Has anyone bought from Peptronix Bio (PTB)?

[carts]

Was curious if anyone has any experience with this vendor. They've posted in the Vendor Connnections, which is where I found them.

 

[rsmith]

Perhaps avoid Finnrick unless you want your name on a list.
If you know what I mean.

I'm sending in a vile tomorrow with a disposable email as only ID.

 

[rsmith]

The way I've looked at price/convenience with Uther is that, for example, I'm not seeing any testing groups on FPPG for WBS, so would one then have to try to gather a test group, along with the time/headache of organizing it. Many of the other China vendors seem to take a pretty long time shipping, add that time on top of trying to find testing.
I received my Uther order very quickly and there was already a testing group in place for what I ordered (MOTS-C), in addition to that he's been doing his own and they're coming in high and very consistent, and matching up with the 3rd party tests. Tirz 30 is $40 more than WBS, but a testing group would be at least that much per person, or much more individually, but we're talking $4 per vial more for Uther. SSA's Sema is $30 less than Uther, and from another person I know, they take a long time to ship.

Uther is right at double what I'm paying now. I understand though, that there are other factors that matter and that might justify at least some markup.

 

[Calm Logic]

Uther is right at double what I'm paying now.

Double for what? Or are you referring only to GLPs?

For reta, Uther is almost twice what I paid, per mg:

Uther is $1.13 per mg for reta, for the R40 for $450. I paid 66 cents per mg, which is 42 percent less, and mine included group testing since it was a group buy.

 

[Jack brown]

I'm sending in a vile tomorrow with a disposable email as only ID.

I also mean if you have a supplier you love, sending in a vial might be a good way to get them shut down

 

[rsmith]

I also mean if you have a supplier you love, sending in a vial might be a good way to get them shut down

Please explain. How would sending a vial to anyone get the vendor shut down? If bad actors are looking for Pep vendors, they most certainly don't need me or my vials to find them. They could just place an order themselves.

 

[rsmith]

Double for what? Or are you referring only to GLPs?

For reta, Uther is almost twice what I paid, per mg:

Uther is $1.13 per mg for reta, for the R40 for $450. I paid 66 cents per mg, which is 42 percent less, and mine included group testing since it was a group buy.

Yeah, I'm talking only GLPs... Thanks for clarifying. Elsewhere, Tirz is going for < .29 mg. if you buy the 2 kits of 40mg. for $230 (advertized on this site for "July Promotion"). Quite the deal if you can stomach the risk. For other Uther products/prices, do your homework...

 

[Semamomma]

Vial has been sent off for testing. Should know results in the next two weeks.

Have you received your results yet??

 

[chmuse]

Double for what? Or are you referring only to GLPs?

For reta, Uther is almost twice what I paid, per mg:

Uther is $1.13 per mg for reta, for the R40 for $450. I paid 66 cents per mg, which is 42 percent less, and mine included group testing since it was a group buy.

Just paid $440 for tested r60, and $225 for tested r30. There's deals to be found. But uther is fast and well regarded- mine could very well take months to get here. 🤷‍♀️

 

[rsmith]

Just paid $440 for tested r60, and $225 for tested r30. There's deals to be found. But uther is fast and well regarded- mine could very well take months to get here. 🤷‍♀️

Tested by whom? Independent 3p?

 

[chmuse]

Tested by whom? Independent 3p?

Group buys. So some people would not want to use their tests as they're vendor-adjacent, but both of those groups are well regarded, have decently long histories, and generally end up retested, anyway. So we get the vendor provided test, the test done by the GBO, and then there will probably be a true 3p test done shortly after arrival.

 

[rsmith]

Tested by whom? Independent 3p?

I am so tempted to spring for the R60 for $370 but the lack of transparency, no batch numbers, question marks about age of product... all give me pause. It would be so easy, and profitable for a vendor to list traceable batch numbers. Then, individual batches wouldn't have to be tested over and over and buyers would have greater confidence in what they purchased.

There must be a reason that vendors don't use batch numbers and I suspect that one of them is that they are selling product that is 1 - 2 years old or older.

Think how business would explode if varifiable batch numbers were used, tested at Jano, confirmed by 1 - 2 third-party tests and then advertized with batch number, mass and purity. I cannot understand why vendors don't do this unless they have compelling reasons for selling untraceable batches (e.g., very old product).

 

[Calm Logic]

There must be a reason that vendors don't use batch numbers and I suspect that one of them is that they are selling product that is 1 - 2 years old or older.

Wouldn't the purity be noticeablely lower then, assuming it wasn't frozen?

But yes the lack of batch numbers can only look sketchy.

 

[ZippityDooDah]

Think how business would explode if varifiable batch numbers were used, tested at Jano, confirmed by 1 - 2 third-party tests and then advertized with batch number, mass and purity. I cannot understand why vendors don't do this unless they have compelling reasons for selling untraceable batches (e.g., very old product).

Business has already exploded without them needing to do much if any of that.

Many domestic vendors try to some degree, but for the Chinese their success in anything is most often accomplished by doing the absolute minimum possible. Then of course there are the domestic vendors who literally buy whatever leftovers and QC fails they can find and sell them backed up by a test report of cherry-picked vials that have zero relation to what they're selling.

Ultimately it's up to end users and cooperative groups to do truly independent testing, and that applies regardless if there is robust "batch" coding/tracking or not.

 

[rsmith]

Business has already exploded without them needing to do much if any of that.

Many domestic vendors try to some degree, but for the Chinese their success in anything is most often accomplished by doing the absolute minimum possible. Then of course there are the domestic vendors who literally buy whatever leftovers and QC fails they can find and sell them backed up by a test report of cherry-picked vials that have zero relation to what they're selling.

Ultimately it's up to end users and cooperative groups to do truly independent testing, and that applies regardless if there is robust "batch" coding/tracking or not.

The Chinese already test their products so I'm not asking for anything more than to connect those tests to batch numbers that could then be tested and verified by others. This is no guarantee that a buyer gets the very same product but if the vendor is lying, they will get busted in short order when others test the numbered batch and get different (lesser) results.

Currently, there is no such thing as truly valid independent testing because one can never know whether a purchase came from the tested batch. Posted batch numbers would eliminate this guessing game. Could the vendor advertize and sell a batch and cherry-pick some vials to send to Jano? Of course, but they would get busted almost immediately when others test that exact same batch number.

Yes, Asian business has exploded. But, as evidenced by the numerous vendors peddling their products on this and other sites, there is still incredible competition and a simple web search will show many additional Chinese peptide sellers that haven't even made it to the states yet. Consequently, one vendor could literally destroy most of the others by using traceable and verifiable batch numbers.

I believe this will almost certainly happen going forward once we progress out of the "wild, wild west" stage of gray peptide sales we are currently in.

 

[rsmith]

Wouldn't the purity be noticeablely lower then, assuming it wasn't frozen?

But yes the lack of batch numbers can only look sketchy.

Yes the purity would be lower for older product, assuming deterioration has already started (which it may not have after 1 year). Indeed, that is often what we see in Jano reports.

Have a look... notice how poor test results are not evenly distributed across products or vendors (i.e., they are not random). Some vendors are habitual offenders of underweight product and deficient purity.

stg-3p-test-results

docs.google.com

 

[rsmith]

Take a look at 4 different Jano tests for T60 Red Cap (Same vendor, different Mfg. dates). What can we know from these tests insofar as my batch if I purchased T60 Redcap from March - June 2025?

Nothing!

My batch may or may not be the same as any one of these. Moreover, even if I and my GB friends tested some of ours, there is still no way to know what we have for sure, how old it is, how long it's been sitting in a warehouse, etc.

https://janoshik.com/tests/61727-Tirzepatide_60mg_4NY7W3C31I8X March

https://janoshik.com/tests/63286-Tirzepatide_60mg_QJPIRQVBTQKX April

https://janoshik.com/tests/65398-Tirzepatide_60mg_7JR698YX8TZI May

https://janoshik.com/tests/70331-TR60Tirzepatide_60mg_LPB1IP5XT5FA June

 

[zpped]

🙂 !remind.me To ask your opinion about batch numbers in 6 months.

I'm only joking, but I'm not gonna hold my breath on any vendor implementing a batch numbering that can be trusted. Meso bros haven't even got that for steroids yet.

And the reason is because testing is by far the largest cost to the vendors. So everytime they can slide an extra 200 kits under another test they win big.

 

[Ted R]

How can any vendor prove that a given sample or a kit or a truckload is ANY particular batch? Slapping a label on it or putting a particular color combo of cap/crimp on it won't do it either. It boils down a level of trust, and to either a chemical signature and assay you can match up to a particular batch, none of which I can see happening, or maybe it's not even possible.

 

[conzopiriani]

How can any vendor prove that a given sample or a kit or a truckload is ANY particular batch? Slapping a label on it or putting a particular color combo of cap/crimp on it won't do it either. It boils down a level of trust, and to either a chemical signature and assay you can match up to a particular batch, none of which I can see happening, or maybe it's not even possible.

Ooo, I like the idea of a chemical signature! Going down the rabbit hole...

 

[zpped]

How can any vendor prove that a given sample or a kit or a truckload is ANY particular batch? Slapping a label on it or putting a particular color combo of cap/crimp on it won't do it either. It boils down a level of trust, and to either a chemical signature and assay you can match up to a particular batch, none of which I can see happening, or maybe it's not even possible.

The only reason it somewhat works in our legit pharmacy system is the FDA's authority to do inspections and the threat of going to prison if you cheat.

 

[StonePny]

The only reason it somewhat works in our legit pharmacy system is the FDA's authority to do inspections and the threat of going to prison if you cheat.

Sorry to hijack this a bit, but can I ask your opinion, @zpped about something I don't know if is sketchy? You're just jaded enough (I mean that in a good way!) and have been around this block a bit.
I ordered a kit of a non-glp peptide from a CN vendor. While I was waiting for it, not long, just a week or so, a 3rd party testing group was forming for that peptide. Red cap/crimp same as mine. When mine arrived it was a different batch #, although same cap/crimp color. Vendor test came back on my batch just when I got mine.
So I start looking for others with my batch--no more than a week later, the new orders are a NEW batch number, still THE SAME CAP/CRIMP color. All have been sent to Jano for vendor testing. So 3 different batches in rapid succession, all with the same cap/crimp.
But how do we know which ones really were tested, since they all have the same cap color??
Is this a thing you've seen before?? What would be your logical explanation?

 

[zpped]

Sorry to hijack this a bit, but can I ask your opinion, @zpped about something I don't know if is sketchy? You're just jaded enough (I mean that in a good way!) and have been around this block a bit.
I ordered a kit of a non-glp peptide from a CN vendor. While I was waiting for it, not long, just a week or so, a 3rd party testing group was forming for that peptide. Red cap/crimp same as mine. When mine arrived it was a different batch #, although same cap/crimp color. Vendor test came back on my batch just when I got mine.
So I start looking for others with my batch--no more than a week later, the new orders are a NEW batch number, still THE SAME CAP/CRIMP color. All have been sent to Jano for vendor testing. So 3 different batches in rapid succession, all with the same cap/crimp.
But how do we know which ones really were tested, since they all have the same cap color??
Is this a thing you've seen before?? What would be your logical explanation?

How do you know? You can't.

I would put zero stock into batch numbers, but it's definitely strange behavior.

One thing I'd do is careful examination of the different batches for subtle differences between the vials. (shoulder slope, markings in the crimp, etc...) To see if there is something that can differentiate them. Short of that I'd sit on it for a while to see if any issues come up (I prefer this for everything anyways)

 

[rsmith]

How can any vendor prove that a given sample or a kit or a truckload is ANY particular batch? Slapping a label on it or putting a particular color combo of cap/crimp on it won't do it either. It boils down a level of trust, and to either a chemical signature and assay you can match up to a particular batch, none of which I can see happening, or maybe it's not even possible.

Go to your medicine cabinet and look at any bottle of cough syrup, ibuprofen, isopropyl alcohol, etc. and you will find a batch number that can be used to trace that very bottle back to the company, specific factory, production line, date of production and shift of production. This costs virtually nothing to do because the bottle of alcohol costs only $1.00 at Dollar General.

The idea that a vendor doesn't want to spend $500 at Jano to test 3 viles and label a batch of peptide that contains hundreds of thousands of viles which will be sold for multiple millions makes no sense. Indeed, domestic vendors who sell numbered batches easily sell out of their product at double the CN price because of the certainty involved in the purchase.

What makes much more sense is that the CN vendor doesn't want their product to be traceable. Why not? I don't know all the reasons but suspect that one of them is liability (e.g., if someone ODs on a particular batch, the company could be identified, investigated, sued, or shut down… think Purdue Pharma). Another reason is likely that some of the product is old, and traceable batch numbers would illuminate that fact and render much of the batch unsellable at some point. Another possible reason is that vendors can unload less-than-optimal batches, say low mass/purity, without much if any notice since their subpar batches can't be identified or traced. We likely see some of that here:

stg-3p-test-results

docs.google.com

I recently received T60 from an American vendor for more than double the price of the same product at a CN vendor. However, my T60 came from a numbered and traceable batch on which the vendor conducted a 3-vile Jano “vendor test” (test #1), the vendor paid for a 3-vile Jano “vendor-financed independent test" (test #2) and finally, buyers of this exact batch did a 3-random-vile Jano “private-financed independent test" (test #3). All 9 viles (same batch, 7 different contributors) from this numbered batch produced Jano results that were indistinguishable (differences in mass or purity were fractional and exceedingly small). This batch sold out in 2 days. Guess why?

 

[zpped]

Go to your medicine cabinet and look at any bottle of cough syrup, ibuprofen, isopropyl alcohol, etc. and you will find a batch number that can be used to trace that very bottle back to the company, specific factory, production line, date of production and shift of production. This costs virtually nothing to do because the bottle of alcohol costs only $1.00 at Dollar General.

The idea that a vendor doesn't want to spend $500 at Jano to test 3 viles and label a batch of peptide that contains hundreds of thousands of viles which will be sold for multiple millions makes no sense. Indeed, domestic vendors who sell numbered batches easily sell out of their product at double the CN price because of the certainty involved in the purchase.

What makes much more sense is that the CN vendor doesn't want their product to be traceable. Why not? I don't know all the reasons but suspect that one of them is liability (e.g., if someone ODs on a particular batch, the company could be identified, investigated, sued, or shut down… think Purdue Pharma). Another reason is likely that some of the product is old, and traceable batch numbers would illuminate that fact and render much of the batch unsellable at some point. Another possible reason is that vendors can unload less-than-optimal batches, say low mass/purity, without much if any notice since their subpar batches can't be identified or traced. We likely see some of that here:

stg-3p-test-results

docs.google.com

I recently received T60 from an American vendor for more than double the price of the same product at a CN vendor. However, my T60 came from a numbered and traceable batch on which the vendor conducted a 3-vile Jano “vendor test” (test #1), the vendor paid for a 3-vile Jano “vendor-financed independent test" (test #2) and finally, buyers of this exact batch did a 3-random-vile Jano “private-financed independent test" (test #3). All 9 viles (same batch, 7 different contributors) from this numbered batch produced Jano results that were indistinguishable (differences in mass or purity were fractional and exceedingly small). This batch sold out in 2 days. Guess why?

Your T60 came with a number. If you believe that it's traceable or has any meaning whatsoever I'm sorry but you are very mistaken.

At best, the person who sold it to you made a large purchase and hopes that it was all the same. But they dont even know that. Let alone what you can know.

I'm in private groups buying 50kits at a time and we sometimes end up with different runs in the same order.

 

[rsmith]

The QR code on my product links directly to the Jano test with the same batch number. It's not perfect but it's as good as the batch numbers on all of the stuff in your bathroom medicine cabinet.

At best, the person who sold it to you made a large purchase and hopes that it was all the same. But they dont [sic] even know that. Let alone what you can know.

The vendor I purchase from didn't have to make a large purchase since he lypholizes all of the GLPs he sells.

 

[zpped]

The QR code on my product links directly to the Jano test with the same batch number. It's not perfect but it's as good as the batch numbers on all of the stuff in your bathroom medicine cabinet.

At best, the person who sold it to you made a large purchase and hopes that it was all the same. But they dont [sic] even know that. Let alone what you can know.

The vendor I purchase from didn't have to make a large purchase since he lypholizes all of the GLPs he sells.

I'm assuming you mean Nexaph, I can't believe he's still telling that lie. Baba/Cain doesn't lyophilize his own raws, otherwise he'd know what was actually going into them which he's proven not to many times.

And I can't emphasize enough how it's NOT as good as the batch numbers in your medicine cabinet. Those are backed up by government regulation with inspectors and legal ramifications.

 

[Birdie]

Perhaps avoid Finnrick unless you want your name on a list.
If you know what I me

Yeah. I never heard another thing from them, so I suspect they are more for promotion that actual vetting.