To filter or not to filter, that is the question

Do you filter your peptides?

  • Total voters
    89
J

joearimathea

New Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2025
Messages
14
Reaction score
45
Location
usa
I see some discussion about filtering peptides. If they are 99% pure, then what are you filtering out? One of my worries is introducing a contaminant.
 
99 percent purity doesn't mean that what you see in your lyophilized vial is 99 percent active ingredient.

Purity is a very misunderstood metric in the market.

I still don't filter.... infections from SQ injections are pretty rare for most people.
 
I filter because I had a bad reaction that lasted weeks. Most folks don't. It's very inexpensive to filter for bacteria.
 
I don't filter because I didn't see a reason for a subq injections. That being said, I'm now leaning towards 'the stuff to do it is cheap anyway' and plan to buy supplies to do so, if only because I want to learn.
 
joearimathea said:
I see some discussion about filtering peptides. If they are 99% pure, then what are you filtering out? One of my worries is introducing a contaminant.
Click to expand...
HPLC purity tests tell you the purity of whatever they are testing for, not the composition of what is in the vial. That puck you see is almost entirely excipient, generally mannitol.

A purity test tells you absolutely nothing about contaminants of most kinds, be it bacteria, mold, heavy metals, glass shards, etc.
 
I filter anything that is going into a cartridge (because it easy to do while filling it) or any pep I plan to use for greater than a few days.

10mg MOTs-C, gone in a day or two, I don't bother. Reta, Tirz even my dirty-ass lab originated Ousia compound Tirz gets filtered every time.
 
Was not filtering. Then realized cheap Amazon bac water was risky. I began to filter using questionable EO needles, attached to questionable filter, to EO syringe made in some Asian country, to filter Bac water that could be tap water, to do recon. Was creating a much greater risk. I did buy a box of EO sterile vials but wondered how sterile can cheap vials be? The address is US but is shipped from China!!! Now use Hospira into lyophilized vial directly and leave a few drops in the vial on the last draw. Minimal manipulation and $$. Medical grade supplies are not cheap.
 
I'm on anti rejection medication so low immunity. I filter each time I reconstitute a vial so maybe twice a month. I found a new AliExpress source for 4mm filters so my $3.20 formerly going to Peptide Test is now $1.80 for the 2 filters. Either filter expense is more of a "why not?" My partner sees me taking extra precautions and doesn't question this stuff I'm injecting came from the same place as his ramen noodles.
 
I filter, cuz it's cheap and quick to do, but it's important to know that it does not filter out all pathogens nor replace other precautions.

Bigger pathogens aren't more dangerous, size actually doesn't matter here lol.

So don't assume that you get a sterile solution when filtering and take other precautions along the way and you shall be good.
 
Every "purity" test you see of UGL peptides is conducted AFTER being filtered with a .22um syringe filter. Contaminants larger than that, which are common, are removed first.

Unless you're filtering first, you're not injecting what you see in the test result, but the "raw" version with some unknown amount of contamination, consisting of glass delimitation shards, rubber particulates, bacteria, peptide aggregates, etc.
 
nonyabizznez said:
I'm on anti rejection medication so low immunity. I filter each time I reconstitute a vial so maybe twice a month. I found a new AliExpress source for 4mm filters so my $3.20 formerly going to Peptide Test is now $1.80 for the 2 filters. Either filter expense is more of a "why not?" My partner sees me taking extra precautions and doesn't question this stuff I'm injecting came from the same place as his ramen noodles.
Click to expand...
Anti rejection medication? Does that mean when I ask a girl out, she’ll say yes? If so, where do I get some?
 
I filter when I mixed a lot of vials together. If I recon a single vial for myself I never filter. I also will filter stuff I make for other people.
 
GLiPtest said:
Every "purity" test you see of UGL peptides is conducted AFTER being filtered with a .22um syringe filter. Contaminants larger than that, which are common, are removed first.

Unless you're filtering first, you're not injecting what you see in the test result, but the "raw" version with some unknown amount of contamination, consisting of glass delimitation shards, rubber particulates, bacteria, peptide aggregates, etc.
Click to expand...
Whoa, that's crazy, I had no idea.
 
penewbie said:
Whoa, that's crazy, I had no idea.
Click to expand...
It doesn't seem to be a commonly understood limitation of the type of testing we have access to.

The standard in science, pharma, and regulatory agencies requires multiple methods of testing peptide drugs for contamination since they all have "blind spots" that need to be compensated for.

The inorganic particulates in cheap Chinese vials not certified to meet USP (the standards setting organization the FDA follows) particulate standards alone warrants filtering.

Injected glass and rubber particulates have been found lodged in many organs during autopsies. They create "micro embolisms" and/or chronic inflammation. With no natural means for glass or rubber to be broken down or removed, they accumulate with each injection.

IMG_9677.jpeg
 
Last edited:
GLiPtest said:
It doesn't seem to be a commonly understood limitation of the type of testing we have access to.

The standard in science, pharma, and regulatory agencies requires multiple methods of testing peptide drugs for contamination since they all have "blind spots" that need to be compensated for.

The physical particulates in cheap Chinese vials not certified to meet USP (the standards setting organization the FDA follows) particulate standards alone warrants filtering.

Injected glass and rubber particulates have been found lodged in many organs during autopsies. They create "micro embolisms" and/or chronic inflammation. With no natural means for glass or rubber to be broken down or removed, they accumulate with each injection.

View attachment 6200
Click to expand...
To be fair I always filter.

I do it because I listened to Ghoul on meso, who is a total fear mongering loudmouth, but he does make good points every now and again.

I'm not worried about bacteria in subq shots, but he showed that immunogenicity could be a realistic concern, so I filter.

It's a "nice" surprise to now be able to add another reason to my filtering, strengthening my decision.
 
GLiPtest said:
It doesn't seem to be a commonly understood limitation of the type of testing we have access to.

The standard in science, pharma, and regulatory agencies requires multiple methods of testing peptide drugs for contamination since they all have "blind spots" that need to be compensated for.

The physical particulates in cheap Chinese vials not certified to meet USP (the standards setting organization the FDA follows) particulate standards alone warrants filtering.

Injected glass and rubber particulates have been found lodged in many organs during autopsies. They create "micro embolisms" and/or chronic inflammation. With no natural means for glass or rubber to be broken down or removed, they accumulate with each injection.

View attachment 6200
Click to expand...

Hi and welcome, brand new member.

I can appreciate that "The standard in science, pharma, and regulatory agencies requires multiple methods of testing peptide drugs for contamination since they all have "blind spots" that need to be compensated for."

But are you stating here that JANOSHIK TESTS of GLPs etc are "conducted AFTER being filtered with a .22um syringe filter"?

... which would mean that every time we confirm our product purchases with a Jano test, we are not actually learning what's in our own (unfiltered) vials?
And that we are not actually using what we think we are UNLESS we filter it that way?

Because I have never, ever come across that piece of information.

Nor do I filter.
 
Garbo said:
Hi and welcome, brand new member.

I can appreciate that "The standard in science, pharma, and regulatory agencies requires multiple methods of testing peptide drugs for contamination since they all have "blind spots" that need to be compensated for."

But are you stating here that JANOSHIK TESTS of GLPs etc are "conducted AFTER being filtered with a .22um syringe filter"?

... which would mean that every time we confirm our product purchases with a Jano test, we are not actually learning what's in our own (unfiltered) vials?
And that we are not actually using what we think we are UNLESS we filter it that way?

Because I have never, ever come across that piece of information.

Nor do I filter.
Click to expand...

All the testing companies have to do this to protect their equipment. Water soluble stuff does not get trapped in the filter so theres no loss of the peptides.

Also edited to add: they don't test for what's in the vial. They only test for what you specifically ask for. Tirz test will only test for tirz quantity and mass. It won't tell you if there's anything else in the vial.
 
Mr. Smith said:
View attachment 6203

Yes, all labs filter before testing... So, your Vial may contain, who knows what.. I always filter.
Click to expand...

THANK YOU for that screenshot! I just wanted confirmation that JANO did it.

Appreciate it, and am astounded you were able to grab it so fast ... wait a minute — are you the Mr. Smith from The Matrix by any chance? 🤔
 
Vicki said:
All the testing companies have to do this to protect their equipment. Water soluble stuff does not get trapped in the filter so theres no loss of the peptides.

Also edited to add: they don't test for what's in the vial. They only test for what you specifically ask for. Tirz test will only test for tirz quantity and mass. It won't tell you if there's anything else in the vial.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Vicki!

(I had known your second paragraph stuff, but just wanted to confirm Janoshik was counted among "ALL" the testing companies doing the first paragraph stuff, lol)
 
Garbo said:
THANK YOU for that screenshot! I just wanted confirmation that JANO did it.

Appreciate it, and am astounded you were able to grab it so fast ... wait a minute — are you the Mr. Smith from The Matrix by any chance? 🤔
Click to expand...
No, but you might know me from my infatuation with Ning Yang Bing on QUAL.

I took that screenshot from SWISS under lab chat with Jano and TP.
 
GLiPtest said:
It doesn't seem to be a commonly understood limitation of the type of testing we have access to.

The standard in science, pharma, and regulatory agencies requires multiple methods of testing peptide drugs for contamination since they all have "blind spots" that need to be compensated for.

The physical particulates in cheap Chinese vials not certified to meet USP (the standards setting organization the FDA follows) particulate standards alone warrants filtering.

Injected glass and rubber particulates have been found lodged in many organs during autopsies. They create "micro embolisms" and/or chronic inflammation. With no natural means for glass or rubber to be broken down or removed, they accumulate with each injection.
Click to expand...

Hey, Glip,

This is my second reply to this post.

In my first, I was stunned and questioning.

But many folks here have set me straight!

So I want to offer you a mea culpa AND thank you so much for helping make me smarter than I was yesterday 💟
 
Mr. Smith said:
No, but you might know me from my infatuation with Ning Yang Bing on QUAL.
Click to expand...
Ning sent me a PM and wanted me to pass this on. 😘 💞

She's busy trying to make a beige day pink! 🩷
Garbo said:
hahah I would tell you hands off Ning, mister, but now I'm kinda infatuated with you.
Click to expand...
This won't surprise her she says @Mr Smith has that effect on people, besides her mom was a Ho.
 
Last edited:
Garbo said:
Hey, Glip,

This is my second reply to this post.

In my first, I was stunned and questioning.

But many folks here have set me straight!

So I want to offer you a mea culpa AND thank you so much for helping make me smarter than I was yesterday 💟
Click to expand...
I had no idea testing facilities filtered.

I'm especially happy I found a source with Ks-tek (packaged) filters on AliExpress under $90 shipped for 100! Arrived in less than 2wks!

I just found this on AliExpress:
$12.99 | Sterile hydrophilic Syringe Filters,PES Membrane 0.22μm Pore Size,4mm Diameter,25pcs/100 Pcs Individually Packed by Ks-Tek

So @exploitedworkerbee there's an alternative to Peptide Test.
 
nonyabizznez said:
I had no idea testing facilities filtered.

I'm especially happy I found a source with Ks-tek (packaged) filters on AliExpress under $90 shipped for 100! Arrived in less than 2wks!

I just found this on AliExpress:
$12.99 | Sterile hydrophilic Syringe Filters,PES Membrane 0.22μm Pore Size,4mm Diameter,25pcs/100 Pcs Individually Packed by Ks-Tek

So @exploitedworkerbee there's an alternative to Peptide Test.
Click to expand...
Here is some more detailed info I got from TP.

1743282713636.png
 
Does anyone know if PT and Jano filter for sterility testing? Seems like it could give you a false negative.
 
penewbie said:
Not really though.

That size difference is meaningless when it comes to small molecules like peptides
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with the size of the peptide molecule.

It's about the microorganisms and other contaminants that would otherwise be removed at .22um that pass through a .45um filter. This additional material reduces purity calculations.
 
GLiPtest said:
It has nothing to do with the size of the peptide molecule.

It's about the microorganisms and other contaminants that would otherwise be removed at .22um that pass through a .45um filter. This additional material reduces purity calculations.
Click to expand...
Microorganisms and contaminants do not enter into the purity calculations.
 
Yep. Purity tests are about looking at the state of the peptide. Degraded aggregates, incomplete synthesis, etc. The way the tests work doesn't allow for it to test for purity in the way people tend to think.

On Peptide Purity | TrustPointe Analytics LLC

Updated: 25-Oct-2024 While identity, quantity, and sterility are straightforward and critical, purity is not something t
trustpointeanalytics.com trustpointeanalytics.com
 
in reality almost none of us filter. and in my opinion you're more likely to screw something up or dump a vial screwing around.
 
I dont bother filtering. Imo if it's lyophilized it's already filtered and sterile enough for me. Ive done worse. I've already died (twice). I'll take my chances.
☆I respect that that everyone does not feel the same as I do. We are all entitled to our own thoughts opinions.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20250330_133752_OneDrive.jpg
    Screenshot_20250330_133752_OneDrive.jpg
    90.1 KB · Views: 72
  • Screenshot_20250330_134018_OneDrive.jpg
    Screenshot_20250330_134018_OneDrive.jpg
    78.1 KB · Views: 87
  • Screenshot_20250330_134528_OneDrive.jpg
    Screenshot_20250330_134528_OneDrive.jpg
    165.9 KB · Views: 83
  • Screenshot_20250330_134719_OneDrive.jpg
    Screenshot_20250330_134719_OneDrive.jpg
    75.2 KB · Views: 87
Yankeegurl_LQJ said:
I dont bother filtering. Imo if it's lyophilized it's already filtered and sterile enough for me. Ive done worse. I've already died (twice). I'll take my chances.
☆I respect that that everyone does not feel the same as I do. We are all entitled to our own thoughts opinions.
Click to expand...
Thanks for those screenshots, My immediate thought was heavy metals. That eases my mind somewhat but I still might look into filtering. I'm not in the medical field or a chemist so there is a lot I'm still learning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 153 (members: 9, guests: 144)

Forum statistics

Threads
3,170
Messages
52,720
Members
6,664
Latest member
Riseandthrive

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom