Stiffler88
New Member
Thanks man. I appreciate it
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
HGH Purity and dimer
- Thread starter Bobertson
- Start date
Stiffler88
New Member
Thanks man
CraneKraken
Member
I just went through something similar. I was on 5iu/d of Chinese GH and I was bloated in it. Then I switched to a more pure domestic source and at 6iu/d I have zero bloat or carpal tunnel. A few times a week I use an additional 6iu on heavy cardio days and even then I get zero bloat. I doubt I'll be switching back to cheaper Chinese GH. Not anytime soon anyway.
clearheaded
Member
if study you are thinking of is "expanding bedside peptide......"
it does not discuss how we know filters can CAUSE aggregates....
what was aggregate levels post filtration other than huge 0.2 micron ones? aren't smaller aggregates more likely to be biologically active... hmmmmmmmm mmm mm
again, VERY little evidence if thats the paper ur talking about lol... yes of course it takes out HUUUUGE 0.2 aggregates... but are those bio active? does it create more smaller aggregates? even they note filter differences (even though you figured they are using same as u get at medsupply store)...
AGAIN, taking particulates out which is essentially what large un dissolved aggregates would be... so suggesting u have all the answers based on 1 paper discussing only adjacent things to what we are discussing here is a little silly... I guess the very reason u had to name call eh?
what we do know is filtration for purification of aggregates and assorted peptides aminos is not done by 0.2 micron filter nor 0.0003 micron filters... and of course 0.2 micron filter takes aggregates larger than that, that was never the point....
all im trying to say, is you may be causing MORE bioactive aggregates when attempting to take out large aggregates that may not be a problem....
clearheaded
Member
you know ur domestic source if generic(and possibly faked GENO) is made in china too?
songsofpyramids
Member
It’s not my fault you’re too dumb to use the search and too big an asshole for anyone to want to help or debate with you. This seems like a life lesson you desperately need. Now, please leave me alone. I’m not interested in your self-absorbed pseudo-intellectualism.
Last edited:
AlexDavis43
Member
You ever get IGF1 tested?
Ghoul
Member
In general, larger aggregates are associated with greater immunogenicity.
"Moreover, sub-visible (1–100 µm) aggregates were found to be more immunogenic than sub-micron (0.1–1 µm) aggregates"
Aggregates in the sub visible range, 1um-100um, are similar to bacteria in size, which may be why they draw a stronger immune response.
Sterile filtering numerous peptide/protein drugs with a PES filter shows an enormous reduction in particulates >1um and larger. It's a staggering improvement really.
Most pharma peptides are sterile filtered during manufacturing, usually just before packaging.
The largest custom peptide producers in the world all recommend .2um filtration of their products when sterility is required. Not limited to specific peptides, all of them.
It seems unlikely this would be a common practice if it resulted in creating a larger amount of aggregates, and worsened immunogenicity.
You're bringing up good questions similar to those I had when I started looking into aggregation. Obviously you're digging into the topic (which you'll find is rapidly evolving).
What other questions do you have? I've looked at this from so many angles I may be able to offer a shortcut to the relevant info. It's easier than trying to explain my entire understanding of the issue in one huge post.
Last edited:
songsofpyramids
Member
I wouldn’t take this guy so seriously. The article he ranted about earlier claiming that using filters cause aggregates actually supports the argument for filtering by saying if you control for factors you can use an industrial scale .22um filter with an industrial pump and still reduce aggregates. So I don’t think he’s reading too hard into this and just being argumentative for shits and giggles.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
If adults are going to discuss the issue I’ll supply sources:
“The removal of aggregation precursors, i.e., non-native monomers and nanometer aggregates (<100 nm), suppressed the aggregate growth. The presented findings demonstrate that a removal treatment with a specific adsorbent of non-native IgG conformers enables long-term stable storage of therapeutic IgG molecules and will facilitate mitigation of the immunogenicity of IgG preparations.”
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
“We found that a 0.22 μm hydrophilic filter, such as hydrophilic polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) or polyethersulfone (PES), provided satisfactory peptide recovery.” [the study discusses reducing aggregates while also preventing peptide loss].
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Which even has a neat chart about what pes filters are the best.
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
And there’s much much more I’m too lazy to dig for again.
What I can’t find is a single credible source advising not using filters, or stating bluntly that using a filter is guaranteed to cause aggregation. I honestly don’t understand the resistance to filtering peptides in this community, especially shit from the underground. I’ve not seen one substantive coherent argument against it thus far. There is a ring of truth to loosing some peptides going through the filter, but the cost point is so low I’d rather loose 10% and reduce aggregation and immunogenicity. I guess that makes me a bubble boy.
Investigation on fouling mechanisms for recombinant human growth hormone sterile filtration - PubMed
During sterile filtration of recombinant human growth hormone solutions, severe membrane fouling was experienced compared to other protein preparations of significantly higher molecular weights and concentrations. This phenomenon was attributed to rhGH aggregation/adsorption occurring in the...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
If adults are going to discuss the issue I’ll supply sources:
“The removal of aggregation precursors, i.e., non-native monomers and nanometer aggregates (<100 nm), suppressed the aggregate growth. The presented findings demonstrate that a removal treatment with a specific adsorbent of non-native IgG conformers enables long-term stable storage of therapeutic IgG molecules and will facilitate mitigation of the immunogenicity of IgG preparations.”
Suppression of Aggregation of Therapeutic Monoclonal Antibodies during Storage by Removal of Aggregation Precursors Using a Specific Adsorbent of Non-Native IgG Conformers - PubMed
The quality of preparations of therapeutic IgG molecules, widely used for the treatment of various diseases, should be maintained during storage and administration. Nevertheless, recent studies demonstrate that IgG aggregation is one of the most critical immunogenicity risk factors that...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
“We found that a 0.22 μm hydrophilic filter, such as hydrophilic polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) or polyethersulfone (PES), provided satisfactory peptide recovery.” [the study discusses reducing aggregates while also preventing peptide loss].
An efficient method for the expression and purification of Aβ(M1–42) - PMC
Advances in amyloid research rely on improved access to the β-amyloid peptide, Aβ. N-terminal methionine extended Aβ, Aβ(M1–42), is a readily expressed and widely used form of Aβ with comparable properties to the natural Aβ(1–42) peptide. Expression ...
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Which even has a neat chart about what pes filters are the best.
Table - PMC
Advances in amyloid research rely on improved access to the β-amyloid peptide, Aβ. N-terminal methionine extended Aβ, Aβ(M1–42), is a readily expressed and widely used form of Aβ with comparable properties to the natural Aβ(1–42) peptide. Expression ...
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
And there’s much much more I’m too lazy to dig for again.
What I can’t find is a single credible source advising not using filters, or stating bluntly that using a filter is guaranteed to cause aggregation. I honestly don’t understand the resistance to filtering peptides in this community, especially shit from the underground. I’ve not seen one substantive coherent argument against it thus far. There is a ring of truth to loosing some peptides going through the filter, but the cost point is so low I’d rather loose 10% and reduce aggregation and immunogenicity. I guess that makes me a bubble boy.
Last edited:
AlexDavis43
Member
I wouldn’t take this guy so seriously. The article he ranted about earlier claiming that using filters cause aggregates actually supports the argument for filtering by saying if you control for factors you can use an industrial scale .22um filter with an industrial pump and still reduce aggregates. So I don’t think he’s reading too hard into this and just being argumentative for shits and giggles.
Investigation on fouling mechanisms for recombinant human growth hormone sterile filtration - PubMed
During sterile filtration of recombinant human growth hormone solutions, severe membrane fouling was experienced compared to other protein preparations of significantly higher molecular weights and concentrations. This phenomenon was attributed to rhGH aggregation/adsorption occurring in the...
If adults are going to discuss the issue I’ll supply sources:
“The removal of aggregation precursors, i.e., non-native monomers and nanometer aggregates (<100 nm), suppressed the aggregate growth. The presented findings demonstrate that a removal treatment with a specific adsorbent of non-native IgG conformers enables long-term stable storage of therapeutic IgG molecules and will facilitate mitigation of the immunogenicity of IgG preparations.”
Suppression of Aggregation of Therapeutic Monoclonal Antibodies during Storage by Removal of Aggregation Precursors Using a Specific Adsorbent of Non-Native IgG Conformers - PubMed
The quality of preparations of therapeutic IgG molecules, widely used for the treatment of various diseases, should be maintained during storage and administration. Nevertheless, recent studies demonstrate that IgG aggregation is one of the most critical immunogenicity risk factors that...
“We found that a 0.22 μm hydrophilic filter, such as hydrophilic polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) or polyethersulfone (PES), provided satisfactory peptide recovery.” [the study discusses reducing aggregates while also preventing peptide loss].
An efficient method for the expression and purification of Aβ(M1–42) - PMC
Advances in amyloid research rely on improved access to the β-amyloid peptide, Aβ. N-terminal methionine extended Aβ, Aβ(M1–42), is a readily expressed and widely used form of Aβ with comparable properties to the natural Aβ(1–42) peptide. Expression ...
Which even has a neat chart about what pes filters are the best.
Table - PMC
Advances in amyloid research rely on improved access to the β-amyloid peptide, Aβ. N-terminal methionine extended Aβ, Aβ(M1–42), is a readily expressed and widely used form of Aβ with comparable properties to the natural Aβ(1–42) peptide. Expression ...
And there’s much much more I’m too lazy to dig for again.
What I can’t find is a single credible source advising not using filters, or stating bluntly that using a filter is guaranteed to cause aggregation. I honestly don’t understand the resistance to filtering peptides in this community, especially shit from the underground. I’ve not seen one substantive coherent argument against it thus far. There is a ring of truth to loosing some peptides going through the filter, but the cost point is so low I’d rather loose 10% and reduce aggregation and immunogenicity. I guess that makes me a bubble boy.
They are talking about doing some Jano tests in Lobster's thread to get to the bottom of this (vacuum & filtration).
Just that no one wants to pay for them. It applies to all hGH, not just @TheLobster so that conversation should be here and the burden should not be on any single vendor of hGH.
Perhaps just the people who are shouting that it's a problem, to prove (or disprove) their point. Money/mouth/etc.
songsofpyramids
Member
You’re right. I agree the people going against medical science and claiming filtering is super harmful to peptides put their money where their mouth is.
But what are you arguing? That protein aggregates in peptides aren’t a health worry? It’s really not up to me to convince you about something the Pharma companies are spending millions of dollars trying to minimize in their products for safety reasons. If your safety profile doesn’t care that’s cool, but that’s not a strong argument at all for them being a nonissue.
AlexDavis43
Member
It's about claiming no vacuum and non-filtered hGH is super harmful. Let them run a few simple Jano tests to prove their point. No big deal, right?
songsofpyramids
Member
I think I would be pretty pissed if I was the guy with 25 kits of no vacuum hgh, and it makes sense that should be on lobster to prove it’s ok or reship.
I’ve done no vacuum peptides and lived, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t stupid of me. I’ve also done cloudy peps and was ok, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t dumb of me. I do wonder if immunogenicity and doing bad peps is why I became allergic to mod grf suddenly after 8 months of use. I’ve tried it from several different places, even compounded, and I have an allergic reaction with hives and itching immediately where I previously had no problems doing it 2-4x a day. Immunogenicity is why the FDA ended up banning it. What’s strange about my reaction is I broke out in hives only where I had pinned before, no where else. That sounds like an immune response to me.
I don’t think this is idle bullshit. Do I think you’re going to drop dead suddenly from aggregates or no vacuum? No. Do I think it can impact your long term ability to abuse these awesome drugs? Yes, I think that’s an issue.
I’ve done no vacuum peptides and lived, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t stupid of me. I’ve also done cloudy peps and was ok, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t dumb of me. I do wonder if immunogenicity and doing bad peps is why I became allergic to mod grf suddenly after 8 months of use. I’ve tried it from several different places, even compounded, and I have an allergic reaction with hives and itching immediately where I previously had no problems doing it 2-4x a day. Immunogenicity is why the FDA ended up banning it. What’s strange about my reaction is I broke out in hives only where I had pinned before, no where else. That sounds like an immune response to me.
I don’t think this is idle bullshit. Do I think you’re going to drop dead suddenly from aggregates or no vacuum? No. Do I think it can impact your long term ability to abuse these awesome drugs? Yes, I think that’s an issue.
Last edited:
See posts 1728 and 1729 as well. Effect of no vacuum is well understood. All that's left is the extent of reaction at room temp vs accelerated aging temperature. I even provided a shortcut method to transfer results from one temp condition to another.
The effects on human health and immune system are nebulous at the individual level. However as any one who has autoimmune issues or an immune system issue can tell you, it's nothing to play around with.
After all that talk of testing, it's crickets when it is time to pay. Guess the burden on me to pay again lol after all the talk, and I wasn't the one claiming it was super harmful. But to pretend vacuum isn't important for product quality is ridiculous position as usual. Way to look out for individual vendor instead of member who raised the issue Alex.
AlexDavis43
Member
I wonder if that guy was just exaggerating for effect or if someone really had 25 kits of non-vacuumed hGH. So he just kept opening them one by one and kept finding no vacuum?
Seems like a made up story but wouldn't be surprised with all the cherry picking and weird way targeted ChatGPT queries have of shaping this conversation.
Seems like a made up story but wouldn't be surprised with all the cherry picking and weird way targeted ChatGPT queries have of shaping this conversation.
AlexDavis43
Member
You have no problem asking anyone else to pay (source or member), why not ask Ghoul yourself, directly. Or are you afraid of him
I don't go around asking specific members to pay like your clique does for science experiments that benefit the community. I am happy to participate. People should stand up if they are interested like I and others have. Still waiting on your comments /revisions.
Nice taunt/dare at the end. Too bad we have such distrust for one another. We could probably be much more effective working together.
songsofpyramids
Member
So, we are just jumping right to paranoid ramblings to justify your belief..?
ChatGPT didn’t cause lobster’s problem. Nor did it create the hard science that vacuum-less vials and aggregates are a health worry. Complaining about new and widely used research tools being used to find data is just a boring personal complaint with little relevance on said data.
You feeling comfortable ignoring the millions and millions of dollars Pharma is dumping on reducing aggregates in peptides and exploring their health complications is on you. They aren’t dumping the money for no reason, and frankly it’s hard to take arguments all that seriously that rely more on whining about how the research was found than anything of any substance about the topic…
Last edited:
AlexDavis43
Member
"the millions and millions of dollars Pharma is dumping on reducing aggregates in peptides and exploring their health complications"
This is the power of cherry picking. The way that information was presented, you might think the more money Pharma spends on something, the more important they think it is.
But by selectively cherry picking that information and not telling you how much they spend on other things, you might think "millions and millions" is a lot, therefore Pharma must think this is a big problem.
Look up how much Novo spent on the Ozempic song.
songsofpyramids
Member
How is that fucking cherry picking? Wtf are you talking about? So what it cost billions to make Ozempic? They and other giant pharma companies aren’t spending millions on nothing for fucking fun…
That’s just an honestly stupid argument you’re making and I deeply suspect you know it…
Present some science supporting your position or I’m just going to ignore you on this issue because all you’re doing is crying about ChatGPT. Are you a high school teacher or something?
