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

[Pupil B]

As soon as anyone makes general statements about the temperature stability of all peptides, you know they're full of shit.

It's about as applicable as "Food is stable at room temperature for years".

Oatmeal, sure. What about an apple? Or a fish?

Do these two peptides look like they degrade at the same rate?

View attachment 344340

Tracey knows better. A couple of times he had to ship replacements because he offered a purity guarantee for a group buy. Between his test, and the test of what customers received a few weeks later , significant degradation had occurred.

To make matters worse. it's not that you can pinpoint less vs more stable peptides. It depends on how a particular batch was lyophilized. So one might be very stable for 6 months at room temperature, and the same peptide from another batch may lose 5% in a month.

Thats why the best you can do is get them into refridgerated conditions as soon as possible. Also, if you're going to stock up, it's preferable to do so in cooler months. Shipping containers in China can hit that internal temps of 150f+ near the ceiling in the summer.

I think next time you should probably read the graph and the numbers on it before you post it straight from chatgpt

 

[Ghoul]

I think next time you should probably read the graph and the numbers on it before you post it straight from chatgpt

I read the entire study. It was USP assessing degradation of reference standards.

Whatever it is you think you're seeing, you aren't.

 

[ineffectual]

It just makes sense to protect your inventory. Whatever amount of chemical degradation would occur at room temp, it's less at 36f. All vendors should be doing this for everything but oils.

View attachment 344360

Everyone asks new UGLs for lab equipment pics. I just want to see your refrigerator.

I would love to have a stash like that. Same for india pharma

 

[Deezznutzz]

Does telegram usually take a bit longer ? First message I asked.... is this Tracy? He replied in two seconds.... yes ....and sent a list without me asking. I immediately placed my order and received no reply so I could pay or finish my order. I was ghosted haha.

 

[phenominal34]

Fwiw, Tracy said many peptides sit on warehouse shelves, unprotected from heat, for some time -- implied weeks/months (but not years due to high turnover of their peptides)

They've tested well and get positive feedback from users; if there was some systemic problem with this, with the amount of people using QSC peps, we'd have heard about it

Again, fwiw

Exactly !!!!

But science says so, sooo it must be false, I read it somewhere lol

 

[ineffectual]

Does telegram usually take a bit longer ? First message I asked.... is this Tracy? He replied in two seconds.... yes ....and sent a list without me asking. I immediately placed my order and received no reply so I could pay or finish my order. I was ghosted haha.

how long ago was that?

 

[Pupil B]

I read the entire study. It was USP assessing degradation of reference standards.

Whatever it is you think you're seeing, you aren't.

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.

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

 

[Onit]

As soon as anyone makes general statements about the temperature stability of all peptides, you know they're full of shit.

It's about as applicable as "Food is stable at room temperature for years".

Oatmeal, sure. What about an apple? Or a fish?

Do these two peptides look like they degrade at the same rate?

View attachment 344340

Tracey knows better. A couple of times he had to ship replacements because he offered a purity guarantee for a group buy. Between his test, and the test of what customers received a few weeks later , significant degradation had occurred.

To make matters worse. it's not that you can pinpoint less vs more stable peptides. It depends on how a particular batch was lyophilized. So one might be very stable for 6 months at room temperature, and the same peptide from another batch may lose 5% in a month.

Thats why the best you can do is get them into refridgerated conditions as soon as possible. Also, if you're going to stock up, it's preferable to do so in cooler months. Shipping containers in China can hit that internal temps of 150f+ near the ceiling in the summer.

What is the best way to store peptides in the freezer? In a special box, or can it just be done in an airtight ziplock for example?

Or is storing in a refrigerator better?

 

[RonStutter]

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 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.

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

View attachment 344474

You did not read the graph. You saw scary looking bars on a chatgpt graph and posted it while even glancing at what it said.

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

More like 87% but regardless why does how much it degraded even matter? If dudes point was that peptides degrade differently from one another, so you can't really make a generalization about them all. The chart seems to point to that.

One had no real degradation over 1000 days regardless of temperature. Another has significant degradation over a smaller timeframe that was plainly correlated to temperature.

There's probably more extreme examples that would illustrate his point better, but this one definitely doesn't support the opposite.

 

[Pupil B]

More like 87% but regardless why does how much it degraded even matter? If dudes point was that peptides degrade differently from one another, so you can't really make a generalization about them all. The chart seems to point to that.

One had no real degradation over 1000 days regardless of temperature. Another has significant degradation over a smaller timeframe that was plainly correlated to temperature.

There's probably more extreme examples that would illustrate his point better, but this one definitely doesn't support the opposite.

If you think dropping down to 97% purity after 98 days at 113 degrees F is significant then you need a psychiatrist not peptides

"B-but it was more likely 87% not 88% purity after TWO AND A HALF YEARS at 113F!!!"

Ok
And?

 

[RonStutter]

If you think dropping down to 97% purity after 98 days at 113 degrees F is significant then you need a psychiatrist not peptides

There's only 2 options with observations: either something is significant or it's random chance. If that chart points to randomness to you then you should stick with the psychiatry and leave the stats to others.

 

[Ghoul]

Fwiw, Tracy said many peptides sit on warehouse shelves, unprotected from heat, for some time -- implied weeks/months (but not years due to high turnover of their peptides)

They've tested well and get positive feedback from users; if there was some systemic problem with this, with the amount of people using QSC peps, we'd have heard about it

Again, fwiw

Where have the aged peptides "Tested well"?

In the feels lab?

 

[readalot]

I think next time you should probably read the graph and the numbers on it before you post it straight from chatgpt

You would be a great asset over on our MESO Group Testing thread. Come join the fun. Where you been?

 

[userhuthuthut]

Would semaglutide powder I bought last November that’s been kept in the fridge since still be ok to use? Whats the expiry time on the powder?

Same with vials of Bacteriostatic water unopened I’ve kept in a cold dark place?

 

[AlexDavis43]

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.

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

View attachment 344474

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

Good catch on the duration

I doubt any QSC peptides have been around for 909 days

They're sold and used far sooner, probably even less than 98 days

 

[Pupil B]

Good catch on the duration

I doubt any QSC peptides have been around for 909 days

They're sold and used far sooner, probably even less than 98 days

Not to mention they are not stored in an oven that someone's cooking food in

 

[Pupil B]

There's only 2 options with observations: either something is significant or it's random chance. If that chart points to randomness to you then you should stick with the psychiatry and leave the stats to others.

Yes because in the context of injecting illegal drugs into our body clearly the context indicates one is talking about the statistical significance of precise instruments, not whether or not the fact that in reality his stupid example he didn't even read showed degradation down to a whopping 97% purity after 3 months at 113 degrees which no one with a non psychotic brain would interpret as anything but a testament to the durability of peptides.

If you perform a study with such precise instruments you will find a "statistically significant difference" with basically any change. For people who are capable of utilizing more than 2 brain cells at a time, they generally then proceed to use their mental faculties (which i understand not everyone is capable of doing) to determine whether this matters in practicality.

Go conduct a large enough study on health markers in people who forcibly concentrate regulating their respiratory rate to 13 vs 14 breaths per minute, and with a large enough sample size you'll find some statistically significant 0.00001% difference in some measure or another, and seeing as you seem to lack any sort of common sense you will then probably proceed to spend the rest of your life with a timer strapped to your wrist trying to breathe at 13 or 14 or whatever breaths per minute 24 hours a day because your newly learned big word is written similarly to a word with a different practical meaning, aka "significant".

 

[mochul]

About a month into using QSC HCG yellow top (15,000iu) and did a pregnancy test which came back negative, dosing 300iu EOD and took the test about 1 hour after pinning it. Vial was reconstituted less than a week. It’s bunk right?

It too concentrated. It will give you a negative. Inject and do a hcg blood test. Pretty cheap

 

[PolarBear88]

has anyone ordered from the canada warehouse yet? how long was shipping ?

 

[Max Magnus]

Does anyone know WHEN the 'Proviron' will be restocked ?