You can't use GHK-Cu with BAC, use PBS.

[Hexmask]

Good post but im gonna continue using BAC, the only reason I use this peptide is for skin gains and I get insane collagen improvements from this that are noticeable.

 

[Deleted member 110192]

Good post but im gonna continue using BAC, the only reason I use this peptide is for skin gains and I get insane collagen improvements from this that are noticeable.

Why not just get PBC and get even better results?

 

[Hexmask]

Why not just get PBC and get even better results?

Because then I have to create my own vials and I personally feel better mentally using what I know is safe and is whats commonly used. I am not going to try and fix something that's not broken.

 

[Deleted member 110192]

Because then I have to create my own vials and I personally feel better mentally using what I know is safe and is whats commonly used. I am not going to try and fix something that's not broken.

In this case it is broken tho…

 

[Hexmask]

In this case it is broken tho…

I get your point, but my skin looks very good lol. What im saying is any added benefit or "more" benefit I would get using PBS does not outweigh the annoyance of purchasing vials, sourcing PBS, and the work that goes into it. I can get BAC for 10 bucks that lasts me forever.

 

[chrishell]

The chemical reasoning is fine but the marginal purity loss you get over time with bac water is well balanced by the sterility guarantee you get with it, assuming you are using the vial within around 3 weeks, which is what you should be doing anyway. By around 3 weeks an originally 99% vial of ghk-cu, if reconstituted in bac water, will get to around 65% purity. With PBS you get to around 85% by that time.

To illustrate: suppose you reconstituted 50mg of ghk cu with 2ml bac water vs. 2ml PBS. Suppose you injected 10 units daily, a dose of 2.5mg, meaning the vial would last 3 weeks. If you do a linear regression analysis on both, with the bac water solution, after 3 weeks, 41.25mg of that ghk cu would ultimately end up in your system vs. 46.25mg of the pbs solution. Moreover, if you did a dose higher than 2.5mg daily, as many here do, the difference between the two would be even smaller. You are looking at trading a loss of 3-5mg over a month for a guarantee of perfect sterility and much more practicality. It's essentially doing gymnastics for little gain for most people. But I can see how if you are prone to injection site pain you might consider PBS to make the injections marginally less painful towards the end of your vial(?), since the hypothesis that the slightly higher free copper ions you get from slightly accelerated degradation in the bac water solution is what causes the pain is plausible if unconfirmed.

 

[SlayerJonas]

What's your opinion on localized vs systemic injections? Which would you recommend? I've had a lot of mixed answers

Localized injections would be some sort of mesotherapy. Our goal is stable serum concentrations of GHK-Cu, so feel free to pin wherever you want to.

They offer the same benefits but the cu amplifies the effect, particularly for skin/hair/nails which is what most people are using it for in the first place.

It doesn't amplify anything at all, @imontheloose remember our convo? Just subtract the supposed benefits of GHK-Cu seen in studies and try to be realistic about what GHK is able to do.

wont there be bacterial growth in the reconstituted peptide since pbs doesnt have benzyl alcohol?

You are so fucking low IQ it is unbelievable. No shit, this whole threads purpose is to address that issue.

how about a solution comprised somewhere in the range of 75% pbs and 25% bac? the bac would inhibit bacterial growth or atleast slow the process down considerably and we would still maintain most of the benefits from using ghk cu

It's about the PH and the benzyl alcohol sort of raping the GHK-Cu molecule.

Good post but im gonna continue using BAC, the only reason I use this peptide is for skin gains and I get insane collagen improvements from this that are noticeable.

First of all, do what the fucking fuck you want. There is no logical reason to use something inferior.

Because then I have to create my own vials and I personally feel better mentally using what I know is safe and is whats commonly used. I am not going to try and fix something that's not broken.

JFL bud is the type of person to wait for a FDA-approval with that logic. You are a sheeplet.

 

[imontheloose]

Localized injections would be some sort of mesotherapy. Our goal is stable serum concentrations of GHK-Cu, so feel free to pin wherever you want to.

It doesn't amplify anything at all, @imontheloose remember our convo? Just subtract the supposed benefits of GHK-Cu seen in studies and try to be realistic about what GHK is able to do.

View attachment 3939705

You are so fucking low IQ it is unbelievable. No shit, this whole threads purpose is to address that issue.

It's about the PH and the benzyl alcohol sort of raping the GHK-Cu molecule.

First of all, do what the fucking fuck you want. There is no logical reason to use something inferior.

JFL bud is the type of person to wait for a FDA-approval with that logic. You are a sheeplet.

Yes, of course I remember, friend!

 

[chadisbeingmade]

friend

son*

 

[imontheloose]

son*

You see, I wrote that out, but I have transitioned successfully from 5ARi and it has gone splendidly!

 

[imontheloose]

son*

I need to trademark this by now. The goyim are copying their shekeler as always.

 

[Deleted member 155538]

.



You are so fucking low IQ it is unbelievable. No shit, this whole threads purpose is to address that issue.

You didnt actually adress anything. There Will be bacterial growth even if you “handle it properly”

 

[NordicLeonhard]

Finally someone cleared this up, Youre doing gods work

 

[NordicLeonhard]

Is what @chrishell says in This Post true or can you debunk it? Seems like it would be an unecessary struggle to get a hold of or to make Phosphate buffered saline if the difference is that small when using it shortly after diluting the GHK-Cu powder.

By around 3 weeks an originally 99% vial of ghk-cu, if reconstituted in bac water, will get to around 65% purity. With PBS you get to around 85% by that time. To illustrate: suppose you reconstituted 50mg of ghk cu with 2ml bac water vs. 2ml PBS. Suppose you injected 10 units daily, a dose of 2.5mg, meaning the vial would last 3 weeks. If you do a linear regression analysis on both, with the bac water solution, after 3 weeks, 41.25mg of that ghk cu would ultimately end up in your system vs. 46.25mg of the pbs solution. Moreover, if you did a dose higher than 2.5mg daily, as many here do, the difference between the two would be even smaller. You are looking at trading a loss of 3-5mg over a month for a guarantee of perfect sterility and much more practicality. It's essentially doing gymnastics for little gain for most people. But I can see how if you are prone to injection site pain you might consider PBS to make the injections marginally less painful towards the end of your vial(?), since the hypothesis that the slightly higher free copper ions you get from slightly accelerated degradation in the bac water solution is what causes the pain is plausible if unconfirmed.

Chatgpt seemed to agree with him if that says anything

 

[LackEmpathyTherefor]

did some research and found out that Cu^2 ,,expires" after about 2 weeks after mixing with bac. never used ghk-cu but ordered it so very interested in solution.

GHK binds Cu²⁺ extremely tightly (stability constant log K ≈ 16.4). Even 0.9% benzyl alcohol in bacteriostatic water has no chelating effect that would displace the copper. In studies, GHK-Cu remained stable in plain water at pH 4.5–7.4 even at 60 °C for two weeks.

Thats basically a conclusion of what i found. correct me if this isn't true or if you've made better expierience with pbs than bac

Real debunk is this. Stable between ph 4.5 7.4 so this whole thread is air

 

[NordicLeonhard]

Is what @chrishell says in This Post true or can you debunk it? Seems like it would be an unecessary struggle to get a hold of or to make Phosphate buffered saline if the difference is that small when using it shortly after diluting the GHK-Cu powder.

Chatgpt seemed to agree with him if that says anything

b @Jonasㅤㅤ

 

[SlayerJonas]

Is what @chrishell says in This Post true or can you debunk it? Seems like it would be an unecessary struggle to get a hold of or to make Phosphate buffered saline if the difference is that small when using it shortly after diluting the GHK-Cu powder.

Chatgpt seemed to agree with him if that says anything

It appears like he just pulled those numbers out of his ass. I read the study of the other guy with the "muh stable at pH 4.5-7.4" post and they literally used PBS for that, not bacteriostatic water.

"The distribution coefficients in octanol-phosphate buffered saline indicated the highly hydrophilic nature of GHK-Cu with log D values between −2.38 and −2.49 at a pH range of 4.5–7.4."(*)

PBS remains the ideal solvent for GHK-Cu.

 

[NordicLeonhard]

It appears like he just pulled those numbers out of his ass. I read the study of the other guy with the "muh stable at pH 4.5-7.4" post and they literally used PBS for that, not bacteriostatic water.



PBS remains the ideal solvent for GHK-Cu.

But is it true that GHK-cu with BAC will sill be loaded with cu if you use it shortly after diluting it

 

[4ever]

Reconstituting GHK-Cu with BAC water will only give you the benefits of "GHK", which doesn't come close to GHK-Cu.

There was a thread about this topic already, yet increasingly more people choose to stay ignorant for the sake of simplicity bringing up logical fallacies like "no one uses PBS so it's worse" and safety concerns.

First of all, there isn't a single study where GHK-Cu was reconstituted with BAC water. Most studies only mention topical vehicles and PBS.

Even normies are questioning the benefits of GHK, which aligns with the fact that GHK won't be as effective as GHK-Cu.

View attachment 3887107

Regarding the safety concerns:



As long as you handle everything appropriately you won't ever get sick.

Simply use single-dose vials along with PBS, you only have to refill the GHK-Cu powder into each vial.

View attachment 3887081

You can buy small vials anywhere and they aren't expensive at all.

Just to mention it again, all the benefits of GHK-Cu apply to GHK-Cu, not GHK.

Spoiler: Cu²⁺ ions

@chadbeingmade @Clavicular @imontheloose

​

PBS mit calcium und magnesium oder ohne?

 

[MastR]

PBS mit calcium und magnesium oder ohne?View attachment 4082553View attachment 4082554

without

 

[MastR]

Reconstituting GHK-Cu with BAC water will only give you the benefits of "GHK", which doesn't come close to GHK-Cu.

There was a thread about this topic already, yet increasingly more people choose to stay ignorant for the sake of simplicity bringing up logical fallacies like "no one uses PBS so it's worse" and safety concerns.

First of all, there isn't a single study where GHK-Cu was reconstituted with BAC water. Most studies only mention topical vehicles and PBS.

Even normies are questioning the benefits of GHK, which aligns with the fact that GHK won't be as effective as GHK-Cu.

View attachment 3887107

Regarding the safety concerns:



As long as you handle everything appropriately you won't ever get sick.

Simply use single-dose vials along with PBS, you only have to refill the GHK-Cu powder into each vial.

View attachment 3887081

You can buy small vials anywhere and they aren't expensive at all.

Just to mention it again, all the benefits of GHK-Cu apply to GHK-Cu, not GHK.

Spoiler: Cu²⁺ ions

@chadbeingmade @Clavicular @imontheloose

​

Hey, so Ive read your thread & multiple others including the main one on using ghk cu with PBS and most of all of the replys on all of them, although I am left with a few questions. It would be so helpful if you could help me out on what im curious on.

My first question is, would freezing those extra vials keep them stable with the PBS indefinitely? and if not around how long of a time period could I keep them in with PBS while keeping each vial as effective copper wise & bacteria wise as possible? I read that with the fride & PBS they last around 17-20ish days.

2nd question, how many mg should I be injecting daily? Now I know that that could be a very varied answer but ive seen people be told that doing it at 2.5mg and even 5mg is not great because it isnt enough. So I was thinking on using 7.5/10mg daily, and want the confirmation that, that is an appropriate and surly effective amount. Ive also seen somebody say they get rid of their 100ml PBS after every reconstitution of their ghk cu because of safety and they buy a whole new one.

(it is cheap for them at €7 but isnt for me, and I would like to know if it makes perfect sense for me to just get the 100ml pbs for 5 vials of ghk cu then reconstitute and put them all in the freezer except 1, with the remaining 1 being put in the fridge.)

I deeply appreciate you reading all of this, and am thankful for any advise and insight given.