Poll: Who filters their peptides?

[readalot]

Filtered cigarettes still cause cancer.

Therefore, filters don't work.

Q.E.D.

https://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/20/Suppl_1/i10

 

[Ghoul]

But the real question is. Are you really reducing harm in the way you think you are, or is it just the perception of being protected by a filter? I think the danger lies in that people think it gives them full protection against contamination by filtering it.

A filter is not a fix for everything bad. A 0.22 µm filter can remove live bacteria from solutions, but it cannot remove endotoxins/pyrogens, dissolved impurities, solvents, heavy metals, or truncated peptide byproducts, the main issues in this space. Endotoxins are smaller than the pores and heat-stable, so they sail right through.

So all you're doing is removing those which may cause an infection or inflamation.

Not blocked are:
Endotoxins
Dissolved toxins, solvents, or heavy metals
Incorrect or degraded peptide molecules
Some virusses

Retarded logic.

"Better to inject unfiltered peptides, accepting all the trash that would otherwise be removed into your body, because there are still other risks."

It's called Harm REDUCTION, not complete elimination or don't bother.

You've also missed removing aggregated peptides, glass delaminates, and any other trash in the vial.

 

[keenpen]

Anyone here have luck recently purchasing 4mm .2um PES filters? I can’t find any, the 13mm would be too big from Cobetter but maybe the peptide loss is negligible?

Peptide test is great. They also have PTFE filters.

Tisch Scientific Filter Syringe .22μm PES 4mm - Sterile Individually W

Tisch Scientific Filter Syringe 22μm Pes 4mm – Peptide Test Lab Supplies - Fast, accurate, and trusted.

peptidetest.com

But these guys have PES filters too (I've never used them). They are great for supplies.

PES Syringe Filter – 0.22 um, 4mm, Luer-Lok/Luer Slip, Sterile – Underground Supply

www.undergroundsupply.shop

 

[SlamSumTest]

Peptide test is great. They also have PTFE filters.

Tisch Scientific Filter Syringe .22μm PES 4mm - Sterile Individually W

Tisch Scientific Filter Syringe 22μm Pes 4mm – Peptide Test Lab Supplies - Fast, accurate, and trusted.

peptidetest.com

But these guys have PES filters too (I've never used them). They are great for supplies.

PES Syringe Filter – 0.22 um, 4mm, Luer-Lok/Luer Slip, Sterile – Underground Supply

www.undergroundsupply.shop

You da man, thank you

 

[ParquetPatquet]

Filtering is an easy win, and it actually saves me from having to test my peptide for sterility, since filtering will greatly help with sterility.

 

[Kralteramon]

Retarded logic.

"Better to inject unfiltered peptides, accepting all the trash that would otherwise be removed into your body, because there are still other risks."

It's called Harm REDUCTION, not complete elimination or don't bother.

You've also missed removing aggregated peptides, glass delaminates, and any other trash in the vial.

I never said that it's better. I said that it gives people a false sense of security, and that is dangerous because there may still be many contaminations that we can't filter. We all should be aware that we are taking risk by injecting UGL peptides, even when we filter them. My take is that the risk is minimal. Everybody has their own risk tollerance. But in all fairness. We need to be fair in educating others and tell the full story. Filtering may help, but it also may not make a noticable difference. Filtering does not remove all potential dangers, not even close. Danger is relative.

 

[Geedium]

Where do you get steril vials ?

 

[Barney67]

Anyone here have luck recently purchasing 4mm .2um PES filters? I can’t find any, the 13mm would be too big from Cobetter but maybe the peptide loss is negligible?

It’s mostly negligible. Split your BAC dose into 2. Reconstitute your peptide with the first partition and filter those, then use the second partition to flush the filter and wash out whatever peptides remain. Then you can do an air flush to get the last bits of BAC from the filter.

 

[Kralteramon]

It’s mostly negligible. Split your BAC dose into 2. Reconstitute your peptide with the first partition and filter those, then use the second partition to flush the filter and wash out whatever peptides remain. Then you can do an air flush to get the last bits of BAC from the filter.

Smart

 

[Kralteramon]

To add here. There is more to understand when filtering peptides. The filtering process can pose risks of it's own to the peptide quality:

In case of HGH as an example: passing the HGH solution through a 0.22 µm syringe filter to remove contaminants), this process can physically or chemically stress the peptide:

Shear stress: Passing through a small pore can cause local turbulence and pressure changes that can unfold parts of the protein.

Surface adsorption: HGH can stick to the filter membrane (especially hydrophobic ones like PVDF or nylon), which can cause loss of material and structural deformation. Use PES to avoid.

Air–liquid interfaces: The filtration process introduces more air–liquid interfaces, promoting aggregation through partial unfolding.

HGH is a 22 kDa single-chain protein with four disulfide bonds—fairly fragile. Aggregation is often caused by:

Partial unfolding → exposes hydrophobic regions.

Mechanical agitation or shear during filtration.

Temperature shifts or pH changes (especially away from pH 7–8).

Contact with hydrophobic surfaces (filters, vials, silicone oil in syringes, etc.).

Once an HGH molecule partially unfolds, it can form dimers or high-molecular-weight aggregates, which are visible as turbidity or invisible but immunogenic.

 

[Sera]

I never said that it's better. I said that it gives people a false sense of security, and that is dangerous because there may still be many contaminations that we can't filter. We all should be aware that we are taking risk by injecting UGL peptides, even when we filter them. My take is that the risk is minimal. Everybody has their own risk tollerance. But in all fairness. We need to be fair in educating others and tell the full story. Filtering may help, but it also may not make a noticable difference. Filtering does not remove all potential dangers, not even close. Danger is relative.

Do you use peptides? It is true that filtering hgh can cause aggregation and such. But there’s also a bunch of aggregates and crap in there without filtering.

 

[readalot]

To add here. There is more to understand when filtering peptides. The filtering process can pose risks of it's own to the peptide quality:

In case of HGH as an example: passing the HGH solution through a 0.22 µm syringe filter to remove contaminants), this process can physically or chemically stress the peptide:

Shear stress: Passing through a small pore can cause local turbulence and pressure changes that can unfold parts of the protein.

Surface adsorption: HGH can stick to the filter membrane (especially hydrophobic ones like PVDF or nylon), which can cause loss of material and structural deformation. Use PES to avoid.

Air–liquid interfaces: The filtration process introduces more air–liquid interfaces, promoting aggregation through partial unfolding.

HGH is a 22 kDa single-chain protein with four disulfide bonds—fairly fragile. Aggregation is often caused by:

Partial unfolding → exposes hydrophobic regions.

Mechanical agitation or shear during filtration.

Temperature shifts or pH changes (especially away from pH 7–8).

Contact with hydrophobic surfaces (filters, vials, silicone oil in syringes, etc.).

Once an HGH molecule partially unfolds, it can form dimers or high-molecular-weight aggregates, which are visible as turbidity or invisible but immunogenic.

Some of this was covered on here. Good stuff and thanks for posting.

With the lab filters or medical grade wheel filters I have always wondered the microplastic load being introduced on the injection. Does a pre-flush with bac help?

Someone could argue same deal with insulin pins but the wheel filters have more wettable surface area. Just a thought. Maybe someone has already looked at this. Usually there are tradeoffs. Thanks for your posts.

 

[readalot]

It is also interesting after you are on the forums for a while to track anecdotal autoimmune and immune related issues being reported in the middle aged who have been in this hobby for a while. Incidence significantly higher than gen pop? Don't know.

 

[Sera]

It is also interesting after you are on the forums for a while to track anecdotal autoimmune and immune related issues being reported in the middle aged who have been in this hobby for a while. Incidence significantly higher than gen pop? Don't know.

I’d be interested to hear more on that, but regarding the previous I always flush with a ml or two of bac water to dislodge any particles that might be there.

 

[Kralteramon]

Do you use peptides? It is true that filtering hgh can cause aggregation and such. But there’s also a bunch of aggregates and crap in there without filtering.

Yes i do use peptides. BPC, TB, HGH, MT1, TIRZ or RETA, Epitalon, IGF1LR3. You might be right but I don't think aggregates are always inherently bad. Dimers are probably not causing much of a reaction, only the bigger aggregates that are visible with the naked eye are probably bad to inject yes.

 

[Kralteramon]

Do you use peptides? It is true that filtering hgh can cause aggregation and such. But there’s also a bunch of aggregates and crap in there without filtering.

Also each pass through a filter can cause up to 10–30%* loss of active monomeric HGH due to adsorption and/or partial aggregation especially if not handled carefully. That's probably quite a lot more aggregation vs unfiltered peptides.

*estimate based on knowledge of filtration losses in biopharmaceutical proteins.

 

[Barney67]

Also each pass through a filter can cause up to 10–30%* loss of active monomeric HGH due to adsorption and/or partial aggregation especially if not handled carefully. That's probably quite a lot more aggregation vs unfiltered peptides.

*estimate based on knowledge of filtration losses in biopharmaceutical proteins.

Is this limited to HGH or does it also extend to GLP-1s and other peptides? First time I’ve heard about it

 

[Kralteramon]

Is this limited to HGH or does it also extend to GLP-1s and other peptides? First time I’ve heard about it

It's a ballpark percentage based on filtration of proteins. It's expected that there will be accelerated aggregation after filtering which happens not emmediately but gradually in a few days. That's why it's better to use your filtered dose emmediately and filter on a per dose basis.

 

[keenpen]

I learned something today. Thanks. I've been using AI in an attempt to quantify the loss from using a 0.2um filter. This is the best I came up with.

Timeline for Refrigerated (2-8°C) Filtered Tirzepatide

Day 0 (Immediate): ~1% loss from filter adsorption

Days 1-7: Minimal additional aggregation. GLP-1 peptides show high stability at refrigeration temperatures

Weeks 2-4: Gradual oligomerization begins, estimated 1-3% additional loss (compared to 5-15% at 37°C)

28-90 days (BUD period): Compounding pharmacies set "Beyond-Use Dates" of 28-90 days for refrigerated reconstituted tirzepatide based on USP guidelines. This suggests cumulative losses remain acceptable (likely <5-10% total) within this window

Beyond 90 days: Aggregation continues but at much slower rates than room temperature. The 10-30% loss range would take months rather than weeks to develop

Loss is much more aggressive when not stored in the refrigerator.

Still better than injecting glass delaminate or bacteria into your body. I'll take the slight loss tradeoff.

 

[Barney67]

I learned something today. Thanks. I've been using AI in an attempt to quantify the loss from using a 0.2um filter. This is the best I came up with.

Timeline for Refrigerated (2-8°C) Filtered Tirzepatide

Day 0 (Immediate): ~1% loss from filter adsorption

Days 1-7: Minimal additional aggregation. GLP-1 peptides show high stability at refrigeration temperatures

Weeks 2-4: Gradual oligomerization begins, estimated 1-3% additional loss (compared to 5-15% at 37°C)

28-90 days (BUD period): Compounding pharmacies set "Beyond-Use Dates" of 28-90 days for refrigerated reconstituted tirzepatide based on USP guidelines. This suggests cumulative losses remain acceptable (likely <5-10% total) within this window

Beyond 90 days: Aggregation continues but at much slower rates than room temperature. The 10-30% loss range would take months rather than weeks to develop

Loss is much more aggressive when not stored in the refrigerator.

Still better than injecting glass delaminate or bacteria into your body. I'll take the slight loss tradeoff.

I’m in a server with testing results for tirzepatide degradation tests. Unfortunately, I am not at liberty to share the tests themselves, but what I can tell you is that reconstituted tirzepatide is extremely hardy and undergoes VERY negligible degradation after 3 months in the fridge. You can also freeze it and thaw for use without losing effectiveness as well.