Do You Filter Your Peptides Before Use?

[zpped]

Do you loose any peptide when you filter?

There is a tiny amount lost in the filter. A couple units worth. Smaller diameter filters and air purging reduce are the biggest factor.

 

[Wheatthins]

Hell if I know! I'm currently going back and fourth on where to get filtering supplies from, never done it before.

I've ordered from underground supply twice now, Just filtered my first vial into a pen. Added some complexity but so far it wasn't so bad.

 

[chmuse]

Look at you go working up to 000.625!!

In other Crypto news Solana is currently up 0.4% 0.5145184!

I took .75 sema this week! I hope I'm making you proud!

 

[flsailfish22]

What olis BA? And how much do you add to a vial?

BA is benzyl alcohol. The amount needed is based off total liquid amount currently in your vial. Anything I personally brew I use 1% to 3% compared to .9%. I use 3% in stuff I know will last for 3 months roughly. If I have 3ml of liquid I'll add 1 unit of BA if it's been in the fridge a while. Likely not needed but it makes me feel better.

 

[catdog]

This was an entertaining read through. Never thought GLP1 would get close to meso level shit talking. but here we are.

Anywho. Filtering is great, but imo unnecessary in regards to subq injections. I have however read of mitigating risk of immunogenicity/immune response rxns.

 

[AndyPanda]

That doesn't make sense to me....are you suggesting the original vial wasn't sterile to begin with? If that's the case, it's not going to matter regardless.. Or are you concerned with residual?

If there are no contaminates in the vial then you need not filter. If there are any contaminants in there and you filter it right back into it, you are defeating the purpose.

 

[Calm Logic]

This was an entertaining read through. Never thought GLP1 would get close to meso level shit talking. but here we are.

 

[Skidude]

This was an entertaining read through. Never thought GLP1 would get close to meso level shit talking. but here we are.

Anywho. Filtering is great, but imo unnecessary in regards to subq injections. I have however read of mitigating risk of immunogenicity/immune response rxns.

Potentially we were cross contaminated and EWB had to filter out the contaminate?
I think it was a good use of filtering

 

[Jfrick11]

If there are no contaminates in the vial then you need not filter. If there are any contaminants in there and you filter it right back into it, you are defeating the purpose.

This seems way over the top for a subq injection. The vial began sterile, peptide powder enters with possible contaminats, powder is diluted with BAC, and then withdrawn into a syringe large enough to withdraw 99+% of what's in the vial now mixed, the liquid passes through a filter (appropriate size) and then goes back into a vial with worse case scenario, a miniscule amount (if any) of contaminant remaining in the vial now diluted further in BAC. Then, it's injected subq, where infection rates are extremely low. Just saying....

If there are no contaminates in the vial then you need not filter. If there are any contaminants in there and you filter it right back into it, you are defeating the purpose.

 

[zpped]

This seems way over the top for a subq injection. The vial began sterile, peptide powder enters with possible contaminats, powder is diluted with BAC, and then withdrawn into a syringe large enough to withdraw 99+% of what's in the vial now mixed, the liquid passes through a filter (appropriate size) and then goes back into a vial with worse case scenario, a miniscule amount (if any) of contaminant remaining in the vial now diluted further in BAC. Then, it's injected subq, where infection rates are extremely low. Just saying....

If you don't want to filter, dont. But you're absolutely wrong about putting it back into the same vial. The vial often doesn't begin sterile and your description of "peptide powder" being put into the vial implies you don't understand how the manufacturing process works.

 

[Iamnew2this]

This seems way over the top for a subq injection. The vial began sterile, peptide powder enters with possible contaminats, powder is diluted with BAC, and then withdrawn into a syringe large enough to withdraw 99+% of what's in the vial now mixed, the liquid passes through a filter (appropriate size) and then goes back into a vial with worse case scenario, a miniscule amount (if any) of contaminant remaining in the vial now diluted further in BAC. Then, it's injected subq, where infection rates are extremely low. Just saying....

If the peptide was contaminated to start off with, then, the original vial that it was in, is contaminated also. It is possible the vial was not sterile and had some kind of contamination itself and not the peptide. Once the peptide enters the contaminated vial, the peptide becomes contaminated as well. I, myself, usually, don't filter, but it is something that I'm starting to think about.

 

[AndyPanda]

This seems way over the top for a subq injection. The vial began sterile, peptide powder enters with possible contaminats, powder is diluted with BAC, and then withdrawn into a syringe large enough to withdraw 99+% of what's in the vial now mixed, the liquid passes through a filter (appropriate size) and then goes back into a vial with worse case scenario, a miniscule amount (if any) of contaminant remaining in the vial now diluted further in BAC. Then, it's injected subq, where infection rates are extremely low. Just saying....

I don’t filter. I also don’t discourage anyone from doing it. The OP stated they were filtering and then returning the filtered liquid back to the original vial. I’m simply saying that to do so is pointless. That’s like filtering puddle water and then putting it back into the puddle before you drink it.