The 48 hour vs 2 months room temperature comparison
There's a lot of commotion on a forum in my native tongue. I told them you could preserve it for two months at room temperature, but they all "defend" the 48 hour rule.
Howcome so many people stick to that rule because there's a huge difference between 48 hours and 2 months.
When I tell them about two months, they reason it by: providers want you to buy as much as possible so they tell you: you can use it up to two months, you will notice that it doesn"t work as well which make you buy "more". How can I prove them wrong?
Re: The 48 hour vs 2 months room temperature comparison
I pulled that figure from a email conversation with Hospira about how many withdrawals you can make from a vial and storage options for said withdrawals.
I'll have a look for the email but I'm not sure if I still have it as the inboxes clear chronologically as new emails come in. If not I'll try and contact them again to resupply the information.
However, that relates purely to the bacterial concentrations in the vial after the given amount of time, and not to the potency of the peptide.
You can prove them wrong by pointing out their failed logic.
If we told people is lasted less time, they would be forced to buy more.
By telling people that is lasts longer, they have to buy less. We do not recommend upping the dosage after X days, and we don't recommend chucking your vials, so the usage stays linear until the vial is gone.
If anything we are doing the exact opposite of this as we have also recommended people start using 500mcg instead of the 1mg dosages that were so popular before our entrance to the market - and still, to this day we're one of the only peptide companies that do.
Another thing to ask them is by what process do they believe the MT2 deteriorates, or otherwise becomes less potent? And, how would refrigeration stall this process considerably?
Lastly, how can they tell it 'doesn't work as well'?
You may start experiencing less side effects but this is due to desensitization to the peptide, and not lowering potency.
Melanotan 2, and most peptides are not as volatile as once thought to be.
The only way to provide cold hard evidence would be spending tens of thousands on testing peptides at various stages and storage options, and that's not a route we want to take when the facts are already present.
Re: The 48 hour vs 2 months room temperature comparison
I'll assume you mean when reconstituted?
- Purely anecdotal albeit, but i have used vials that i have forgot about that have been left for three plus months in 15-25 degree weather and noticed no degradation. Ie. the sides, tanning efficacy were the same ( back when i used it). The mt2 peptide is a lot hardier than people say. They just say that to cover there arse as the bac water its reconstituted with, or even sterile water become contaminated in about two months or a couple of weeks respectively.
I'm with labpeps on this one and so would most long term users i'd say. The people on your forum might be basing their argument on a theoretical basis rather than actual experience with the pep.*
Re: The 48 hour vs 2 months room temperature comparison
"
Wasn't there a pubmed article that explained why it remains stable for at least two months?
"
I'm sure there was a pubmed article that detailed the stability of melanotan, but it stated far longer than 2 months.
Even at room temperature, if you leave a reconstituted, sterile vial of MT2 it will still be in the upper 90% integrity after several years.
Again, the 2 month time line is purely bacterial, as the peptide stays near on perfect after years of storage, even reconstituted.
You'll start noticing denaturation of the peptide at around 45C and will escalate as temperatures do.
Reply With Quote