Peptide Critic Community

Big thanks to @randy and his youtube vids btw! They were instrumental in helping start our research the right way, with the right tools, and kept us from making rookie mistakes.

Also...Sorry guys, I left off the decimal in the filters i was describing. Meant to say ".22 micron" or ".22um". I guess nobody noticed, but 22um and .22um are vastly different things lol.

Figured I would say HI. I have started researching with my wombat using GLP3.

Only 5 weeks in and there has been a 6% weight loss in him. There has ben a 5% drop in waist/belly measurement (visceral fat indicator). This has started a chain reaction of physiological changes including a drastic reduction in sleep apnea episodes, cessation of snoring, more energy, etc. The apnea reduction has caused pulse and BP drops into Orthostatic Hypotension, leading us to begin reducing the ACE inhibitor and beta-blocker we were researching for the last three years.

A side note, the lab work done before starting GLP3 research led to finding high ferritin (iron) levels, also caused by metabolism stress to the liver (compensation for high insulin resistance), that are being dealt with by phlebotomy and are rapidly resolving as well. Lastly, lab tests comparing A1C and hemoglobin from now to 5 weeks ago show marked improvement in both. All good things!

I've always assumed there was variation in vials. Most tests I see posted on vendor sites using have 2-3 vial testing show the variation, although not always this much. I think we would see this much more if we were to, for example, send a batch of 10-20 vials to be tested. Honestly, my concerns are 1: the active chemical is what is is supposed to be. 2. Sterility and endotoxins. 3. Purity. Granted they all matter, but folks taking content and purity COA's as a stamp that the stuff is safe to inject is a terrible trend IMO.

After more reading this week I honestly believe the only difference between the "sterilization grade" filters and the sterile ones we are already using is the certification tests and related marking. Those tests are just spot checks though so I would think batches would still vary. Bottom line, it's all a calculated risk. Do the things you can do to make the calculations more likely to come out in your favor based on your comfort level.

This is a vendor review submitted by kj4otu on PeptideCritic.com.

Rating: (5/5)

Review

I ordered Mots-c, TB-500, BPC-157, Semax, and KPV. Had content, purity, endo, and sterility tests posted for each batch. 2 day shipping. Vials come with labels with qr code and written batch numbers - matched the website. Peps worked for my wombat testing great. Will buy again.

Read the full review: Quick Shipping, Tests posted, Decent price, Good selection

Discuss this review, share your own experiences, or ask questions about the vendor.

Please keep discussions respectful and factual.

I guess I've stumped everybody? LOL @randy any thoughts on the need for sterilization grade filtering?

I love actual logical science when dealing with peps! I thank you and my wombat thanks you!

@rogerp Granted i don't have a lot of experience, but one I have used that puts the batch on the label is Peptide Crafters. Obviously they could still fake the COA to bottle relation, but if you're going to put it on the bottle, at least make it match you know?

For me, a labeling and batch issue is not minor. That's a big deal to me. I wouldn't touch these guys.

Having been on the bad end of a Reta batch that ended up failing sterility tests, I started down the rabbit hole of filters. I have been filtering using "sterile" 22 micron filters since I started researching peptides to help my wombat, but on researching what to do about this most recent test failure I realized that all filters are not made equally.

I found that the pass/fail that janoshik gives for sterilization tests is not enough information to just move on, filter, and use failed peptides (not that I would, I'm just researching facts) and that the amount of "stuff" that a filter can clean up is limited - the filter can be overwhelmed, so you need need to know the level of failure for any sterility test if you were to theoretically want to remediate the contamination.

Also I now understand that "normal" 22u filters are not up to the standard of "sterilization grade" filters and are perhaps not enough to give me the safety I'm looking for. The ones I found most commonly listed are the PureFlo D65 Disc Filter 0.65um / 0.2um - Sterile Compounding (Aqueous), but I'm having trouble finding a source these high grade filters.

With all that said, what does Randy think about better filters and would he know a source for the Pureflo D65 filters?

@peptidecritic main description of Nexaph says "rigorous third-party testing (identity, purity, and cleanliness checks)". I have been unable to find anything but COA's showing purity and identity. Have they changed their testing since your review or am I missing or just not looking in the right place for the cleanliness part of their COA's?