Qingdao Sigma Chemical Co., Ltd (International, US, EU, Canada and Australia domestic

You banned bruh?

Thou shall not misquote a member. Never ends well.

Just don't do it.
 

Thou shall not misquote a member. Never ends well.

Just don't do it.
Ooookay then.
 
I saw this coming, and intentionally made the comment about an "imperfect" process, and that I had eliminated backfilling entirely, via a couple of incrementally better approaches. Add a 31g needle to the filtered syringe, if you're confident you can control it well enough to not inadvertently overdose, and any concern about backfilling is eliminated.

Still, after some practice, I can do this very quickly now, holding the plunger in my hand, leaving the insulin syringe exposed for only a few seconds.

"OMG an exposed syringe opening you don't care about sterility."

EVERY SINGLE LUER LOCK. SYRINGE AND NEEDLE ARE OPEN AND EXPOSED TO A NON-STERILE ENVIRONMENT ONCE REMOVED FROM THE PACKAGE.

Look at these gaping holes.

View attachment 314920

Is it ideal to have an open syringe? No.

Yet luer needles and syringes are packaged separately, exposing both to a non-sterile environment once opened. In fact syringes are often filled with one needle (large gauge, blunt, or filter) which is then removed, again exposing an OPEN syringe and now the contents to a non sterile environment, and another needle is removed from its packaging, exposing its open end to a non-sterile enviornment, and then attached.

How about ampules, commonly used for injectable drugs. Are they exposed to a non-sterile environment briefly?

View attachment 314921

The risk is low enough ampules and luer syringes are routinely exposed in clinical environments, even hospitals. Is that ideal? No, but then neither is you filing vials in a non-sterile environment, without a sterile flow hood, that you supply to other people, putting their health at risk.

Acting intelligently means understanding that while perfection is the goal, striving for it shouldn't be an impediment to incremental improvements where and when they can be implemented.

On balance, filtering removes existing bacteria, which Jano has found in peptides, particulates that are almost certainly present, and aggregates, the latter two are most dangerous with cumulative exposure. Any time exposed to a non-sterile environment risks the possibility of new post filtering bacterial contamination, but as a practical matter, based on the routine use of luer syringes and ampules, the risk is very low , and potential worst case outcome, unless you're somewhere with uniquely dangerous bacteria, is minor.
Not reading this long text of garbage
 
Do any of you guys who are doing per dose filtering of peps/ hgh by back filling into slin have any pointers for how to do it without losing so much after plunger is reinserted and how to even get correct measure for lower doses. Even a 10 unit dose is difficult to accurately measure off the host 3ml syringe so provided the fluid goes to bottom of slin it can be measured that way but then for me I’m losing a lot reinserting plunger no matter how i hold the syringe and the peps won’t flow in the syringe like oils do. @SWFL-239 @Ghoul
I have not used the filter or 3cc syringe to backfill yet. I’m sure the 3cc will be harder to control. What does work for me and is very easy. I set all my doses to 20unit. A 25g 1 inch needle shoved all the way in a .3ml slin pin held sideways not vertical. Start to push slowly till the water bubble fills the barrel at the end of the 25g once the water bubble is in place the rest of the fluid will fill to the back plunger side of the slin pin. 20 units with the 1” needle fills the back side perfectly so when you put the plunger back in there is plenty of head space at the needle end and just the tiniest bubble at the plunger end. As soon as the peptide filters I ordered come in I will give @Ghoul per dose filtering a try.
 
wow you guys that use QSC are a bunch of clowns haha go keep using dirt cheap gear cuz your broooooke hahahaha must be something in that qsc gear youre getting cuz you guys act like a bunch of clowns
I just get the raws and peptides.

What's your reason? Are you an idiot? How long have you been on this forum? Lol

Nice accusations against me. Saying I am broke. Lol.

I make my own gear retard.
 
Let me make it simple for you:

How is the risk of backfilling worse than the risk of using ampules? The most common injectable packaging in the world?

View attachment 314924

I'm not worried. There is no reason to not use a draw needle and swap it for a new needle.
 
But that’s sterile glass you’re injecting bro

LOL, and sadly even in the US nurses often "forget" to use filter syringes as required.

I mean look, Spaceman spiff just enjoys taking shots at me, but I can't say he's wrong that any exposure to non-sterile environments is not desirable, including open ampules or syringes, despite being accepted practices in medicine.

I'm confident the net benefit of removing particles, aggregates, and existing bacteria outweighs any, demonstrably small risk from backfilling, etc.

I want to give injecting directly from the filtered syringe a try, but I am concerned about the risk of overshooting. It would simplify things greatly, just put on a new needle for each injection. No other syringes or vials needed,

In the never ending quest, I'm looking for a sterile version of this, which would be the holy grail for controlled dose injections directly from the filtered syringe.

IMG_0448.webp
 
Wouldn't this significantly increase chances of contamination? Opening up sterile areas of the syringe and the peptide liquid to open air? For anyone into mycology, you know it's super easy for things to get contaminated in the open air. Unless you're using a flow hood. Maybe I'm missing something, but at least the way you're demonstrating it, it seems like you're trading one risk for another.

Not nearly the problem it is made out to be. We can take much more "contamination" when it's IM. Our bodies have been getting poked and jabbed by nature since humans first existence so we have plenty of defense mechanisms through this process.

If you're doing IV use then absolutely need to be sterile. but then again, I've met a million junkies reusing dirty needles to inject heroin that was in someone's ass and they turned out fine.

I was a sterile compounding tech at a hospital for a long time. We just soak everything in alcohol, wipe it down with antimicrobial napkins, and then compound it. Obviously they had multiple layers of air filtration but that hasn't been the standard for most of history. And as I mentioned, that's the standard for IV use... They aren't sterilizing the room at a doctors office for anything IM. Look at vaccines, b12 shots, etc... People line up for them and take it in the shoulder like cattle.

The risk of things getting polluted through random particles in the air is extremely low. We're wayyyyy more likely to get contaminated from the UGL substances or containers than a random air particle.

At the end of the day, the concept of something being "sterile" is black and white. It's sterile or it's not. You can transfer it through 100 containers and it'll still be sterile unless you add contamination to it. As long as you're not sneezing or ripping farts out your ass when you prefill you're going to be fine.
 
I really hope QSC either comes back quickly or is confirmed as a dead source equally fast, so I don’t have to keep scrolling through pages & pages of this shite. It’s soul destroying.
I know. I have about 1.5 months worth of HGH on hand and I was planning on running it again but there's zero point if I can't get more and I was going to buy from there.

I've always had good experiences with QSC so I don't know how good any other sources are. The price seems decent for HYB but I haven't dealt with them before so I'd rather wait and see if QSC come back first.
 
Back
Top