MESO "Specialized" Testing Group Fund

[niqTM]

It would be nice to compare some of the known brands on this board, like a vial of lobster, SSA and serostim.

I’d be interested in seeing total protein content in the vial too, (every test post-0.22 filtration) and comparing that to the hgh content (if that’s not what jano’s percentage score is).

I have no spare money right now unfortunately so take my suggestions with a pinch of salt.

Absolutely. This is the info that I would be interested in seeing. I don't have any SSA or Lobster GH right now but I can order some and contribute a vial to the cause. It will just take a while to get.

 

[AlexDavis43]

NMR, yes. We are on our own for the analysis of the raw data.

I would definitely jump on CD, but Jano informed us that the 3rd party lab he would contract this to is closing up in less than 4 weeks. CD data much easier to analyze. I dont want to waste my $$$ and certainly dont want to waste any one else's should we crash and burn on the deadline or stuff gets delayed shipping wise. Hence I recommend we take our time and have a solid plan.

If you want to do CD now, react with "like".

NMR now, react with "wow".

Both, react with "love".

None, "thumbs down"

Lets get a count.

@janoshik, do we still have a shot if we send samples this week for CD analysis?

$610 USD for 3 GH samples?

If you have a choice between CD and NMR, why would you choose CD?

Just because it's easier to analyze? With all the apps and AI etc

 

[readalot]

If you have a choice between CD and NMR, why would you choose CD?

Just because it's easier to analyze? With all the apps and AI etc

Per sample...

NMR = 300 USD,
NATIVE-PAGE = 400 USD.

CD is 610 USD for 3 samples. Easier to interpret than NMR and similar info (I think lab would provide conclusions for CD on the comparisons. Don't know if we would get tertiary along with secondary structure).

NMR interpretation of GH sample by AI? I have no idea. I am not an AI guy. Or would you help us with that? Jano doesn't provide and it is not trivial.

 

[AlexDavis43]

NMR interpretation of GH sample by AI? I have no idea. I am not an AI guy. Or would you help us with that?

Shit. Trying to figure out how to analyze NMR data? Or who to ask for help? Ok

 

[readalot]

Shit. Trying to figure out how to analyze NMR data? Or who to ask for help? Ok

Whatever you can. Thanks.

 

[Sera]

What are we hoping to get out of NMR?

 

[zpped]

I'll send in some money for any of the tests that get decided on. Also have 2 different SSA batches and Lobster that I can donate.

 

[AlexDavis43]

What are we hoping to get out of NMR?

If it is misfolded or any structural abnormalities

Like if it's real GH but doesn't work in your body because it got messed up somehow (but not degraded)

 

[readalot]

What are we hoping to get out of NMR?

NMR and CD would give info on 2D and 3D structure of GH sample.

 

[Sicsemptyran]

Assuming three samples for both we're looking at what, ~$1800? Feel like we've already gotten that in commitments, might as well do both.

Will happily contribute as well.

 

[readalot]

Assuming three samples for both we're looking at what, ~$1800? Feel like we've already gotten that in commitments, might as well do both.

Will happily contribute as well.

610 (CD) + 900 (NMR) = 1510 for pharma control plus 2 UG samples.

*** I will warn again. Interpretation of NMR spectra is no joke. Unless we have a resident expert I would strongly urge caution before we spend the NMR $$.. ***

Q: what will NMR give us that CD won't if we can get both 2D and 3D info from CD? This is question for CD lab as to what they include in their methods.

@janoshik : any idea on near vs far UV with this lab you would contract for CD? Do they offer both?

 

[AlexDavis43]

Assuming three samples for both we're looking at what, ~$1800? Feel like we've already gotten that in commitments, might as well do both.

Will happily contribute as well.

Priority should be: bioactivity > NMR > CD

 

[AlexDavis43]

Q: what will NMR give us that CD won't if we can get both 2D and 3D info from CD?

Take it to ChatGPT and promise not to give a prompt that favors CD

For example, "Why is CD better than NMR to study growth hormone"

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

Shit. Trying to figure out how to analyze NMR data? Or who to ask for help? Ok

@Ghoul acts like he knows how to and claims he knows someone who does lol

 

[readalot]

Take it to ChatGPT and promise not to give a prompt that favors CD

For example, "Why is CD better than NMR to study growth hormone"

Would you mind sharing? I cant bring myself to use it. Lol.

 

[readalot]

Take it to ChatGPT and promise not to give a prompt that favors CD

For example, "Why is CD better than NMR to study growth hormone"

Best i can do on short notice...

Advantages and Disadvantages of Protein Circular Dichroism | MtoZ Biolabs

Explore the advantages and disadvantages of protein circular dichroism, a key technique in studying protein structures and dynamics in biological research.

www.mtoz-biolabs.com

https://www.mdpi.com/2813-0464/2/4/40

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

Would you mind sharing? I cant bring myself to use it. Lol.

I learned about this in basic high school science class. I wrote a quick summary of what I know about it. No biggie


Circular Dichroism (CD) and Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) are both useful for studying peptides, but they serve different purposes:

- CD is great for quickly checking the overall shape and folding of peptides. It tells you about the general structure, like whether the peptide is mostly in an alpha-helix or beta-sheet form. It's fast and requires less sample.

- NMR provides detailed, specific information about each part of the peptide. It can show you the exact 3D structure and how different parts of the peptide move. However, it takes more time and requires more sample material.

In summary, use CD for a quick overview of the peptide's structure and NMR for detailed, in-depth analysis. Often, using both methods together gives the best understanding of a peptide's properties.


Ask a follow up question: explain it like you are talking to an 8 year old

Imagine you have a toy made of building blocks, and you want to know how it's put together.

- CD is like looking at the toy from far away. You can see the overall shape, like if it looks like a car or a house, but you can't see the small details.

- NMR is like getting really close to the toy and seeing each block and how they fit together. You can see all the tiny details, but it takes more time to look at everything closely.

So, if you want to know the big picture quickly, use CD. If you want to see every little part, use NMR. Sometimes, it's best to use both to understand the toy completely!

"Put this in language Forrest Gump could understand"

Sure thing!

Imagine you have a box of chocolates, and you want to know what's inside each one.

- CD is like looking at the whole box from the outside. You can tell if it's a big box or a small box, but you can't see what's inside each chocolate.

- NMR is like opening each chocolate to see what's inside. You can find out if there's caramel, nuts, or something else, but it takes more time to check each one.

So, if you just want to know the size of the box, use CD. If you want to know what's inside each chocolate, use NMR. Sometimes, it's good to do both to really understand your box of chocolates!

 

[readalot]

I learned about this in basic high school science class. I wrote a quick summary of what I know about it. No biggie


Circular Dichroism (CD) and Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) are both useful for studying peptides, but they serve different purposes:

- CD is great for quickly checking the overall shape and folding of peptides. It tells you about the general structure, like whether the peptide is mostly in an alpha-helix or beta-sheet form. It's fast and requires less sample.

- NMR provides detailed, specific information about each part of the peptide. It can show you the exact 3D structure and how different parts of the peptide move. However, it takes more time and requires more sample material.

In summary, use CD for a quick overview of the peptide's structure and NMR for detailed, in-depth analysis. Often, using both methods together gives the best understanding of a peptide's properties.


Ask a follow up question: explain it like you are talking to an 8 year old

Imagine you have a toy made of building blocks, and you want to know how it's put together.

- CD is like looking at the toy from far away. You can see the overall shape, like if it looks like a car or a house, but you can't see the small details.

- NMR is like getting really close to the toy and seeing each block and how they fit together. You can see all the tiny details, but it takes more time to look at everything closely.

So, if you want to know the big picture quickly, use CD. If you want to see every little part, use NMR. Sometimes, it's best to use both to understand the toy completely!

"Put this in language Forrest Gump could understand"

Sure thing!

Imagine you have a box of chocolates, and you want to know what's inside each one.

- CD is like looking at the whole box from the outside. You can tell if it's a big box or a small box, but you can't see what's inside each chocolate.

- NMR is like opening each chocolate to see what's inside. You can find out if there's caramel, nuts, or something else, but it takes more time to check each one.

So, if you just want to know the size of the box, use CD. If you want to know what's inside each chocolate, use NMR. Sometimes, it's good to do both to really understand your box of chocolates!

Thanks. My read was we can get some 3D info out of CD using near UV vs far UV. Of course not as detailed as NMR. But all this dependent on what CD methods the lab offers and the CD testing has a time horizon (whereas the NMR testing does not).

https://jascoinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/CD-ebook.pdf

In a perfect setting, I agree with Alex's assessment of priority.

 

[AlexDavis43]

I learned about this in basic high school science class. I wrote a quick summary of what I know about it. No biggie


Circular Dichroism (CD) and Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) are both useful for studying peptides, but they serve different purposes:

- CD is great for quickly checking the overall shape and folding of peptides. It tells you about the general structure, like whether the peptide is mostly in an alpha-helix or beta-sheet form. It's fast and requires less sample.

- NMR provides detailed, specific information about each part of the peptide. It can show you the exact 3D structure and how different parts of the peptide move. However, it takes more time and requires more sample material.

In summary, use CD for a quick overview of the peptide's structure and NMR for detailed, in-depth analysis. Often, using both methods together gives the best understanding of a peptide's properties.


Ask a follow up question: explain it like you are talking to an 8 year old

Imagine you have a toy made of building blocks, and you want to know how it's put together.

- CD is like looking at the toy from far away. You can see the overall shape, like if it looks like a car or a house, but you can't see the small details.

- NMR is like getting really close to the toy and seeing each block and how they fit together. You can see all the tiny details, but it takes more time to look at everything closely.

So, if you want to know the big picture quickly, use CD. If you want to see every little part, use NMR. Sometimes, it's best to use both to understand the toy completely!

"Put this in language Forrest Gump could understand"

Sure thing!

Imagine you have a box of chocolates, and you want to know what's inside each one.

- CD is like looking at the whole box from the outside. You can tell if it's a big box or a small box, but you can't see what's inside each chocolate.

- NMR is like opening each chocolate to see what's inside. You can find out if there's caramel, nuts, or something else, but it takes more time to check each one.

So, if you just want to know the size of the box, use CD. If you want to know what's inside each chocolate, use NMR. Sometimes, it's good to do both to really understand your box of chocolates!

I love the internet

 

[MadaFacor]

It would be nice to compare some of the known brands on this board, like a vial of lobster, SSA and serostim.

I’d be interested in seeing total protein content in the vial too, (every test post-0.22 filtration) and comparing that to the hgh content (if that’s not what jano’s percentage score is).

I have no spare money right now unfortunately so take my suggestions with a pinch of salt.

I have a few vials of the famous 40 IU QSC batch if there is interest. Happy to donate and ship.