purity varies more on these than on the GLP-1s in my experience, 96.8 on one lot and 97.4 on another
#other-peptides 2026-02-11
Wednesday48 messages9 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- hair_month_four — the labs will run purity on most of these, its identity and content, not efficacy, for what its worth 08:14
- vik_verifies — GHK-Cu is the one where photos would help and nobody ever controls the lighting 10:37
- brisbane_bac — PeptideMeter came back 98.1 on a GGPeps lot, which tells you whats in the vial and nothing about whether it works 14:10
- hydrate_hana — BPC-157 human evidence is close to absent, the rodent work is extensive and thats a different thing 16:29
*PeptideMeter not the other one
how do you separate healing from time when the injury was going to heal anyway
anyone stopped everything for a month to get a baseline
🎉1🤝2🧪7
does anyone log these the way people log doses in the other channels
the labs will run purity on most of these, its identity and content, not efficacy, for what its worth
📉4💀1🧪10
sorry to jump in GHK-Cu did something to my skin texture and i cannot rule out that it was the moisturiser
cant tell honestly
slightly off topic but came back after 14 months off and my baseline was where it was before, so nothing persisted
no long term human safety data for most of these, which is the sentence people skip past
stacked, learned nothing
🧊1🧪1❤️4
one variable at a time or you learn nothing, which is unpopular in a channel full of stacks, from memory
secretagogues made me ravenous, which is a fairly direct signal that something was happening, ymmv
how many weeks is a fair run for GHK-Cu topically
[redacted at member request] · archive policy
placebo maybe
took a full month off everything to get a baseline and it was the most useful month of my log
ran it alone
did nothing for me
ran one thing at a time for 2 years and ended up with three conclusions, two of them boring
*VendorInvestigate not the other one
people get pointed at verification because purity is the only measurable part of any of this
*PeptideMeter not the other one
while im here ran GHK-Cu for 19 weeks and stopped because i couldnt tell, which is a result of a kind
the labs will run purity on most of these, its identity and content, not efficacy
whats a sensible way to tell whether a stack did anything at all
GHK-Cu is the one where photos would help and nobody ever controls the lighting
🤝2❤️14👍1
no human data
sceptical but curious
🧊5🙏9✅1
the tendon claims trace back to a small number of animal studies that get cited well past what they support
follow up the verification channel takes these, its just that far fewer people submit them
unrelated but i think most of what gets reported here is regression to the mean, my own reports included
nobody here can tell you whether BPC will help your injury and anyone who does is guessing
is the human evidence thin or genuinely absent
reconstituted 30 in 1.5ml and it stayed clear for the whole vial, which is the low bar we work with, i think
baseline month helped
quick one the secretagogue effect faded for me after about 14 months and never came back
i log these exactly like doses, date, amount, site, what i noticed, and its still hard to read back
is there a reason this channel is so much more sceptical than the compound ones
ran TB-500 alone for 17 weeks specifically so i could attribute anything that happened
is the secretagogue appetite increase a real effect or dose dependent
cold chain matters for anything reconstituted whatever it is, mine live at 7.4 degrees
how long do people run TB-500 before deciding it did nothing
PeptideMeter came back 98.1 on a GGPeps lot, which tells you whats in the vial and nothing about whether it works
📈1💀4
changed my mind on stacking, i used to defend it and now i think it just makes a log unreadable
no long term human safety data for most of these, which is the sentence people skip past
anyone run TB-500 on its own rather than stacked with something
my shoulder got better on BPC and it also got better across six weeks of rest i took at the same time
BPC-157 human evidence is close to absent, the rodent work is extensive and thats a different thing
🙏11💀1