Why are we all hung up on purity?

[Garbo]

Here is an excellent article on peptide purity written by the business partner of the founder of peptidetest.com:

On Peptide Purity | TrustPointe Analytics LLC

Updated: 19-Jul-2024 Council On Harm Reduction - Peptide Safety Basics The Council on Harm Reduction (CoHR) for peptides

trustpointeanalytics.com

It goes into detail about what these purity numbers mean, and what they do not mean.

Specifically, a 99.575% purity result does *not* mean that 99.575% of the contents of the vial is the claimed substance, and only 0.425% is anything else.

All it means (to oversimplify a bit) is that only 0.425% of the contents is similar to *but not quite* the claimed substance.

The purity process that is being used (HPLC) does not detect substances that are radically different from the claimed substance. For instance, if a vial contained 20mg of perfectly pure tirzepatide and 10mg of arsenic, the HPLC purity test would report it as 100% pure because arsenic is not similar to tirzepatide. The equipment cannot be set to look for everything.

In addition to not detecting significantly different substances the purity score also says nothing about sterility.

Since a 30mg tirzepatide vial could be half poison and biologically contaminated and still get a 99.5% purity reading the question “why do we care about this purity number” is an excellent question.

My answer is simple: We do not have a better test.

I use purity as a proxy, hoping that a lab that does the work to produce a high quality peptide will also do the work to produce a sterile and uncontaminated product.

Here is an excellent article on peptide purity written by the business partner of the founder of peptidetest.com:

On Peptide Purity | TrustPointe Analytics LLC

Updated: 19-Jul-2024 Council On Harm Reduction - Peptide Safety Basics The Council on Harm Reduction (CoHR) for peptides

trustpointeanalytics.com

It goes into detail about what these purity numbers mean, and what they do not mean.

Specifically, a 99.575% purity result does *not* mean that 99.575% of the contents of the vial is the claimed substance, and only 0.425% is anything else.

All it means (to oversimplify a bit) is that only 0.425% of the contents is similar to *but not quite* the claimed substance.

The purity process that is being used (HPLC) does not detect substances that are radically different from the claimed substance. For instance, if a vial contained 20mg of perfectly pure tirzepatide and 10mg of arsenic, the HPLC purity test would report it as 100% pure because arsenic is not similar to tirzepatide. The equipment cannot be set to look for everything.

In addition to not detecting significantly different substances the purity score also says nothing about sterility.

Since a 30mg tirzepatide vial could be half poison and biologically contaminated and still get a 99.5% purity reading the question “why do we care about this purity number” is an excellent question.

My answer is simple: We do not have a better test.

I use purity as a proxy, hoping that a lab that does the work to produce a high quality peptide will also do the work to produce a sterile and uncontaminated product.

Great synopsis — really cleared up a lot of my fuzzy thinking about this whole purity thing. Thanks so much for taking the time

 

[Eclipse]

I think we're pretty jaded that we buy random stuff from China to inject. The day we stop caring about purity or tests we might as well just go hang out with tweakers lol at least they're still concerned

 

[GLP69]

So this all has me wondering; Hypothetically, what kind of testing could tell us everything in this?

I bit the bullet and gave an Amopure dose to my RS, and it seems on the up-and-up from that angle as far as working as intended with no side effects, but If some shady dealer wanted to lace this stuff with fentanyl or something else dangerous, how would you test for that without specifically looking for it?

 

[RedSkip]

I pay a college to test the amino acid sequence and the total mg of tirzepatide…. $108… I don’t care about it being 99 percent … that would be a more expensive test anyway.

Which college?

 

[Revo39564]

Which college?

University of Cali ….Have to have an institutional account though, no retail sales. I set one up at the clinic I work at.

 

[Revo39564]

When you get real redneck

I think we're pretty jaded that we buy random stuff from China to inject. The day we stop caring about purity or tests we might as well just go hang out with tweakers lol at least they're still concerned

when u get real OCD you start doing this at home lol

 

[dionysos]

@Eclipse
I’m just gonna say the quiet part out loud:
we research PepTweakers need love too!!!

 

[dionysos]

When you get real redneck

when u get real OCD you start doing this at home lol

@Revo39564
I’ll see that redneck OCD scrawl and raise you one PTouch Label writer!

 

[Revo39564]

@Revo39564
I’ll see that redneck OCD scrawl and raise you one PTouch Label writer!

lol I have a dedicated freezer and vaccum sealer ? Lol

 

[dionysos]

lol I have a dedicated freezer and vaccum sealer ? Lol

PASS. I’m out, you win

 

[dionysos]

When you get real redneck
when u get real OCD you start doing this at home lol

@Revo39564
Cocodrie, my research Alligator, has expressed unease at the aah green background of your pix Revo.

Fair Warning: Cocodrie is a member in good standing of PETA (Personages for Exceptional Treatment of Alligatoridae mississippiensis)

 

[Revo39564]

@Revo39564
Cocodrie, my research Alligator, has expressed unease at the aah green background of your pix Revo.

Fair Warning: Cocodrie is a member in good standing of PETA (Personages for Exceptional Treatment of Alligatoridae mississippiensis)

Well, I am from Mississippi so there’s that…. lol

 

[dionysos]

Well, I am from Mississippi so there’s that…. lol

Oh SURE! You come across all folksy and cousin-like
BUT that looks suspiciously like one of Cocodrie's cousins!

 

[iamedbile]

So this all has me wondering; Hypothetically, what kind of testing could tell us everything in this?

Per the author of the article I linked and Janoshik’s FAQ, there is no single “tell us everything” test.

It is theoretically possible to do hundreds (maybe thousands) of different tests looking for different individual things, but there are so many “things” in the world. Per Janoshik that would cost thousands (or even tens of thousands) of dollars and still not actually cover everything. You would also need a very patient lab tech. It would be hard to take a request to test a lyophilized peptide for uranium seriously, but uranium is definitely part of “everything”.

It would also likely drive the cost per mg of medication above what Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly charge for the official stuff.

With the technology available today, testing is intended to look for the stuff you would expect to find if the peptide was not made right (precursors and damaged peptides). That’s what the purity number we’re talking about is: How much stuff that should have become (for example) tirzeparide was not processed enough to get all the way there, or was processed too much and broke down.

When you combine the purity test with a sterility test, you get a relatively complete picture: How well the peptide was manufactured and whether or not there is any biological contamination.

I consider that useful information, and am personally willing to pay for it.

I am less concerned with somebody accidentally contaminating the vial with mercury or fentanyl or something. Mercury and fentanyl aren’t used in the peptide production process.

It seems fairly unlikely somebody would go through all the trouble to synthesize a high quality peptide and then make an easily avoidable mistake like dropping an unrelated substance in there.

 

[GLP69]

Per the author of the article I linked and Janoshik’s FAQ, there is no single “tell us everything” test.

It is theoretically possible to do hundreds (maybe thousands) of different tests looking for different individual things, but there are so many “things” in the world. Per Janoshik that would cost thousands (or even tens of thousands) of dollars and still not actually cover everything. You would also need a very patient lab tech. It would be hard to take a request to test a lyophilized peptide for uranium seriously, but uranium is definitely part of “everything”.

It would also likely drive the cost per mg of medication above what Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly charge for the official stuff.

With the technology available today, testing is intended to look for the stuff you would expect to find if the peptide was not made right (precursors and damaged peptides). That’s what the purity number we’re talking about is: How much stuff that should have become (for example) tirzeparide was not processed enough to get all the way there, or was processed too much and broke down.

When you combine the purity test with a sterility test, you get a relatively complete picture: How well the peptide was manufactured and whether or not there is any biological contamination.

I consider that useful information, and am personally willing to pay for it.

I am less concerned with somebody accidentally contaminating the vial with mercury or fentanyl or something. Mercury and fentanyl aren’t used in the peptide production process.

It seems fairly unlikely somebody would go through all the trouble to synthesize a high quality peptide and then make an easily avoidable mistake like dropping an unrelated substance in there.

Oh I agree with all of that, but in terms of killing the stigma associated with what we're doing, something like that sure would be useful. To be clear; I don't think there's a legitimate reason to suspect something like fentanyl ending up in any of these peptides, but the "unknown" aspect of what's in the fillers leaves a lot of room for FUD to be pushed by big pharma.

 

[Revo39564]

Oh SURE! You come across all folksy and cousin-like
BUT that looks suspiciously like one of Cocodrie's cousins!

That alligator skin came from the same place, my tirz comes from…. China lol

 

[iamedbile]

Oh I agree with all of that, but in terms of killing the stigma associated with what we're doing, something like that sure would be useful. To be clear; I don't think there's a legitimate reason to suspect something like fentanyl ending up in any of these peptides, but the "unknown" aspect of what's in the fillers leaves a lot of room for FUD to be pushed by big pharma.

I agree a “tell me everything that is in here” test would be useful!

Unfortunately there are many things that would be useful that are not possible with current technology. I am also still waiting on my Rocketeer-style jet pack.

 

[dionysos]

I agree a “tell me everything that is in here” test would be useful!

Unfortunately there are many things that would be useful that are not possible with current technology. I am also still waiting on my Rocketeer-style jet pack.

Lack of Jet-Packs in the 21st century is a major disappointment for me, too

 

[Garbo]

I think we're pretty jaded that we buy random stuff from China to inject. The day we stop caring about purity or tests we might as well just go hang out with tweakers lol at least they're still concerned

wow that painting

 

[GLP69]

I agree a “tell me everything that is in here” test would be useful!

Unfortunately there are many things that would be useful that are not possible with current technology. I am also still waiting on my Rocketeer-style jet pack.

Well, you can get one! it's just hella expensive, but I guess that's the point.