1569 replies to this topic

[FW900]

I'll lead it

Everyone, I think xks201's past posts about requiring compensation for his "effort" should be taken into mind before considering him as a candidate for leading this group buy:

I can lead it but I need SG s help as far as sources good and bad and I wanna make a couple hundred bucks off it.

This following post is from the EVP-6124 thread, but it illustrates his desire to be compensated.

I can weigh them in my school's chem lab (I am a chem student) or at home. Obviously we have extremely accurate and expensive scales. I am in the US. For the work I am expecting to not have to pay for my sample though. I do not work for free. lol

xks201 should clarify before he assumes leadership of this group buy as to whether or not he will charge a fee. It's unethical to say you are going to lead a group buy and then state afterwords you want a fee. If you want a fee just say it beforehand.

And xks201, I'm sorry if my post looks a bit confrontational, it's just that in the past you wanted commission for what you do and here you are requesting to lead a group buy without mention of commission?

I might be in for 1-2 grams of Dihexa depending on what the cost will be and who will be the group buy organizer.

Edited by FW900, 17 February 2014 - 03:48 AM.

[xks201]

I never asked for anything more in any group buy than the cost of my sample and I maintain that is fair if I am putting it together.

[sk_scientific]

Here's how it should go, correct me if I am missing something.

1.) One responsible individual steps up and leads a group buy. He/she declares what his/her cut will be for doing the work straight away. (example: I am leading the group buy, I will collect all the specifics and coordinate for 3 months, after this time frame the group buy is closed, I will make the purchase and I am expecting some x-number of grams for my duties and x-dollar value for shipping and handling costs to members.) The transparency of this individual is of utmost import, and their identity should be known to the group.
2.) That individual confers with the group, OPENLY, about potential sources. Quotes are sourced and posted openly for a given time frame.
3.) The group discusses and determines what independent lab will do analysis on the compound being sourced and the pricing. This value is to be spread evenly between all orders.
4.) The individual leading the group buy collects money from and the mailing addresses of participating members so that he/she may satisfy the order. If capital on investment falls short of projection, there may be a need for either follow-up investment from individuals involved in the buy, or a benefactor that can buffer the purchase value in the interest of the group (who will be compensated in extra material ordered).
5.) The purchase is made and documentation is posted to the forum; personal details aside from those pertaining to the lab, and the goods themselves may be edited from the documentation of the order for posting to the forum (eg, the home address and financial information of the team lead).
6.) The substance is obtained.
7.) Independent lab analysis is done on the compound and results are posted for the group.
8.) Satisfaction of the delivery of the group buy is posted in a timely fashion.
9.) Participating members post to the thread if they have grievances.
10.) The group buy is satisfied.

Edited by sk_scientific, 17 February 2014 - 04:41 AM.

[di36]

I don't mind xks taking his cut out of it.It is sure somehow right for his efforts .10 dollars more per person or near that isn't much.The other option is for this gb NOT to happen,which is clearly worse .

What i would like from the gb leader in return is a clear timeline and a EU distributor(he lives in US).

[phil8462643]

I reckon I trust xks.
I have seen xks' posts for a while and I like xks
He is being up front and straightforward
What he will do will take work
A couple hundred bucks is alright
The group buy rules a couple posts back are spot on
Just no YADAYADA bs

[neuroatypicow]

yeah, amortized across the entire pool of participants, a couple hundred dollars' worth of compensation and/or a free batch for xks201 won't hurt us. in return, it's his responsibility to conform to the group buy protocol and keep us all in the loop, which i think is a fair tradeoff, and for someone competent, which i would assume he is, this shouldn't be at all difficult to adhere to. if this goes off smoothly, i'll even buy him an ice cream.

[cATsE]

I never asked for anything more in any group buy than the cost of my sample and I maintain that is fair if I am putting it together.

Depends on how big a sample you want for yourself, eh?

All joking aside, what are the costs?

Edited by cATsE, 17 February 2014 - 02:03 PM.

[hadora]

You cant synthesize this peptide without knowing its EXACT structure which you cant since the peptide structure isnt published

[sk_scientific]

A user, named Xenix, recently posted that he had been in contact with whomever ScienceGuy's chemist is, and that the synthesis of Dihexa is as follows:


-((benzyloxy)carbonyl)-L-isoleucine from isoleucine
-make mixed anhydride with isobutyl chloroformate and ((benzyloxy)carbonyl)-L-isoleucine
-make benzyl ((2S,3S)-1-((6-amino-6-oxohexyl)amino)-3-methyl-1-oxopentan-2-yl)carbamate by N-acylation of 6-aminohexanoic acid amide with above mixed anhydride
-deprotect ((2S,3S)-1-((6-amino-6-oxohexyl)amino)-3-methyl-1-oxopentan-2-yl)carbamate with 10% palladium on carbon yielding 6-((2S,3S)-2-amino-3-methylpentanamido)hexanamide

-O-benzylate L-tyrosine cupric chelate in dimethylformamide with benzyl chloride, yielding (S)-4`-benzyloxytyrosine
-N-acylate(S)-4`-benzyloxytyrosine with hexanoyl chloride in tetrahydrofuran with triethylamine as base, yielding (S)-3-(4-(benzyloxy)phenyl)-2-hexanamidopropanoic acid

-combining 6-((2S,3S)-2-amino-3-methylpentanamido)hexanamide and (S)-3-(4-(benzyloxy)phenyl)-2-hexanamidopropanoic acid with carbonyldiimidazole in THF, yielding N-((S)-1-(((S)-1-((6-amino-6-oxohexyl)amino)-4-methyl-1-oxopentan-2-yl)amino)-3-(4-(benzyloxy)phenyl)-1-oxopropan-2-yl)hexanamide
AND hydrogenolysis of the above yielding DIHEXA

Can any one follow up on the veracity of this information?

Edited by sk_scientific, 17 February 2014 - 03:31 PM.

[phil8462643]

I love you guys

[xks201]

Everyone please agree on the chemical structure before I go get quotes on it. I'm fine with handling everything but I don't want to get a bad chemical structure and then be blamed for that. lol Apparently there was a study done with authors that could be contacted that would potentially verify the structure. Has anyone attempted to contact them? Even if it takes a week for us all to agree upon the structure I would rather take the time to do that than rush into it and get the wrong thing obviously.

A user in this thread also supposedly obtained Dihexa. Perhaps he would share where he got his. Apparently his was bunk or he did not respond to it.

Between all of us we can get the introductory process done a lot faster...

Edited by xks201, 17 February 2014 - 08:58 PM.

[sk_scientific]

Everyone please agree on the chemical structure before I go get quotes on it. I'm fine with handling everything but I don't want to get a bad chemical structure and then be blamed for that. lol Apparently there was a study done with authors that could be contacted that would potentially verify the structure. Has anyone attempted to contact them? Even if it takes a week for us all to agree upon the structure I would rather take the time to do that than rush into it and get the wrong thing obviously.

A user in this thread also supposedly obtained Dihexa. Perhaps he would share where he got his. Apparently his was bunk or he did not respond to it.

Between all of us we can get the introductory process done a lot faster...

I agree, this is the first major important step. Do we have any members with some clout or credentials that would be taken seriously, who are more likely to elicit a response from the authors of the paper, or study, in question? Perhaps a researcher at a university or medical doctor?

I see the researchers from Washington State University who developed Dihexa (N-hexanoic-Tyr-Ile-(6) aminohexanoic amide) to be:

Joseph W. Harding, Ph.D.,
Professor
hardingj@vetmed.wsu.edu
Office: VBR rm. 471
(509) 335-7927

Alene T. McCoy, Ph.D.,
Associate Toxicology Manager at The Dow Chemical Company
http://www.linkedin....mccoy/9/b74/8a9

Perhaps that individual who intends to make their contact, should let the group know his or her intention before reaching out, this way we avoid humiliating ourselves by bombarding them with a hundred emails from various users on the site.

Edited by sk_scientific, 17 February 2014 - 10:53 PM.

[jabowery]

Some ethical considerations, which should be taken in the spirit given, which is that -- not only is the scientific medical establishment dead wrong and unethical in using (and/or allowing its influence to justify use of) its recommendations to impose Federal government force on relations between otherwise consenting adults, but -- we are all victims of a monstrously unethical medical establishment that is monstrously unethical because it should have, for decades, been investing in intelligence increase and anti-aging at least as heavily as it has in remediating pathologies such as cancer and heart disease:

One thing that the medical establishment has dead right is the need for control studies to establish safety and efficacy.

This is an ethical requirement for claims -- even implied claims -- of safety and efficacy, in cases where one is dealing with vital life functions such as neurophysiology.

I would admonish we victims of the medical establishment's monstrously unethical behavior to at least try to establish an experimental protocol with some means of testing safety and efficacy.

This might mean pre-treatement testing and measurement as well as having a trusted person sending out placebo samples -- the dihexa samples thus withheld sent after an agreed upon protocol of treatment and measurement.

[sk_scientific]

Some ethical considerations, which should be taken in the spirit given, which is that -- not only is the scientific medical establishment dead wrong and unethical in using (and/or allowing its influence to justify use of) its recommendations to impose Federal government force on relations between otherwise consenting adults, but -- we are all victims of a monstrously unethical medical establishment that is monstrously unethical because it should have, for decades, been investing in intelligence increase and anti-aging at least as heavily as it has in remediating pathologies such as cancer and heart disease:

One thing that the medical establishment has dead right is the need for control studies to establish safety and efficacy.

This is an ethical requirement for claims -- even implied claims -- of safety and efficacy, in cases where one is dealing with vital life functions such as neurophysiology.

I would admonish we victims of the medical establishment's monstrously unethical behavior to at least try to establish an experimental protocol with some means of testing safety and efficacy.

This might mean pre-treatement testing and measurement as well as having a trusted person sending out placebo samples -- the dihexa samples thus withheld sent after an agreed upon protocol of treatment and measurement.

If you are looking to establish a double-blind, placebo controlled study of your own, I recommend that you purchase enough of the substance in the group buy to put together this study for yourself.

Where your feelings and contentions about what is wrong with the world is noted, you're de-railing the topic. I do not think any one interested in a group buy is going to appreciate receiving a placebo when they're looking to purchase Dihexa. Nor do I think that such individuals are here because they have the patience to wait for an FDA-approved process to play itself out. Quite simply, individuals are proactively taking measures to acquire this substance before it is regulated, or controlled in the market. What those individuals choose to do with the compound is their business, but please keep this dialogue on topic.

Edited by sk_scientific, 18 February 2014 - 02:12 AM.

[jabowery]

If you are looking to establish a double-blind, placebo controlled study of your own, I recommend that you purchase enough of the substance in the group buy to put together this study for yourself.

Where your feelings and contentions about what is wrong with the world is noted, you're de-railing the topic. I do not think any one interested in a group buy is going to appreciate receiving a placebo when they're looking to purchase Dihexa. What that individual chooses to do with the compound is their business, but please keep this dialogue on topic.

"The topic" is what are the conditions of the group buy? It is entirely within the conditions of a group buy to allow for volunteers as subjects in a blind control study.

My feelings and contentions about what is wrong with the world is not the topic of my post but merely an attempt try to, by acknowledging these feelings in others, head off understandable hostility from people abused by a medical establishment that is associated with such studies. It was appropriate to head off such de-railing of the topic in the manner I did.

[sk_scientific]

Duly noted. Now do we have any volunteers to contact the following individuals to obtain more information on the structure and/or synthesis of Dihexa?
Joseph W. Harding, Ph.D.,
Professor
hardingj@vetmed.wsu.edu
Office: VBR rm. 471
(509) 335-7927

Alene T. McCoy, Ph.D.,
Associate Toxicology Manager at The Dow Chemical Company
http://www.linkedin....mccoy/9/b74/8a9

[ceridwen]

If there is a group buy I would like to be a part of it. It might slow down my Alzhimers?

[Overman]

I'm fairly sure someone here must have already discovered this but..

http://www.justanswe...-ve-trying-find-this-n-hexanoic-tyr-ile.html


I am very excited about the group buy potential here (I am in), this compound looks to be the most promising of all which I've seen discussed on these forums.
It truly seems to be the case that something this capable of increasing synaptic density could increase brain functionality to the levels that we're all here seeking,
and even the prospect of this coming to fruition is inspiring to me. I mean...I would absolutely love to learn as well and easily as I did when I was a child (even .5 or .25 as well lol).

Some caveats (wrt overall efficacy) exist, for example existing neural architecture/genetics seems to be at least pseudo-optimized for minimizing the noise/signal ratio , and increasing synaptic density to say, pre-synaptic pruning levels could introduce some (possibly) permanent negative changes (i.e. increase in noise signal ratio(n/s)). This is not necessarily going to happen of course, it's merely something to keep in mind, and I can definitely imagine other configurations which result in a reduced n/s. That being said, I really don't think an increased n/s would be a good property to have in places like the brain stem, basal ganglia, amygdala, medial forebrain bundle, etc; i.e. places where a high n/s would have more than a negative "aesthetic" effect on consciousness. Obviously, any visual/auditory/somatosensory/premotor/motor cortex increase in noise could be uncomfortable, but it is more likely to be bearable in than the more fundamental areas.

Anyway, regarding synaptic pruning itself, we can't say for sure whether or how this process will recur at later ages. It could be that it is primarily a process which occurs only once (due to some unknown dna/rna/structural mechanism), or, just as plausibly (if not moreso) it could be a primarily Hebbian process (i.e. you are born, and then a subset of the total number of synapses is used in a statistically "dominant" way, thereby removing the remainder of (unused) synapses from use and hence, existence. To be clear, the process seems to involve each of the mechanisms outlined above (plus a few others), but the question remains as to which is primary.

One possible general solution (or mitigating factor) for the some of the above issues (and others which I haven't outlined) is "tight regulation of environment", meaning: very carefully filter out all possible perceptual field inputs which have a high probability of causing problems (determining the correct probability distribution could be impossible) or which do not positively reinforce the creation of the internal architecture which you want to live with day to day.


We'll interact with these things directly when we get there, but I just wanted to contribute some of my thoughts.

*I think everyone who wants it should have a chance to benefit maximally from this compound, and that is my only goal with these comments.*
Also critique/dialogue is welcome!

[xks201]

Are you sure you aren't already on dihexa or adderall? We can speculate all day what can happen but there is a large chance it does nothing. There was a ton of hype over BPAP but no one really was impressed with it long term including myself and I even obtained mine from a different source.

I'm fairly sure someone here must have already discovered this but..

http://www.justanswe...-ve-trying-find-this-n-hexanoic-tyr-ile.html


I am very excited about the group buy potential here (I am in), this compound looks to be the most promising of all which I've seen discussed on these forums.
It truly seems to be the case that something this capable of increasing synaptic density could increase brain functionality to the levels that we're all here seeking,
and even the prospect of this coming to fruition is inspiring to me. I mean...I would absolutely love to learn as well and easily as I did when I was a child (even .5 or .25 as well lol).

Some caveats (wrt overall efficacy) exist, for example existing neural architecture/genetics seems to be at least pseudo-optimized for minimizing the noise/signal ratio , and increasing synaptic density to say, pre-synaptic pruning levels could introduce some (possibly) permanent negative changes (i.e. increase in noise signal ratio(n/s)). This is not necessarily going to happen of course, it's merely something to keep in mind, and I can definitely imagine other configurations which result in a reduced n/s. That being said, I really don't think an increased n/s would be a good property to have in places like the brain stem, basal ganglia, amygdala, medial forebrain bundle, etc; i.e. places where a high n/s would have more than a negative "aesthetic" effect on consciousness. Obviously, any visual/auditory/somatosensory/premotor/motor cortex increase in noise could be uncomfortable, but it is more likely to be bearable in than the more fundamental areas.

Anyway, regarding synaptic pruning itself, we can't say for sure whether or how this process will recur at later ages. It could be that it is primarily a process which occurs only once (due to some unknown dna/rna/structural mechanism), or, just as plausibly (if not moreso) it could be a primarily Hebbian process (i.e. you are born, and then a subset of the total number of synapses is used in a statistically "dominant" way, thereby removing the remainder of (unused) synapses from use and hence, existence. To be clear, the process seems to involve each of the mechanisms outlined above (plus a few others), but the question remains as to which is primary.

One possible general solution (or mitigating factor) for the some of the above issues (and others which I haven't outlined) is "tight regulation of environment", meaning: very carefully filter out all possible perceptual field inputs which have a high probability of causing problems (determining the correct probability distribution could be impossible) or which do not positively reinforce the creation of the internal architecture which you want to live with day to day.


We'll interact with these things directly when we get there, but I just wanted to contribute some of my thoughts.

*I think everyone who wants it should have a chance to benefit maximally from this compound, and that is my only goal with these comments.*
Also critique/dialogue is welcome!

Are you sure you aren't already on dihexa or adderall? We can speculate all day what can happen but there is a large chance it does nothing. There was a ton of hype over BPAP but no one really was impressed with it long term including myself and I even obtained mine from a different source.

I'm fairly sure someone here must have already discovered this but..

http://www.justanswe...-ve-trying-find-this-n-hexanoic-tyr-ile.html


I am very excited about the group buy potential here (I am in), this compound looks to be the most promising of all which I've seen discussed on these forums.
It truly seems to be the case that something this capable of increasing synaptic density could increase brain functionality to the levels that we're all here seeking,
and even the prospect of this coming to fruition is inspiring to me. I mean...I would absolutely love to learn as well and easily as I did when I was a child (even .5 or .25 as well lol).

Some caveats (wrt overall efficacy) exist, for example existing neural architecture/genetics seems to be at least pseudo-optimized for minimizing the noise/signal ratio , and increasing synaptic density to say, pre-synaptic pruning levels could introduce some (possibly) permanent negative changes (i.e. increase in noise signal ratio(n/s)). This is not necessarily going to happen of course, it's merely something to keep in mind, and I can definitely imagine other configurations which result in a reduced n/s. That being said, I really don't think an increased n/s would be a good property to have in places like the brain stem, basal ganglia, amygdala, medial forebrain bundle, etc; i.e. places where a high n/s would have more than a negative "aesthetic" effect on consciousness. Obviously, any visual/auditory/somatosensory/premotor/motor cortex increase in noise could be uncomfortable, but it is more likely to be bearable in than the more fundamental areas.

Anyway, regarding synaptic pruning itself, we can't say for sure whether or how this process will recur at later ages. It could be that it is primarily a process which occurs only once (due to some unknown dna/rna/structural mechanism), or, just as plausibly (if not moreso) it could be a primarily Hebbian process (i.e. you are born, and then a subset of the total number of synapses is used in a statistically "dominant" way, thereby removing the remainder of (unused) synapses from use and hence, existence. To be clear, the process seems to involve each of the mechanisms outlined above (plus a few others), but the question remains as to which is primary.

One possible general solution (or mitigating factor) for the some of the above issues (and others which I haven't outlined) is "tight regulation of environment", meaning: very carefully filter out all possible perceptual field inputs which have a high probability of causing problems (determining the correct probability distribution could be impossible) or which do not positively reinforce the creation of the internal architecture which you want to live with day to day.


We'll interact with these things directly when we get there, but I just wanted to contribute some of my thoughts.

*I think everyone who wants it should have a chance to benefit maximally from this compound, and that is my only goal with these comments.*
Also critique/dialogue is welcome!

[sk_scientific]

I'm fairly sure someone here must have already discovered this but..

http://www.justanswe...-ve-trying-find-this-n-hexanoic-tyr-ile.html

GUYS, a word of caution!

I contacted the one of the original researchers of Dihexa and they stated that there were several mistakes in the structure mentioned in the above link.

I have obtained the structure of the actual molecule.

Here it is, straight from the horse's mouth.


I give to you, DIHEXA:

Attached Files

•  Dihexa.jpeg   54.54KB   96 downloads

[Metagene]

Nice work sk_scientific!

[Azz19]

Cool

[xks201]

Great will request quotes tmrw and compile in a spreadsheet.

[di36]

I'm fairly sure someone here must have already discovered this but..

http://www.justanswe...-ve-trying-find-this-n-hexanoic-tyr-ile.html

GUYS, a word of caution!

I contacted the one of the original researchers of Dihexa and they stated that there were several mistakes in the structure mentioned in the above link.

I have obtained the structure of the actual molecule.

Here it is, straight from the horse's mouth.


I give to you, DIHEXA:

sk ,that was usefull as hell.Could you also ask him if the compound need to be preserved ,when not used,in ice cold temperatures?

[sk_scientific]

I believe that it does not. We may want to consult with the lab as to the best way to keep the peptides stable. Here is an explanation related to the freshness of peptides and storage that I found elsewhere on the internet.

STORAGE OF LYOPHILIZED PEPTIDES

All products marked “keep cool and dry” should be stored frozen, preferably at -20°C. Most peptides, when stored below -10°C, will remain stable for several years. Storage in buffer is not recommended. We could provide the peptide in aliquots for you.

When using a frozen product, the bottle or vial should be allowed to warm to room temperature in a desiccator containing fresh desiccant before opening. This process can take an hour or more from -20°C, depending on the pack size. Failure to do this can cause condensation to form on the product when the bottle or vial is opened and will greatly reduce the stability of the material. Once opened, the required quantity should be weighed out and the vial or bottle re-sealed immediately to prevent absorption of water.

Solubilization of Peptides

Use only a small amount of peptide to test for solubility. Only when the peptide has been fully dissolved, should the buffer salts be added and the solution diluted to its final concentration.

The main problem associated with the dissolution of a peptide is the formation of aggregated secondary structures. Although this is more pronounced with hydrophobic peptides, it is liable to occur with all except the shortest peptides, irrespective of polarity. Therefore, the first rule is to try to dissolve the peptide in sterile, distilled or deionized (and if possible, oxygen-free for peptides containing cysteine, methionine, tryptophan) water.
If the peptide is insoluble in pure water, sonication may help break up any particles and increase the rate of dissolution, though sonication can cause warming of the solution and degradation of the peptide.
To recover this first sample of peptide, use lyophilisation.
If the peptide contains many basic amino acids, use an aqueous acetic acid (1 to 10 %) solution, with or without sonication. For very hydrophobic peptides, use a 50 % aqueous acetic acid.
If the peptide has many acidic amino acids, use an aqueous ammonia (1 to 10 %) solution, or a volatile basic buffer (up to pH 8) such as N-ethylmorpholine acetate or bicarbonate, with or without sonication. The pH may have to be adjusted before chromatography.
Propanol and acetonitrile can dissolve some medium-sized peptides. If the peptide is to be injected onto a column, the amount of organic solvent, especially propanol, must be kept small, or retention time will be greatly affected.
If the peptide is highly hydrophobic with aromatic or hydrocarbon-like side chains, such as valine, leucine, isoleucine, methionine, phenylalanine, tyrosine, alanine or if the peptide is neutral, use a chaotropic agent such as DMF or DMSO, added drop by drop until the peptide dissolves.
If the peptide does not dissolve with the above organic solvent, it may require TFA or formic acid
High concentration of chaotropic salts helps to dissolve the peptide by breaking up the secondary structures.
Chaotropic agents are suitable for preparing solutions for analysis, but may interfere with a biological system used for the study of the peptide.
With reverse-phase chromatography, the DMF will elute with the buffer front.
STORAGE OF PEPTIDES IN SOLUTION
Peptides in solution are much less stable than lyophilized peptides. If you need to store peptides in solution, follow these guidelines for best results:

It is recommended that the stock solution be aliquoted upon arrival to prevent degradation caused by repeated thawing and freezing. Thaw only what is needed and discard any unused portion.
Sterile filter before storing to prevent bacterial contamination.
Maintain peptides in an oxygen-free environment as peptides containing cysteine, methionine, tryptophan, glutamine and asparagine are susceptible to oxidation and have limited shelf life.
Peptides have a wide range of properties, which the above guidelines may not address.

→ source (external link)

Edited by sk_scientific, 19 February 2014 - 02:23 PM.

[xks201]

1) Started a private forum for us so that our personal information can be more confidently shared along with supplier names etc...
https://groups.yahoo.com/group/dihexa

2) dihexa2@yahoo.com is my new email I want anyone interested to send an email to just saying I am interested. By emailing me you are saying that you are most likely interested in entering this group buy (though no funds will be collected until all details are worked out obviously).
I am requesting everyone interested in obtaining a sample to email me at this address so I can get an idea of the volume to order and funds we need. Also join the group. SK_Scientific I am appointing you co-organizer of this group buy. Not saying you have to do any work but you seem the most knowledgeable here so you can help me narrow down suppliers.

3) For issues of legality I want to use a US manufacturer. I do not want any BS here of overseas companies running with money with no refuge. If anyone has further US manufacturers you would like to see quotes from please list them here so we can get this going.

4) Can SK or anyone also please verify the therapeutic dose?

Edited by xks201, 19 February 2014 - 02:33 PM.

[sk_scientific]

I'm working on gathering some more information at the moment. I'll email soon and also create a yahoo profile. I'll continue to post information here as it becomes available, and encourage all other members to do the same for the good of the group (even if we're organizing personal information within a group setting off-site).

As an update: I spoke with the second researcher and that individual stated that the peptides were always kept at -20 degress. I'm attempting to elicit whether it is necessary, as well as more information about the exact process of synthesis so that we don't potentially endanger ourselves.

I'll be in touch with you xks201 via email in the next 24 hours.

I'll do what I can in terms of figuring out what the therapeutic dosage was for the animals, but I might ask that someone enlist the assistance of ScienceGuy or a peripheral pharmacologist to make a determination of Human Equivalent Dose (HED) because this is outside of my experience. This may require expert assistance.

Also, Dr. Harding shared that there are three new publications on Dihexa to be released in the near future, the first of which within 2-3 weeks. He also stated that he's not gotten around to updating his webpage at the university so the best way to find his publications is to search for "harding jw" at pubmed.

Edited by sk_scientific, 19 February 2014 - 03:32 PM.

[xks201]

Yes if you find the animal dose let me know..thanks. I assume the scientist/creator must be thrilled with the compound if he keeps researching it.

Edited by xks201, 19 February 2014 - 03:25 PM.

[sk_scientific]

While I await more information, for your consideration:


Dose translation from animal to human studies.

http://www.fasebj.or...9.full.pdf html

[Nero]

doesn't Dihexa need to be IVed? or I'm I thinking of GLYX 13