Sigma Audley Inc. - Your source for peptides, ancillaries, AAS, and more!

There are almost certainly aggregates like that in every UGL rHGH, they're just below the visible range, and are potentially much more dangerous than the large, visibile ones.

As much as no one want to see "trash" in any vial, it's important to realize you can't see the vast majority of that stuff. Clear is no assurance of anything.

I've had 1ml of "clear" peptide solution completely clog a 13mm filter before getting 1/3 of the liquid through, which is insane. The peptides are hundreds of times smaller than the filter pores, so the quantity of trash it takes to clog a filter like that has to be enormous.

Filter it all to be safe. (and to keep these compounds at maximum effectiveness).
I feel like the strands that people see are only visible right after reconstitution. That's at least what I notice with all brands. Those strands seem to have dissapeared the next day. I'm thinking they are something else because wouldn't they be visible as well after a while? Could it have something to do with the excipients?
 
I'm certain it's aggregates, which is primarily a function of the excipients (or lack thereof) creating an environment that encourages aggregation.

The 30+ varieties of pharma rHGH are all using the same molecule. 99% of their work is ensuring it stays stable via the formulation.

Unfortunately excipients just aren't a focus of our community.

We could make a lot of progress by starting with one simple cheap test that doesn't even require a lab. Check the PH of the reconstituted solution on a PH strip.

I'll bet if we gather that data, we'll see a clear correlation between visible aggregates and PH.

All that's needed is someone to develop a standardized protocol, so we're all using the same test strip (from Amazon), put a drop on, and wait the same amount of time.

@readalot

That would be a start to figuring out whose formulations are getting it right.

PH is THE most critical element to peptide stability. The wrong PH can cause near instant degradation, and more over time.

The issue with excipients is that its almost impossible to get any info on. Even Jano won't share what he considers as excipient for each peptide, when performing his testing.

The reconstituted solution of PH will largely depend on the water being used? No? Hospira's pH ranges from 4.5 to 7.0 depending on batch. A large amount of "issues" faced by people, might be simply due to the pH of the batch they have, and the quality of the water (fake, amazon etc)

Have u ever filtered pharma peptides and just to see if the filter clogs?
 
I feel like the strands that people see are only visible right after reconstitution. That's at least what I notice with all brands. Those strands seem to have dissapeared the next day. I'm thinking they are something else because wouldn't they be visible as well after a while? Could it have something to do with the excipients?

So the two types of aggregation that can occur are "growth", where peptides bump into each other and adhere into a "snowball" kind of structure, growing larger over time.

The other type of aggregation is spontaneous, where certain conditions will cause a certain size and shape to form almost immediately. with no intermediate "growth".

The latter is what I think the strings are, and most commonly the result of the PH being too acidic or base.

What may happen is the PH changes a little as the solution sits, just enough for the conditions to no longer support the spontaneous large string aggregates and they fall apart, "disaggregate" back into solution. On the other hand, the change in PH may just result in smaller, sub visible aggregates, not breaking the strings down back into rHGH monomers.

Ideal PH would prevent aggregation almost entirely.

You can see the impact of PH on types of aggregates formation here using GLP-1 as an example peptide (cloudy particles vs strings):

IMG_9794.webp

And the impact on rHGH. The researchers were able to reproduce conditions creating "strings" by adjusting PH:

IMG_9088.webp
 
Last edited:
So the two types of aggregation that can occur are "growth", where peptides bump into each other and adhere into a "snowball" kind of structure, growing larger over time.

The other type of aggregation is spontaneous, where certain conditions will cause a certain size and shape to form almost immediately. with no intermediate "growth".

The latter is what I think the strings are, and most commonly the result of the PH being too acidic or base.

What may happen is the PH changes a little as the solution sits, just enough for the conditions to no longer support the spontaneous large string aggregates and they fall apart, "disaggregate" back into solution. On the other hand, the change in PH may just result in smaller, sub visible aggregates, not breaking the strings down back into rHGH monomers.

Ideal PH would prevent aggregation almost entirely.

You can see the impact of PH on types of aggregates formation here using GLP-1 as an example peptide (cloudy particles vs strings):

View attachment 340220

If you want to be anal about pH values, then Hospira definitely won't cut it.

Take Pharma Tirz for instance.
pH is 6.5-7.5

Pharma Sema.
pH 7.4

Serostim
pH of 7.4 to 8.5

Hospira's pH ranges from 4.5 to 7.0 depending on batch.
 
The issue with excipients is that its almost impossible to get any info on. Even Jano won't share what he considers as excipient for each peptide, when performing his testing.

The reconstituted solution of PH will largely depend on the water being used? No? Hospira's pH ranges from 4.5 to 7.0 depending on batch. A large amount of "issues" faced by people, might be simply due to the pH of the batch they have, and the quality of the water (fake, amazon etc)

Have u ever filtered pharma peptides and just to see if the filter clogs?

Initially yes the BAC PH dominates. But very quickly it changes by interactions with the lyophilized powder and (believe it or not) the glass walls of the vials. Thats why "buffers" are used in pharma excipient formulations. To stop the PH from changing from whatever it's supposed to be.

I haven't filtered pharma peptides (all mine come in pens), but having read countless FDA documents I'm confident they don't have this problem. After efficacy and safety of the drug, you could say preventing aggregation is the major focus of regulators and pharma companies when it comes
to protein drugs.

Also, with the correct excipients, including buffers, the variation in Hospira PH won't matter, as the excipients will compensate for it, and the end result will be the correct PH. That's what buffers do, pull the solution back toward the correct PH when it changes.
 
Initially yes the BAC PH dominates. But very quickly it changes by interactions with the lyophilized powder and (believe it or not) the glass walls of the vials. Thats why "buffers" are used in pharma excipient formulations. To stop the PH from changing from whatever it's supposed to be.

I haven't filtered pharma peptides (all mine come in pens), but having read countless FDA documents I'm confident they don't have this problem. After efficacy and safety of the drug, you could say preventing aggregation is the major focus of regulators and pharma companies when it comes
to protein drugs.

Also, with the correct excipients, including buffers, the variation in Hospira PH won't matter, as the excipients will compensate for it, and the end result will be the correct PH. That's what buffers do, pull the solution back toward the correct PH when it changes.

Then the appropriate reconstitution solution would probably be a PBS buffer with BA. BA by itself, is pretty acidic. I don't remember my Hospira pH but i know it was pretty close to 6.
 
Then the appropriate reconstitution solution would probably be a PBS buffer with BA. BA by itself, is pretty acidic. I don't remember my Hospira pH but i know it was pretty close to 6.
cant remember if im correct but im pretty sure i remember i read somewhere hospira ba is 5.7 ph average
 
Then the appropriate reconstitution solution would probably be a PBS buffer with BA. BA by itself, is pretty acidic. I don't remember my Hospira pH but i know it was pretty close to 6.

We have lists of dozens of pharma GH formulation excipient "recipes". I don't know why UGL wouldn't just take advantage of the extensive work pharma already did to develop them, and steal one of the most recent (presumably better) formulations. All the ingredients are dirt cheap.
 
cant remember if im correct but im pretty sure i remember i read somewhere hospira ba is 5.7 ph average

Based off the FDA formulations, you'd ideally want a base, somewhere around 7.4.

We have lists of dozens of pharma GH formulation excipient "recipes". I don't know why UGL wouldn't just take advantage of the extensive work pharma already did to develop them, and steal one of the most recent (presumably better) formulations. All the ingredients are dirt cheap.

There is no way to test.
No testing, no complaints, perfect results.
Good to go.
 
It’s been a week now on SSA 24iu HGH. Maybe it’s still early, but so far I haven’t noticed much difference from the others. No negative reactions, sleep’s still great, no water bloat. We keep pinning and see where it goes. If I had to rank everything I’ve tried so far, it would go something like this: 1. Lobster, 2. Opti/SSA, and 3. Q. Just my completely unscientific, highly subjective bro ranking.
 
It’s been a week now on SSA 24iu HGH. Maybe it’s still early, but so far I haven’t noticed much difference from the others. No negative reactions, sleep’s still great, no water bloat. We keep pinning and see where it goes. If I had to rank everything I’ve tried so far, it would go something like this: 1. Lobster, 2. Opti/SSA, and 3. Q. Just my completely unscientific, highly subjective bro ranking.
i have 10 years worth of ssa hgh at 8iu.

should tell you all you should know. its good enough to be ran for 10 years, for the price aswell? lobster and opti can go kick it they can
 
Just sent over my list (tablets and oils) and got 'no stock' back as a response. Do they not mark items that are out of stock as such on their price list?

EDIT: nm, I see some of the items are struck through on the left side (and over right where the reports are)
 
Last edited:
theres no graphite in hgh.

theres no graphene in covid vaccines either.

it was part of some fake news in 2022 tho.
Nope. over 10 countries have found it in analyzes, its graphene that clots the blood and leads to stroke, wich is why every shot is now banned for at least one age group (most common is for young boys)
 
Nope. over 10 countries have found it in analyzes, its graphene that clots the blood and leads to stroke, wich is why every shot is now banned for at least one age group (most common is for young boys)
thanks, link me anything that could even slightly suggest theres any graphene in our hgh.

i think you're severely drunk
 
Back
Top