Hardcore Formulations Sarms?

Ok, so we tested that Hardcore Formulations MK-677. A couple things. One, there is clearly maltodextrin in their capsules. However, they do not list that on the label. Not a massive deal, but that is clearly what they are using for a filler. Each capsule supposedly has 12.5mg of MK-677, which is a super low amount to have in a size 0 capsule. It means that there is much more filler in the capsules than active ingredient. So it will mask a lot of peaks. However, it did not mask the impurity peak enough to obscure it.

The impurity that has been showing up on all the batches this year is a solvent residue with a carbonyl group, which is giving an extra peak at about 1,730-1,740 cm-1. HPLC we ran on all the other batches shows the impurity is a few percent, with the total purity of the batches this year ranging from 92-96%. I looked back through the synthesis methods for MK-677, and the only solvent used in the synth that has a carbonyl group is benzyl chloroformate. That step gives yields of about 80%. If they do not purify it before moving onto the next step in the synth, the benzyl chloroformate could be left in, giving us the extra peak at ~1,740. When you FTIR Sigma Aldrich's reference standard, there is no peak at 1,740. Also, the less pure batches via HPLC are the ones that smell the worst, and coincide with larger peaks at 1,740. So the presence of that peak on the FTIR shows the impurity, and the HPLC and UPLC we ran confirms it ranges from 3-6%. If it is benzyl chloroformate, that is nasty stuff, and very toxic. Based on the fact that a peak at 1,730-1,740 should not show up in an MK-677 sample, and the peak intensity coincides with the higher impurity we measured on the HPLC/UPLC, that peak indicates the presence of the impurity (most likely benzyl chloroformate).

Here is the FTIR peak table from the Sigma Aldrich reference standard for MK-677

See how there is no peak around 1740 where a carbonyl group would be? Sigma uses an alcohol based solvent in their synthesis, which is why you see a bigger bulge at 3,200-3,600 cm-1. They do not have any impurity left with a carbonyl group.

Here is the FTIR from one of the batches we rejected due to impurities.

See that peak at 1,733? That is the impurity we are talking about. Batches that were tested lower in purity on our HPLC had a higher peak there, and batches that were tested pure had no peak there. Also, the batches that had higher peaks there smelled horribly of solvent. The smell alone should make people reject the batches. However, when mixed into solution, or masked by a bunch of fillers, you won't notice. The people accepting the batches sure as hell will, though.

Now here is the Hardcore Formulations peak table.

You'll see a lot of masking from the maltodextrin at 3,000-3,600. The peak at 2927 is magnesium stearate, which is an excipient used in the encapsulation process. Then you are getting a lot of interference in the fingerprint region from the fillers. However, it containing MK-677 is likely, due to some of the more prominent peaks. They are just very masked by the large amount of filler in the capsules. I'd have to have my analytical chemist spend some time on HPLC testing to compare retention times to be sure, but we'll operate under the assumption there actually is MK-677 in the capsules. So the big tell here is the peak at 1,741. The fact that it is still showing up among all the interference from the fillers means that there is a significant amount in there. If I were a betting man, I would say the raw MK-677 they used was the same impure shit we have been sent this year from all the suppliers. That peak would not show up in a pure sample, and the fact that even 12.5mg of MK-677 mixed in with a bunch of fillers still has that peak show up, is pretty telling for me.

Here are all three overlayed on each other.

Now I am not going to say for sure it is impure, as the fillers make things a bit tough. However, I am pretty certain, given the available evidence, that it is the same impure supply going around from all the suppliers right now. I would have to give my analytical chemist a few days in the lab to dedicated to doing some HPLC testing to know for sure. We are just too busy with our own shit to spend much time on this, though. So take the data for what you will, and decide if you feel comfortable with it or not. I will say I would not be comfortable taking it, though.