SRY Tirz 30 with disinfectant?

[Ghoul]

Alright... so apparently it's not great to have this stuff in our vials. I've just ordered some Tirz15 from SRY and wondering if I made a mistake here. I guess it's benign to inject but it might cause aggregates when I keep it reconstituted for "too long"? How would I know it went bad? Cloudy?

Cloudy means the aggregates are large enough to be visible, which is huge, at least 100um per spec in the "cloud". That's tens of trillions of individual monomers per visible spec. Below that size they're invisible.

While time can be a factor when aggregation is caused by excess concentration, heat, light, etc, in a case like this where the excipient immediately damages the monomers, aggregates typically don't "grow", but spontaneously form instantly into their maximum size. So you can safely filter into another vial and not be too concerned about the aggregates "regrowing" (which can happen with other causes of aggregation).

The larger the aggregate, the more of a concern they are. 10um to 100um is the size range considered most risky.

If you use a .22um sterile syringe PES filter, you'll eliminate the vast majority of that range or larger and make the Tirz as safe as possible. As a bonus you'll sterilize it as well, since many peptides are unsterile.

PS: Most of the time aggregates won't be visible, the riskiest size range is sub-visible, so filtering everything is best practice imo.

 

[Kralteramon]

Cloudy means the aggregates are large enough to be visible, which is huge, at least 100um per spec in the "cloud". That's tens of trillions of individual monomers per visible spec. Below that size they're invisible.

While time can be a factor when aggregation is caused by excess concentration, heat, light, etc, in a case like this where the excipient immediately damages the monomers, aggregates typically don't "grow", but spontaneously form instantly into their maximum size. So you can safely filter into another vial and not be too concerned about the aggregates "regrowing" (which can happen with other causes of aggregation).

The larger the aggregate, the more of a concern they are. 10um to 100um is the size range considered most risky.

If you use a .22um sterile syringe PES filter, you'll eliminate the vast majority of that range or larger and make the Tirz as safe as possible. As a bonus you'll sterilize it as well, since many peptides are unsterile.

PS: Most of the time aggregates won't be visible, the riskiest size range is sub-visible, so filtering everything is best practice imo.

Thanks Ghoul. Would you filter an entire reconstituted vial into a sterile one or filter per administration? The latter would be quite costly if you need to use a sterile filter each time.

 

[janoshik]

#### 1. Testing Delays and Data Inaccuracies
- Unacceptable Processing Time: Reports were delayed up to two weeks post-sample delivery—far exceeding standard turnaround times.

We were waiting for them to pay for their order, which they did not despite several urgencies. The results were released immediately after the payment and we have data to easily prove all that.

- HPLC Purity Calculation Errors:
- After we flagged discrepancies, Janoshik corrected the data *without explaining the cause of the errors*.
- Critical Issue: An anomalous peak at 274 nm (inconsistent with peptide characteristics) was erroneously included in purity calculations, artificially deflating results.

It is literally explicitly stated that if we cannot ID something as a filler, it will be counted among impurities. I think it's much worse optics if you don't know what is in your product than anything I can do now.



I will be addressing the rest later, as addressing BS is substantially more time expensive than having AI create their own sort of BS, but oh man. I will get there.

 

[Whistles77]

We were waiting for them to pay for their order, which they did not despite several urgencies. The results were released immediately after the payment and we have data to easily prove all that.


It is literally explicitly stated that if we cannot ID something as a filler, it will be counted among impurities. I think it's much worse optics if you don't know what is in your product than anything I can do now.



I will be addressing the rest later, as addressing BS is substantially more time expensive than having AI create their own sort of BS, but oh man. I will get there.

Yeah. Sorry to be the one to share this. Feels very much like damage mitigation PR fluff.......to confuse an uninformed consumer base.

 

[Photon]

I think it's much worse optics if you don't know what is in your product than anything I can do now.

Chinese UGL are all dropshippers/resellers so they probably don't know what goes into each batch either.

damage mitigation PR fluff.

Yes it is.
Plus they probably got tens of thousands of vials of that crap they need to offload one way or another.

 

[Ghoul]

Thanks Ghoul. Would you filter an entire reconstituted vial into a sterile one or filter per administration? The latter would be quite costly if you need to use a sterile filter each time.

I have my personal routine down that filters every dose. of every peptide, immediately prior to administration. I only use one filter per vial with this method (unless it clogs, which has happened, shockingly, on "clear" vials").

Because of the unknowns that can cause aggregates that can grow over time, ie;

- is the solution the wrong PH? a major factor of aggregation that pharma very carefully controls for

- Are there defective (unfolded, oxidized, etc) monomers that act as "seeds" that will lead to aggregates growing

Per dose filtering eliminates any concern over "newly formed" aggregates that could happen in the days after filtering an entire vial, along with the other benefits of sterilization, removing other trash like delaminated glass, rubber particulates, etc.

But I've come to the conclusion the best protocol is the one someone can and is willing to adhere to.

Never let the perfect be the enemy of the good. If someone just filters an entire vial, it's still a better, cleaner version than if it's not filtered at all.

I would say in order of increasing risk reduction:

-Filter back into the original vial

-Filter into an ultra-spec USP particulate free vial

-Per dose filter

-?? some other unknown method better than these that'll be developed in the future. Maybe an injection pen with built in filter, that have been patented but not produced.

 

[Kralteramon]

I have my personal routine down that filters every dose. of every peptide, immediately prior to administration. I only use one filter per vial with this method (unless it clogs, which has happened, shockingly, on "clear" vials").

Because of the unknowns that can cause aggregates that can grow over time, ie;

- is the solution the wrong PH? a major factor of aggregation that pharma very carefully controls for

- Are there defective (unfolded, oxidized, etc) monomers that act as "seeds" that will lead to aggregates growing

Per dose filtering eliminates any concern over "newly formed" aggregates that could happen in the days after filtering an entire vial, along with the other benefits of sterilization, removing other trash like delaminated glass, rubber particulates, etc.

But I've come to the conclusion the best protocol is the one someone can and is willing to adhere to.

Never let the perfect be the enemy of the good. If someone just filters an entire vial, it's still a better, cleaner version than if it's not filtered at all.

I would say in order of increasing risk reduction:

-Filter back into the original vial

-Filter into an ultra-spec USP particulate free vial

-Per dose filter

-?? some other unknown method better than these that'll be developed in the future. Maybe an injection pen with built in filter, that have been patented but not produced.

Cool, that sounds like pretty good advise to stay safe. I just wonder how you store the filter after every use so it doesn't get potentially contaminated on the output side. Just pop on a new needle after every use and don't worry about the input side?

 

[Ghoul]

Cool, that sounds like pretty good advise to stay safe. I just wonder how you store the filter after every use so it doesn't get potentially contaminated on the output side. Just pop on a new needle after every use and don't worry about the input side?

No. I reconstitute with 3ml (I buy vial sizes that make this reconstitution volume practical, ie, doses end up being between .2ml-.6ml).

I draw all of the solution into a 3ml syringe. Attach the filter and a large gauge 1.5" needle.

I fill an insulin syringe from this rig. Recap the needle and store the 3ml syringe/filter in a diabetic travel case in the fridge. This eliminates using a vial entirely.

The entire process takes me under 10 seconds, nothing that's in contact with the peptide touches an unsterile surface. Very brief air exposure, not dissimilar to many other routine, medically approved techniques used in hospitals is the only possible source of contamination.

I'm aware this isn't "perfect", nothing is, but I've come to the conclusion I'm reducing more risk than potentially introducing, and made a few tweaks along the way to reduce risk further.

It does take practice, and I lost a few ml worth of peptides during the first couple of attempts, but now it's perfect every time.

 

[Kralteramon]

No. I reconstitute with 3ml (I buy vials sizes that make this reconstitution volume practical, ie, doses end up being between .2ml-.6ml).

I draw all of the solution into a 3ml syringe. Attach the filter and a large gauge 1.5" needle.

I fill an insulin syringe from this rig. Recap the needle and store the 3ml syringe/filter in a diabetic travel case in the fridge. This eliminates using a vial entirely.

The entire process takes me under 10 seconds, nothing touches an unsterile surface.

I'm aware this isn't "perfect", nothing is, but I've come to the conclusion I'm reducing more risk than potentially introducing, and made a few tweaks along the way to reduce risk further.

It does take practice, and I lost a few ml worth of peptides during the first couple of attempts, but now it's perfect every time,

Sounds like a pretty good method. Aren't you afraid that the BA or BB melts the stopper when you store it in the 3ml syringe? I guess you're backfilling the insulin pins? Theoretically some floating particles can get in that way? Or am I overthinking it.. I'm going to give it a try anyways.

 

[Photon]

Sounds like a pretty good method. Aren't you afraid that the BA or BB melts the stopper when you store it in the 3ml syringe? I guess you're backfilling the insulin pins? Theoretically some floating particles can get in that way? Or am I overthinking it.. I'm going to give it a try anyways.

No BB in peptides.
BA content is low, but yes it degrades rubber, just not that quickly.

 

[null88]

can you not use the HPLC data to fingerprint samples? ex: If chinese source A tirz30 and chinese source B tirz30 graph line up they may be using the same formulation/same manufacturer

 

[zpped]

can you not use the HPLC data to fingerprint samples? ex: If chinese source A tirz30 and chinese source B tirz30 graph line up they may be using the same formulation/same manufacturer

tons of stuff in the vial could not show in the hplc at all.

 

[janoshik]

#### 2. Contaminant Identification Concerns
- We paid $170 for GC-MS analysis to identify the unknown substance.
- Our independent testing confirmed the compound as CAS 99-93-4.

Which no one has ever seen and they didn't send to me.

- Janoshik's amended report (issued two days later) identified it as p-Chlorocresol but failed to provide:

Goddamn Janoshik did additional work on IDing unknown impurity only AFTER it was paid. Shame on him.

- Molecular weight verification

They asked AFTER they posted this. It's not even funny anymore.




While I inquired with them beforehand if they have any info about chlorocresole in their manufacturing process all I got was crickets.

- Rationale for attributing the 274 nm peak to this compound

Phenol derivatives often exhibit absorbance in this region and a quick online search seems to fit my expectation.

- p-Chlorocresol is **a toxic substance requiring government clearance for purchase**—our decade of industry expertise precludes its intentional use.

If only they communicated this when I inquired with them 6 days ago.
It is fun IDing complete unknowns with an uncooperating client, right?

- Janoshik’s opaque methodology (updating reports without evidentiary support) violates professional standards.

As opaque as GCMS gets.

- Ongoing Dialogue with Janoshik: We demand:
- Complete analytical data (MW, 274 nm peak justification)
- Explanation for contaminant inclusion in purity calculations
- Clarification on testing delays

MW: above. They posted this BEFORE they asked me.
274 nm blah blah: They posted this BEFORE they asked me.
Explanation for contaminant inclusion in purity calculations: I explained this to everyone years ago, I explained this to Anya like 10 times in past couple days, see excerpt of email above.
Clarification on testing delays: we wait to receive payment before we release the results for unreliable partners and Anya paid WEEKS after we were urging them saying we have the results available.

We urge Janoshik to address these concerns promptly and uphold their professional obligations.

SRYlab
June 15, 2026

*(Key improvements for U.S. audience: Concise phrasing, active voice, emphasis on accountability, and logical flow aligning with Western business communication standards.)

I urge SRY to pay their commitments on time, to respond to my emails timely and not waste my time with this special kind of AI bullshit.

All of those are outright insulting to me and my time.

For everyone else, please, do actively share this.

 

[janoshik]

BTW - CAS: 99-93-4

Acetophenone, 4'-hydroxy-

webbook.nist.gov

EI spectrum prominent peaks 121 Da, 136 Da.



Now, one of the samples with those masses exported:


Nothing, right?

Well, we can try zooming in:


Damn. Guess we can zoom in some more.



Whoopsie.

So much for the compound they claim is there.
Pity I have not seen any evidence so far.

 

[janoshik]

Given their Telegram statement had been made public before they inquired with me (or even replied my emails) I feel it's only appropriate to take this to public scrutiny:

Hello Anya,

given you've apparently decided to make this a public thing with a statement containing multiple false claims and deliberate misleading in order to smear my work while being less than responsive to my emails about the issue, please, do accept that I have posted all the information you've requested for public scrutiny as well.

Given you must be confident in what you've posted I am sure public scrutiny will only help confirm your point of view and we'll eventually see our failings, thus you'd naturally have no objections towards that.

Also please understand that given the fact you are shipping in samples that were not in your order, there are trouble with you paying your orders on time and the above, I have removed you from our VIP list, which makes you lose special privileges, such as free services rendered or us accepting your packages before they are paid.

We are very sorry it has come to this, but if we are seeing our hard work on IDing unknown impurities for you and releasing results early for you even before payment at no charge being repaid with this, it is very disheartening for me and my team and I would rather avoid that.

All the information you have provided has been posted here: SRY Tirz 30 with disinfectant?

Is there any information you have requested missing? If so, I will be happy to amend that.

Thank you for your understanding and I hope you're having a great day.

With best regards,
Janoshik
janoshik.com

 

[Lifting88]

Might be these excipients..some of these are known irritants, some more potent than others. If it's listed on the tests, at least you can figure out which one irriates you the most and avoid it.



I might avoid SRY and HYB for peps for now. (HYB used to work at SRY) -- high chance the sources are the same. Didn't you get a terrible batch of Tirz from HYB?



Please share the announcement.

I got a bad batch reta from hyb but didn't send it for testing becausd i dont want storecredits from them...bad customservicd

 

[Photon]

Looks like its happened before for this vendor -- contamination.
And that it uses a different factory than the others.
Anyone know how they addressed this?

Saw this on reddit

Janoshik Analytical

 

[phatty1]

That's around the same date as the initial reports on the other peps. Honestly there have been thousands of people using the diff peps over the last 2 months and how many claims of something? I've seen one guy who pissed whatever but we don't know how many other peps he was pinning or other circumstances. I've been using the cjc and bpc for past couple of weeks w no issues and plan to continue. If it was the p clorel maybe not

 

[Photon]

That's around the same date as the initial reports on the other peps. Honestly there have been thousands of people using the diff peps over the last 2 months and how many claims of something? I've seen one guy who pissed whatever but we don't know how many other peps he was pinning or other circumstances. I've been using the cjc and bpc for past couple of weeks w no issues and plan to continue. If it was the p clorel maybe not

no testing no complains

 

[Ghoul]

People go 30 years drinking water with cancer causing contaminants or lead "without complaints". The idea harm only occurs immediately after an injection and you would "feel" it, or that a solid connection between health damage and injecting a particular underground produced drug is likely EVER to be made borders on retarded.