Thermos Freezer Test - Long-term storage

GimmeABreak

Registered
Joined
Oct 6, 2024
Messages
150
Reaction score
286
Location
Dallas TX
I have built up a nice little cache of Peps over the past couple of months and am concerned about keeping them safe for long-term storage. I purchased a $200 Amazon 1.1cuft freezer that will go down to about -9 degrees so I am covered there to keep peps safe for at least a few years. My next challenge was buying some time if the power goes out or the freezer dies when I am out of town (which is often). The solution? Insulated storage containers.

I started with the 32oz Hydraflask food storage container and wondered how long it would keep my peps below freezing if the freezer died. I tested by putting in a heavy drinking glass an a couple of shot glasses (to simulate glass vials) added my Govee wireless temp/humidy sensor and it actually worked inside the insulated container, inside of the fridge. I waited until the temp was below -5 degrees F and then took it out leaving it at room temp. Sadly, within 2.5 hours the temp had risen from -5F to >32F. Not good enough.

Next I tried the 47oz Thermos food storage container. It has two plastic containers that stack inside and will hold roughly 10 kits of peps!

I froze the thermos (loaded with drinking/shot glasses) to negative -5 degrees F and removed it at 9:00 PM. The Thermos managed to keep the peps below freezing for over 5.5 hours! The Govee will send me a notification if the freezer temp exceeds a preselected temp. This thermos will give me time to call a family member to save my peps if something happens when I am out of town. My little freezer will probably hold three of thermos containers which means I can keep buying peps!

1730577087274.png


1730577000016.png

1730577055876.png
 
Super dumb question, but by putting the thermos in the freezer, it gets the peps inside cold enough to freeze? Or do you have to put them in already frozen?

I thought a thermos would prevent the outside (freezer) temp from affecting the stuff inside (where the peps are stored). Is that not right?
 
Super dumb question, but by putting the thermos in the freezer, it gets the peps inside cold enough to freeze? Or do you have to put them in already frozen?

I thought a thermos would prevent the outside (freezer) temp from affecting the stuff inside (where the peps are stored). Is that not right?
No, the temp in the thermos will increase/decrease based on the ambient temperature outside of the thermos. It just takes longer with it sealed up. I just checked my temp app and it took about 22 hours to go from 70 degrees F to -5F.
 
For real, temp variation of lyophilized peptides aren't that bad. Even freeze-thaw, you lose about 1-2% everytime it freeze-thaw
 
Here's some graph for ya
This is great info, I had no idea that they would lose 10% of potency after just 12 months at -20C (which is where my freezer sits).

Do you know who did this testing and which pep(s) was tested?

So after 24 months of -20C we are probably looking at <75% of original potency?
I guess when I pull them out of the freezer 5 years from now I should get them tested to dose correctly.

I guess I need to stop buying peps. Now what am I going to do with those hours and hours of free time every week?
 
This is great info, I had no idea that they would lose 10% of potency after just 12 months at -20C (which is where my freezer sits).

Do you know who did this testing and which pep(s) was tested?

So after 24 months of -20C we are probably looking at <75% of original potency?
I guess when I pull them out of the freezer 5 years from now I should get them tested to dose correctly.

I guess I need to stop buying peps. Now what am I going to do with those hours and hours of free time every week?

This is why I stopped buying. I have 4 years at double my dose right now, and I don’t think I’ve ever even seen someone using a supply that’s a year old.
 
This is great info, I had no idea that they would lose 10% of potency after just 12 months at -20C (which is where my freezer sits).

Do you know who did this testing and which pep(s) was tested?

So after 24 months of -20C we are probably looking at <75% of original potency?
I guess when I pull them out of the freezer 5 years from now I should get them tested to dose correctly.

I guess I need to stop buying peps. Now what am I going to do with those hours and hours of free time every week?
This is the theoretical outcome, it has not been exactly tested in these exact settings.

This is not considering the additions of any fillers/stabilizers/antioxidants to the peptide
 
This is the theoretical outcome, it has not been exactly tested in these exact settings.

This is not considering the additions of any fillers/stabilizers/antioxidants to the peptide
Why are you so smart? Just panic with the rest of us please.

I have a year's worth of reta, sema, and cagri that I'm about to take tomorrow in one giant dose. Wish me luck 🤞 🤞
 
This is why I stopped buying. I have 4 years at double my dose right now, and I don’t think I’ve ever even seen someone using a supply that’s a year old.
Yeah, well this is the theory, I have not been in here long enough myself to really know if that is true or not.

I feel like it's more on the dramatic side, but I plan on running a vial or two to test. It also depends on the type of peptides
 
Am I reading this right? Did you just entirely make up those graphs from nothing?
No lol, I'm making these based of the knowledge scientists know so far, what I'm saying is that it's not backed up by studies. It's assumptions from scientists that actually know their shit, not from me, but it's still just assumptions.
 
Here's another graph that may be more relatable for you guys, since the ones I posted are for pure peptide, here's one with the difference of fillers on preservation at -20 - Trehalose seems to be the best at that temperature
 

Attachments

  • Resize_20241104_060922_2994.jpg
    Resize_20241104_060922_2994.jpg
    118.6 KB · Views: 15
No lol, I'm making these based of the knowledge scientists know so far, what I'm saying is that it's not backed up by studies. It's assumptions from scientists that actually know their shit, not from me, but it's still just assumptions.
Are the scientists in the room with us?

I'm honestly more confused than before, where is this coming from? Can you link a source to your uh, scientists' assumptions?
 
No lol, I'm making these based of the knowledge scientists know so far, what I'm saying is that it's not backed up by studies. It's assumptions from scientists that actually know their shit, not from me, but it's still just assumptions.

Just to be clear, you're putting this together and pulling data with ChatGPT and Claude based on your previous posts, correct?

Can you post sourcing information for said data as well?
 
Alright everyone, I realize I may not have been clear before. The numbers I shared are extrapolated from the existing knowledge we have on the topic, and they're the most accurate estimates we can provide right now.

If you’re looking for hard, factual numbers, new studies would need to be conducted, so feel free to start research and share your findings!

I didn’t mean to spark a debate. I only posted them because having an approximate estimate is better than nothing, in my opinion.

For those interested in diving deeper, here are some links to relevant resources (in no specific order):
 
Last edited:
Back
Top