a lot of molecules are not this or that, but please keep in mind she has a business to run. Regardless of whether anyone wants to believe it or not androtics is in the business of making money. I work for androtics to make money. So does Mickaelia, Ben, Jacob… There is nothing wrong with making money either.
Lets take MX297 for instance in relation to Jasmin’s posts (linked below) about how the P series are all pretty much unique. After much acclaim on the forum, the more I used it the more I did not like it. After extensive testing I did a post in my journal with some personal observations: The Path of the Righteous Man - #53 by SteveO My theorem is that MX297 is P91 heavy and that TAL and P90 all remind me of similar results. I also get a weak beta boy vibe from the A314 P90 special edition. I don’t believe in neutering ones self thus fooling myself into believing that because women are paying more attention to me leads to sex. In fact, I very much believe that it’s a wonderful way for men to suddenly discover just how to not sexually attract females.
I didn’t have to tell anyone that, but I always believed sharing my experiences on the forum is good for others to research. Well very surprising to me soon afterward Jasmin decided to post this Rough synthesis vs. "perfect" - P88 vs. P93
I found the timing of the post to be remarkably coincidental when here I am just days before stating something vastly different. Do I believe that this is to mislead, a conspiracy, or some type of ill-intent? Categorically NO! This is a business and a business must do what it needs to do to continue doing business. It’s the very reason androtics does not name their molecules, but keeps them a secret. It eliminates any competition and as researchers there is not a thing you can do with the molecules except continue to buy them from Anrotics because you like them. Again, I see nothing wrong with that.
As mentioned I have an extensive database started with Dancing Joker that we are systematically testing every known molecule and then cross checking against other suppliers same named molecules. We have found a vast difference in some molecules with the same names from different suppliers. Quality issues, mostly from China, and some results that are just baffling to us. What’s more interesting, we have also drawn some most interesting conclusions on what some putatives are. All the same that does not mean that because we have tested something do I go and say a vast majority of other researchers are wrong. Out of respect for androtics that information will stay private and confidential between all the people involved in the project.
So yes, I take exception not to your statement that those of us who have tested it and come to different conclusions are wrong, but because you are accusing many of us of not testing at all.