Participants agree that peptide molecules pass through standard 0.22 µm filters without issue. Hold-up volume in the filter reduces total recovered peptide proportionally to volume lost but does not alter concentration. Adsorption losses are minimal and sometimes offset by water retention. Air or BAC flushes recover some but not all of the hold-up; opinions differ on how much effort is worth spending given low cost.
What this discussion establisheshow much volume is actually held up by common 13 mm filters and whether air purging is worth doing
Still openexact practical loss most users experience after flushing and whether it ever affects dosing noticeably
Nothing here is advice.
Does anyone else think that using a filter makes the contents of the container less potent? It seems like the filter might be trapping a lot of the substance. Have people tried filtering some but skipping it on others from the identical package? Wondering whether this is all in my head.
I don't think that's the case. It is most likely imagined. The material has to be entirely mixed in solution prior to being drawn up.
Peptide molecules are vastly tinier compared to the filter pores measuring 0.22 micrometers, meaning they pass through without being caught. Regarding any residue left inside the filter, which I don't rinse out myself, this would actually lead to a stronger mixture rather than a weaker one. Is this just a theoretical inquiry, or have you run into an issue yourself? If it's the latter, additional information might clarify things.
They run the material through a filter ahead of any checks on how pure or heavy it is, which leaves us certain the peptides make it across just fine.
Found some solid material covering how filtration affects these compounds. One link points to a discussion thread with an attached analysis on the topic. Forums like that have their ups and downs but the linked items hold up well. Bottom line from the results shows a small portion of the compound gets retained by the filter media yet the amount falls well below any meaningful threshold roughly a third of one percent. In certain tests the retained liquid actually held more solvent than compound which nudged the final strength up a notch. The real practical issue turns out to be the leftover volume trapped inside the housing. Pushing air through recovers only a fraction of that. Someone could burn another needle on a full flush with sterile water though even that leaves some behind or simply skip the step entirely the way most people begin.
Those thirteen millimeter filters retain point one three milliliters up to thirteen units. Inexpensive twist lock items with half inch needles are what I use for rinsing. Apparently certain folks dampen the filter using BAC ahead of filtration.
I own identical filters and realize I'm losing thirteen units each time. Grey being cheap means I haven't been too concerned, though I could begin rinsing the filter when dealing with the other product owing to the expense versus quantity. Wetting it beforehand with the water doesn't seem like it would resolve the problem to me. After forcing through the mixture containing the peptide, what's left behind inside is the peptide itself. Recently a person brought up using air to clear it. I could give that a shot.
Yeah I feel the same and probably would skip it without still having that pack of connectors that included the pointed tips. Someone else mentioned blowing some air through afterward to clear out the rest. I have never tried flushing with air myself.
I'm trying to grasp the idea around how strength stays consistent here. Assuming the powder mixes evenly all through the liquid, the spread should stay the same, right? That would mean the strength level holds steady even if some liquid stays behind and cuts the overall amount slightly. Appreciate any thoughts on where my thinking falls short. I've pushed through both liquid and air to clear the needle. The liquid option works better for me since it shows clearly that everything moved as intended. Air leaves me wondering whether the stuff actually shifted. The whole point of clearing the needle is to land on portions that match the count I worked out ahead of time. Most times the final portion from a container comes up short or gets discarded as too weak. Exact matches hardly ever happen. The low cost means small waste doesn't bother me, yet it still frustrates me when the morning dose falls short around four o'clock. Sorting out an extra couple units just to adjust the next container feels like too much trouble then.
Doubt lingered for me too before I tried pushing some air through during filtration of that copper peptide. A couple milliliters stay inside the syringe on purpose. The moment liquid started moving into the vial the filter soaked it up and shifted straight to blue. After everything liquid had passed I forced the leftover air through in short bursts. Each one made the color fade a bit more until the filter looked plain once again. Some material stays behind in the damp filter plus the syringe. Even so this pulled out quite a bit extra compared with skipping the air step. The low cost keeps me from bothering with anything further.
I wonder about the origin of that 13 unit figure. Previously I thought 25 to 27 was normal for those 13mm ones. That piece I shared earlier reported 29 units of holdup, which really surprised me. It made me question using 13mm filters, so now I'm using 4mm ones instead and haven't had problems. The air purge on the 4mm only brought back 2.2 from the 7 units that were lost, while doing it on the 13mm didn't help at all. I saw the same thing when I drew the needle up into the headspace of the vial before purging the air. Hardly any liquid comes through the needle with a 13mm filter, nowhere near 29 units.
I'm not pleased with that method. Why check the item after processing instead of before, to confirm its real quality? Processing ahead of time only ends up checking how the processing performs, rather than the item.
I am pretty sure the filtration is meant to protect the instrument.
He always gives that reason supposedly for keeping his gear safe.
I had mixed up adsorption with another part of the filtering process and even reversed how the effect works. 😲 It might change the solution strength a little, but only slightly, and would decrease it instead of increasing. You're right that retention by itself cuts the recovered amount and overall peptide equally without shifting concentration.
People always filter their samples around here to safeguard that pricey equipment. Without doing so the numbers on the paper would not reflect what actually got tested. Treating these checks as some kind of real safety guarantee strikes me as pretty silly. They might show you received the main ingredient you ordered yet the vial could still hold toxins or bits of debris and still read ninety nine percent pure. That word does not signal the stuff is okay to use the way it does on a water bottle and most folks probably think it does. Every testing service works the same way. None of them tell outright lies but they let the confusion linger. The bigger problem is that these measurements skip key details such as how long the material stays good. You only see the purity and amount figures right after mixing. A day later the level could drop sharply if the batch breaks down easily. I once asked an AI whether that sort of lab analysis can really confirm a freeze dried peptide from an unregulated source is safe and then followed up with more questions.
Thanks. I'm always trying to do better for myself. You helped me.
I'm puzzled why so many here report big losses with the 13 mm ones. Every maker posts a spec sheet listing its own hold-up volume in microliters. The brand I switched to now lists just 10 microliters lost from a 10 ml sample, and I liked another brand before that too. When I load pen cartridges or vials almost nothing disappears and the cartridge still fills completely. These days I just push air through afterward, though at first I would wet the filter first and push liquid back the other way. I'm too lazy for that now. Now and then the final amount ends up a hair over because I mixed the peptide straight into the bac water. I keep reading the same complaints and can't figure out why. Early on I asked someone about filter sizes and all they said was why not just get the top option, meaning their 4 mm version.
My filters come in the 13mm size plus the 25mm versions. I also push air through afterward. The losses I end up with stay much smaller than the numbers others post. When mixing the solution again I add about 3ml whenever that works out. That choice cuts down how much any leftover liquid inside the filter even matters.
I suspect the filtering step isn't where I'm losing any noticeable amount. Probably I'm overfilling the syringe by a small mark now and then. With tiny doses, that single extra mark daily piles up over weeks into something you can actually notice. That's why I want to double-check my starting measurement lines up with what I expect, so any slips don't throw things off. The materials aren't expensive even without any discount. The cost isn't what bothers me anyway. It's the extra trouble that I'm trying to skip.
Yeah I'm with you on this. There was a moment when I figured my own ideas were complete. This is nonsense. Check the plain untreated material to see its purity. Wonder if the outcomes they show include that detail.
They tend to confirm filtering the samples upon being asked. At one point certain labs asserted they avoided it, though such claims faced swift rejection.
I recall you locating those smaller four millimeter ones. Once I tried a thirteen millimeter version by loading twenty units of the solution into a one milliliter syringe and advancing the plunger until fluid appeared on the other side, leaving seven units behind. Someone noted this matched the retained volume in that size. Nowadays I just go with fifteen units. Perhaps you have the larger thirty three millimeter ones in mind instead.
Man, I sure regret not seeing this earlier today before mixing up those three bottles. Sounds like a solid experiment though, might experiment with it myself. Appreciate the heads up. That guy in the fifth message shared his measurements, and it looks like he claimed the retained liquid reached twenty nine units with the larger filter size, plus that pushing air through didn't really help reduce it. I've observed something similar since then too. When I lift the tip away from the liquid before forcing air, zero fluid exits the smaller needle on the big filter. Just a couple drops escape the tiny one during that step. Still, the amounts don't match what gets left behind. Attached is an image capture from his message. The post dates back two years, and I have to deduct some credibility because of the typo in that word, unless he's implying the filters have feelings, which is silly.
After posting that comment I tried the process once more and ended up with identical results. I had been referring to the person known for the rodent clip who got removed from the main video platform. He still has not uploaded the footage to his page on the backup site.
Thinking twenty nine units means point two nine milliliters is just crazy and not worth any time arguing about. When handling the air part of the transfer you skip the filter first then pull in air and push the plunger forward. Instead you pull the mixed liquid from the starting container into the syringe then take the needle off point the tip upward and pull ten units of air inside swap on a fresh filtered needle and push straight into the empty clean container with the air pocket staying at the top force the liquid through and once the air pocket reaches the end you hit resistance then work the plunger back and forth a bunch of times until drops stop appearing at the tip avoid pushing so forcefully that the filter gets damaged.
If you have tried it, this topic is still open. Sign in to reply — it takes a minute.