There is absolutely no way in hell that anyone who's trying to argue that "just because some peptides dont degrade doesnt mean others dont" or whatever, would think posting a graph that compares a peptide vs a more "delicate one", shows a remaining purity of the more delicate one of 88-89% after NINE HUNDRED AND NINE DAYS AT 45C (113F...) or 97% after 98 days, or 93% after 909 days at 37c or 98% after 98 days at 37c, is actually supporting their argument. Because its supporting the exact opposite.I read the entire study. It was USP assessing degradation of reference standards.
Whatever it is you think you're seeing, you aren't.
Next time read the graph you're posting instead of seeing zoomed in scary looking bars on the Y axis and then posting it while not understanding what you're posting.
so scare, zoomed in y axis with 0 context, much scare, wow, much doge

You did not read the graph. You saw scary looking bars on a chatgpt graph and posted it while not even glancing at what it said for a grand total of 5 (probably not even 0.5) seconds.
This is the part where you're now going to talk chatgpt into agreeing with you when you tell it that qscs warehouse aka some chinese guys closet actually does in fact somehow reach 5000 degrees due in part to the astrological alignment of the planets and zodiac signs in an attempt to save face in light of this blatant display of stupidity and post its idiotic reasoning here
Edit in the spirit of full disclosure: AI was used to generate the above image
Last edited:
