430 replies to this topic

[aconita]

"i cant find the stable version anywhere on the internet, but on the other hand the generic version seems to be sold all over the place so i might be purchasing it soon and report"

 

Of course you can't find the stable version since it is patented and made exclusively by Diagen, if you want some join the group buy by PM me.

 

"I am interested in this but have never done an injectable.

Where does one get the needles and syringes?"

 

Insulin syringes 0.5 or 0.3 ml are ready available in any pharmacy.

 

But with the stable version the oral route is as effective as subq injections and the use as a supplement (everyday for unlimited time) becomes possible.

 

"Do you mean an older vial of bpc won't hurt me"

 

Since spoiling would be due by bacteria proliferating on it I wouldn't recommend injecting spoiled peptides, likely nothing would happen but better to play safe than being sorry, just in case.

 

In this specific case the degree of spoilage should be around 10% and might not be a major issue but I wouldn't be comfortable with more than that.

[GreenmachineX]

Started using this Saturday night at 250mcg twice a day. Question though, why is subq recommended and not IM? If it works systemically, wouldn't IM work as well?

[aconita]

Subq it's easier and safer to perform, plus an insulin syringe isn't meant for IM and a conventional syringe is too big for such tiny doses with a lot of getting wasted in the needle attachment etc..., in terms of effectiveness there isn't difference.

[GreenmachineX]

Subq it's easier and safer to perform, plus an insulin syringe isn't meant for IM and a conventional syringe is too big for such tiny doses with a lot of getting wasted in the needle attachment etc..., in terms of effectiveness there isn't difference.

Oh ok, then I'll just keep shooting it straight in my delt for convenience. Thanks.

[aconita]

I just remember everybody that there is currently a group buy going on for the stable version directly from Diagen, it will be available both in vials and in caps ready for oral use.

 

Whom is interested can PM me the amount wished, final price will depend by how big the order is going to be (I guess). 

 

Likely this group buy will close in a week or so. 

[Nate-2004]

I'll be wanting the vial kind as I'll be doing IM injects.

[Rocket]

Subq it's easier and safer to perform, plus an insulin syringe isn't meant for IM and a conventional syringe is too big for such tiny doses with a lot of getting wasted in the needle attachment etc..., in terms of effectiveness there isn't difference.

Insulin syringes for IM is fantastic!!!! I speak from years of experience. No pain. No scaring. Insulin syringes are the bomb for IM injections!!!

[aconita]

Sure but the needle is very thin and when stabbing for IM it might break, which I agree would be a quite rare accident but yet possible and kind of unpleasant when happens.

 

In a medical setting nobody will IM with an insulin syringe for a reason.

 

When IM there is always the risk to get into a vein, than your IM turns into an IV, with peptides likely not a huge deal but better to avoid (since bacterial load is unknown but always a reality might be smarter to let the immune system the time to take care of it in some tissue than shooting it in the blood stream where it gets in vital organs right away).

 

Iin order to do it correctly before injecting one should draw in to make sure no blood comes in the syringe as guarantee that the needle isn't inside a vein, there is a reason why only licensed nurses can perform IM...and the only prescribed self administered injections are subq.

 

That said one is free to do what better wishes but I don't feel like recommending it.

 

Reason for IM is that injecting subq a considerable amount of liquid isn't optimal but this isn't a concern with peptides because amounts are ridiculously tiny.

 

Subq is easy, painless, safe and as effective as IM, why make things more complicate than they are without any reason?.

[GreenmachineX]

Day 3 Bpc-157 at 250mcg twice a day IM in right delt. Already feeling a little pain reduction in certain movements, for example, brushing my teeth this morning was pain free. Hard to tell if range of motion is improved or if it's just in my head.

Edited by GreenmachineX, 29 August 2017 - 04:50 PM.

[normalizing]

im going to get bpc soon but i will take it only orally. at 5mg, how long will it last, 2-3 days?? that will suck as it will rave up the cost exponentially over time

[RiDDIM]

Hey everyone just passing through after an absence.  Started trialing some bpc about 3 days ago.  Will see how it goes.  

 

Aconita,  I'm interested in the buy if you haven't done it yet.  I just pm'd you.

 

It would be better, if just for the lulz, if there was a :facepalm: button along with the other buttons for rating posts here.  hehe

 

Regards all!

[RiDDIM]

im going to get bpc soon but i will take it only orally. at 5mg, how long will it last, 2-3 days?? that will suck as it will rave up the cost exponentially over time

 

Hazy,

What are you planning on treating with it?

 

Thanks.

[normalizing]

i was hoping to use it for getting off benzos since i read it helped restore function after quiting diazepam also it should help with alcohol abuse from a similar study i read

[RiDDIM]

ah, ok.  seems like this can be a good candidate to try then.  perhaps also low dose naltrexone therapy, may wanna look at that too.

[RiDDIM]

Hey all,  was wondering if either variation of BPC could be reconstituted with a greater level of alcohol, say ethyl, like vodka or something, to extend its shelf life for oral use.  could that feasibly work or would it destroy the bonds in the structure?  any thoughts?

[aconita]

Bacteriostatic water is sterile water and benzyl alcohol.

 

Injecting pure alcohol might not be the most pleasurable experience.

[normalizing]

ah, ok.  seems like this can be a good candidate to try then.  perhaps also low dose naltrexone therapy, may wanna look at that too.

 

 

i know about naltrexone for ages and have been trying to get it for just as long but here in US, its very difficult to prescribe. its not popular and you need a specialist to do it, but they wont take insurance and that stuff is super expensive

[calm--]

 

I might offer to organize a group buy for either the stable BPC vials and/or for the ready to use caps, shelf life for both is 1 year at room temperature.

 

 

 

Aconita, I talked a bit with Diagen, and the said shelf life for stable version is 6 months. Can you tell me why you think it will last a year?

 

Does refrigeration prolong the shelf-life?

[aconita]

That is strange since I still have two of their e-mails stating shelf life for the stable version as 1 year at 25°C both for the vials and the caps (properly prepared).

 

Refrigeration will prolong shelf life but can backfire.

 

Vials will do all right but have to always stay in the fridge, taking them in and out will cause humidity to be drawn inside the vial because of pressure difference (hot air versus cold air), this will lead to powder getting reconstituted by humidity (condense) and get spoiled (been there).

 

Caps would be even trickier since less "sealed" than vials, of course.

 

In my knowledge humidity is a main player in peptides shelf life, the arginine molecule attached to the end of BPC stable version is what makes it stable because of its hydrophobic nature (repels water).

 

Certainly I don't recommend to keep all caps in the fridge, eventually only a well sealed container with the ones not needed everyday.

 

Another container for everyday use should be better kept at room temperature, a desiccating bag inside caps containers would be smart (those can be recycled periodically placing them in a microwave or low temperature oven for a few minutes).

 

I try my best to be as knowledgeable as I can on the subject but I am far from knowing it all, of course, if whom knows better says otherwise I am happy to stand correct.

[adamh]

I would be suspicious of vendors telling you the competitors version is "unstable" and theirs is stable. I would not accept that at face value without evidence. I also see it said that bpc157 will rapidly grow bacteria once water is put in and quickly go bad. I'm sure being kept at a higher temp will cause it to degrade faster than freezing but I have seen no studies on that. Neither the bacteria theory or the rapid breakdown theory has been validated and should be taken with a grain of salt.

 

Just for example, drug companies are putting a 1 year shelf life on all drugs no matter how stable. This is a transparent attempt to get patients to toss out what they have and buy more. Consider the economic motives the person telling you something might have.

[aconita]

Evidence is well provided but you carefully avoid to check out studies because you already know it all better, of course,

 

Luckily enough science doesn't give a shit about what you think and your thoughts and believes aren't going to make a dent in the reality of things.

 

Show everybody I am wrong on you posting here some links about BPC157 studies you have gone trough, common, I am sure you aren't going to miss this opportunity to make me wrong. 

 

Show everybody the evidence you keep asking for from others but promptly ignore when provided.

 

Show you have got balls, claim a shelf life for BPC and support it with solid research.

[adamh]

You always rage furiously when anyone questions your beliefs but you never seem to back them up with any evidence. Saying go look for it yourself is not evidence. I merely said I have not seen the evidence of the statements I mentioned, I did not say I had proof they were wrong simply that there were no supporting studies or anything really. 

 

How do we know "normal" bpc is unstable? The competing vendor says so, to me that is not good enough. Saying it breaks down after a month or whatever time period is a belief, not a fact until some evidence is shown. All I'm asking is something to back up these beliefs. Otherwise they get repeated all over the net until they are taken as gospel and then later some are found to be false

[aconita]

This has been already provided many posts ago, I invited you to have a look at it, it contains all the evidences you are asking for, all data, researches and whatever you might wish for from the most prominent authority about BPC 157 research, obviously you didn't care to check it out as usual.

 

https://www.google.c...4142764A1?cl=en

 

Well, since you aren't going to make the effort to click the link AS USUAL, I'll do for you and copy and paste the relevant parts here:

 

Numerous pharmacological studies have demonstrated a protective, regenerative and therapeutical activity of pentadecapeptide (abbr. BPC-157 or bepecin) having an amino acid sequence: Gly Glu Pro Pro Pro Gly Lys Pro Ala Asp Asp Ala Gly Leu Val (SEQ ID NO 1) to both a human and animal organism. Until now, this peptide has always been used either in a free form or in an acetate form or as a salt with bases such as sodium salt. All these forms have been characterized by still not adequate stability in gastric juice, which particularly limits oral use of these compounds and simultaneously decreases their therapeutic value. It has therefore been necessary to manufacture this pentadecapeptide in a form which is substantially more stable both in gastric juice and at raised ambient temperature. Such form of the preparation could be used more successfully particularly in oral delivery into an organism. Due to higher stability an overall better effectiveness would be expected as well

 

The fundamental problem to be solved is stability of the compound at an increased temperature, in particular the stability in gastric juice. The present invention relates to novel pentadecapeptide salts with basic amino acids having Significantly improved thermal stability and also stability in gastric juice.

 

The stability of bepecin di-L-arginine salt (1 : 2, abbr. Arg-BPC) at an increased temperature was determined by an accelerated ageing method at 50 °C and relative humidity of 65 %, which represents relatively very stringent conditions for a compound having a peptide structure.

Table 1. Pentadecapeptide content decrement in standing at 50 °C and relat. humidity 65 %:

Substance: 0 day 10 davs 30 davs 60 davs 90 davs

BPC acetate 99.65 % 95.97 % 91.98 % 85.49 % 85.90 %

BPC Na salt 99.20 % 97.22 % 96,46 % 97.38 % 97.14 %

Are-BPC 99.46 % 99.29 % 99.20 % 98.96 % 99.07 %

Arg- 99.46 % 99.37 % 99.29 % 99.16 % 99.15 %

BPC/NaHCO,

Lvs-BPC 99.47 % 99.24 % 99.27 % 98.90 % 99.28 % The table further shows that the addition of sodium hydrogen carbonate to bepecin salt increases its stability at an increased temperature

 

The stability of bepecin salt with L-arginine in water solutions was determined after incubation of aqueous salt solutions in concentration 1 g/ 100 ml, at 50 °C, and in a separate test in very stringent conditions: at 100 °C, where the decomposition was determined after one hour.

Table 2. Pentadecapeptide content decrement in water at 50 °C / time (hours):

Substance: pH start/0 20 65 148 388

BPC acetate 3.88 98.89 % 71.17 % 55.25 % 52.55 % ^' 21.30 %

BPC Na-salt 8.42 99.01 % 98.36 % 97.47 % N.D. 96.74 %

Arg-BPC 7.35 99.05 % 98.97 % 99.04 % 99.10 % 99.01 %

Lys-BPC 7.28 99.07 % 99.40 % 99.09 % 99.35 % 99.01 %

Orn-BPC 7.12 100.00 % 99.64 % 99.78 % 99.59 % 99.44 %

Table 3. Pentadecapeptide content decrement in water at 100 °C - 1 hour:

Substance: start after 1 hour

BPC acetate 98.89 % 56.80 %

BPC Na-salt 99.01 % 98.56 %

Arg-BPC 99.05 % 99.08 % (unchanged!)

 

Stability of a compound in gastric juice is an important parameter, particularly in peptides, which very rapidly decompose in the presence of pepsine enzyme and in an acidic medium. Better stability in gastric juice means a longer period, in which the compound is available for resorption and its therapeutical activity. Artificial gastric juice illustrates the conditions in normal human gastric juice and contains: 0.08 mol of hydrochloric acid, 0.03 mol of sodium chloride and 1.0 g of pepsin in 1000 ml of water.

The studied peptide salt in concentration 10 mg/5 ml was incubated in artificial gastric juice with pH values 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0 at 37 °C.

Table 4. Pentadecapeptide content decrement (rel. %) in gastric juice at pH = 2.0

Substance: Time (hours):

0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5

BPC acetate 100 21.4 8.2 4.75 2.46 2.1

BPC Na-salt 100 21.6 6.7 4.4 4.2 2.7

Arg-BPC 100 30.2 13.5 8.2 6.0 4.9

Table 5. Pentadecapeptide content decrement (rel. %) in gastric juice at pH = 3.0

Substance: Time (hours):

0 0.5 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0

BPC acetate 100 41.7 26.1 7.8 2.5 1.1 0.08

BPC Na-salt 100 81.9 71.6 56.0 40.2 29.7 10.1

Arg-BPC 100 98.1 96.5 93.6 90.0 87.2 84.9

Table 6. Pentadecapeptide content decrement (rel. %) in gastric juice at pH = 4.0

Substance: Time (hours):

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

BPC acetate 100 89.7 81.3 72.5 60.9 56.4 48.8 44.6 38.0

BPC Na-salt 100 99.0 98.9 94.6 89.7 78.3 76.3 68.2 60.9

Arg-BPC 100 99.9 99.5 98.7 96.1 89.8 84.6 73.5 67.2 The content of pentadecapeptide BPC-157 in tested samples was determined by HPLC method in the following system:

column: Reprosil Orpegen CI 8, 100, 5 μιτι, 250 * 4.6 mm,

mob. phase A: 0.1 % trifluoroacetic acid/5 % acetonitrile/water

mob. phase B: 0.1 1 % trifluoroacetic acid/40 % acetonitrile/water

gradient: from 100 % A to 30 % A in 25 min

temperature: 20 °C

flow: 1.5 ml/min

detection: UV, 210 nm

The results of stability determination show that bepecin salts with basic amino acids are substantially more stable than other hitherto known salts of pentadecapeptide in question, which is surprisingly a huge advantage. In any case these new salts are better than bepecin salts with different amines, alkali and earth alkali metals according to patents EP 0983300 and US No. 6,288,028, which are prone to formation of polar degradation product (up to 10 %, structure not yet defined). A consequence of better stability is also better biological activity, since the intact compound is present in an organism for a longer period of time and available for more efficient resorption.

 

Stability in Light

Compounds of such type are very susceptible to ultraviolet light. An aqueous solution of Arg-BPC (1 g/100 ml of water) at 20 °C was radiated with ultraviolet light of a wavelength of 253.7 nm and absorption was measured within wavelength range from 230 to 350 nm over a period of 70 min every 10 min. The results are represented in Fig. 1 and confirm that the compound is stable.

 

Now keep claiming there is no evidence if you dare.

 

The fact that you don't check the evidence I provide doesn't make me not providing any as you keep claiming, you are the one whom NEVER provided any to support your ideas.

 

Prove me wrong, common, I am here waiting.

 

And by the way the above isn't MY BELIEF, you are the one relying ONLY on YOUR OWN BELIEF ignoring whatsoever evidence not matching your wishes. 

[adamh]

Thats better at least we are getting some specifics.  But stability in gastric juice is a special case, not the same as stability in storage which is what you have talked about. You have said several times it will quickly degrade in solution or even in the freezer. Keeping it in the fridge or freezer avoids uv light which is a known factor. It should keep for a long time kept that way and a water solution in the fridge should likewise keep for a month or two. I have in fact kept a water solution in the fridge for close to 2 months and it still seemed active when I used the last of it.

 

The fact it works when taken orally is the main consideration for most of us. The majority of drugs break down or are excreted within a day or two anyway I'm not sure why a more stable version will be needed. I also have not seen the evidence that the stable version works any better. It may it may not. It will definitely be more expensive. Why tell people to buy the more, possibly much much more expensive version when it has not been shown to work better? The so called stable version will likely be patented and be as costly as other prescription drugs.

 

Lucky for us the regular version is cheap and easily available. It also seems to work very well. The few studies that were done as well as the reports from users were using the regular version apparently

 

 

you are the one relying ONLY on YOUR OWN BELIEF ignoring whatsoever evidence not matching your wishes

 

 

Lets just discuss things calmly, no need to blow a gasket every time. I am relying on the studies and reports already given as well as my own experience. It works, it works orally, it can be stored for reasonable lengths of time, what is the dispute if any? I simply can't see paying a lot more for another version unless and until its proven to be better. Have you any such proof? I'm not saying its worse I say its hard to get and expensive.

[aconita]

Almost all the studies on BPC are done on the stable version, you aren't aware of that because you never read any of them, do your homework before stating things you don't have a clue about.

 

Likely being patented?

 

Don't tell me!!!

 

Listen, I do understand that moving the cursor above a link and clicking it needs some formal training but it is worth the effort, once you'll learn how to do it you'll might be able to find a whole new world of opportunities, like to educate yourself and to find out that actually the link provided, surprise, surprise,... IS the PATENT.

 

Did you tested by proper HPLC your BPC after couple of months in the fridge?

 

No, you didn't.

 

Did you tested the bacterial load?

 

No, you didn't.

 

How can you state it isn't spoiled, by feeling?

 

Well, I might suggest to leave your current job and find a new one in the biology field, someone able to tell by feeling the composition of multi-peptides has been awaited since long time by the industry, I guess.

 

I just posted all the evidence in the world about BPC stability issues in gastric juices hindering its effectiveness when taken by oral route, data, measurements, researches, it is all there, just a few lines above this, nothing, just like fresh air to you: it doesn't matches your wishes therefore can't be right, YOU know how it works because YOU can feel it.

 

Right.

 

Trying hard here to provide research based information about the subject and you coming along with your feelings, everybody is wrong, and you are the only one knowing how it works....

 

I already invited you several times: provide one link, JUST ONE about ONE SINGLE STUDY you did read!!!

 

There are 114 of them on pubmed (https://www.ncbi.nlm...d/?term=bpc 157), it shouldn't be difficult....

 

Nothing, just the sound of the wind blowing over the steppe.....

 

Blowing my gaskets....you are shredding my gonads, not just blowing my gaskets!!!

 

And spare your energy, no need to mark this as unfriendly, IT IS VERY MUCH SO!!!

[Moondancer]

Take it easy folks. 

Could BPC 157 influence tumor angiogenesis/progression? 

 

Bepecin upregulates VEGFR-2-expression in rats. https://www.ncbi.nlm...pubmed/27847966

Edited by Moondancer, 30 September 2017 - 12:39 AM.

[adamh]

(aconita)

>Almost all the studies on BPC are done on the stable version

 

How do you know this? Where is the evidence? Here is a link talking about it and they say this  "While BPC-157 is a stable peptide..." https://examine.com/...ements/BPC-157/

 

Peptides normally break down in the gut, that is the job of the gut. Where is the evidence that some new form does not break down and works better? I must have missed that though I read the thread. You have shown something indicating the normal form will break down after a while which would be expected. What is the new form and does it work the same? That is the question we need to ask. You have not shown us any info on the allegedly "stable" form.

 

We know it breaks down in the gut we also know it works. What we have not seen is any evidence about this stable version you speak of. 

 

>Did you tested the bacterial load?

 

What is the point? It was in a sealed vial with bacteriostatic water. Any bacteria present would be destroyed by digestion. Did you know that bacteria are present everywhere including on and in the food you eat? You claimed that bacteria would grow rapidly in it but show no evidence of that.

 

Why do you persist in hostile tones and comments? Can't you for once simply discuss things calmly and rationally? 

[Leni]

Take it easy folks. 

Could BPC 157 influence tumor angiogenesis/progression? 

 

Bepecin upregulates VEGFR-2-expression in rats. https://www.ncbi.nlm...pubmed/27847966

 

 

This doesn't entirely answer your question, but nonetheless quite interesting with regard to your question:

 

A patent I found with a Google search, but I can't find the actual study unfortunately: Link to the patent

 

"Tumors

 

Materials, Methods and Results:

 

One of the commonly used models of experimental tumors involves the assessment of the number of the metastases of carcinoma and melanoma B-16 in mice. Like various models of experimental tumors, these experimental tumors share a considerable similarity with disturbances observed in human patients. Applied in different protocols, NaBPC157 was shown to decrease the number of metastases in treated mice relative to corresponding controls. Ehrlich's ascites tumor (EAT) is a tumor which can grow in all strains of mice. It can grow in ascitic or in solid form depending upon the way in which the tumor cells are administered. Although, generally, animal tumor models only partially share a similarity with human disease, the use of this model has achieved general acceptance because of its possible usefulness when applied in anti-tumor agent research.

 

Survival (days) in the mice injected with Ehrlich's ascites tumor cells was mostly limited to less than 25 days. Previous incubation of tumor cells with NaBPC157 (2 μg/ml) led to a prolonged life of the animals injected with said tumor cells. More than 90% of animals survived to the end of the 45-day observation period. In addition, various cytostatic drugs induced neutropenia in patients as well as in experimental animals. Cyclophosphamide is a commonly used agent for neutropenia induction. An application of cyclophosphamide (180 mg/kg i.p.) induced significant disturbances. NaBPC157 prevented neutropenia, decreased the reticulocytes and improved hemoglobin values.

 

Consequently, an anti-tumor potential of NaBPC157 is evident. Considering the apparent similarity of the animal models and human conditions and the beneficial effects obtained in both in vivo and in vitro experiments, NaBPC157 is useful in an anti-tumor therapy. NaBPC157 is suitable for the attenuation of the cytostatic noxious effects."

 

 

 

 

And an in vitro study: "BPC 157 inhibits cell growth and VEGF signalling via the MAPK kinase pathway in the human melanoma cell line"

Edited by Leni, 30 September 2017 - 02:41 AM.

[aconita]

Adamh,

 

you do what you should have done before posting nonsense here which is READ AT LEAST ONE RESEARCH about BPC and under "methods and materials" you'll see what kind of BPC they used.

 

How do I know researches have been done almost always on the stable version?

 

I do know because, unlike you, I have been trough ALL the 114 researches published on pubmed before starting this thread in the attempt acquire some basic knowledge about the topic.
 

You have not shown us any info on the allegedly "stable" form.

 

 

You are perfectly right here, I didn't.

 

I just posted, I don't remember now anymore how many times, the link to the stable form patent,

 

Do you have a clue about what a patent is?

 

Eventually you don't.

 

But the idiot here is definitely me insisting in the attempt to somehow keep up with you.

 

How can my tone be any different from hostile when it is way easier to talk about molecular biology to my cat than have you clicking a link?

 

Adamh, you are driving me nut!

 

....and the funny thing is I don't even dislike you that much, actually the opposite is true, believe it or not, because I appreciate whom questions things...the issue is you keep questioning just for the sake of sanding down on my testicles, you are more impermeable than a submarine dude, just admit it: no evidence in the world will make you blink, period.

 

It is my personal limit: I am just unable to discuss things calmly with a complete irrational person as you are, nothing personal and no hard feelings, really,....I just can't. 

[Leni]

The so called stable version will likely be patented and be as costly as other prescription drugs.

 

 

you are the one relying ONLY on YOUR OWN BELIEF ignoring whatsoever evidence not matching your wishes

 

 

Lets just discuss things calmly, no need to blow a gasket every time. I am relying on the studies and reports already given as well as my own experience. It works, it works orally, it can be stored for reasonable lengths of time, what is the dispute if any? I simply can't see paying a lot more for another version unless and until its proven to be better. Have you any such proof? I'm not saying its worse I say its hard to get and expensive.

 

Adamh, no offense meant, but perhaps read through all info that was posted again as you may very well find an answer to several of your questions in this thread. Aconita literally posted the link to the patent of the stable version, even citing an important part of that patent in his post here, and in your response to that you state the stable version will likely be patented?

 

 

And indeed most (Pubmed)-studies will literaly state "Stable gastric pentadecapeptide BPC", was used.

 

Admittedly I can also be all over the place missing out on info that had been mentioned before, but don't keep insisting that Aconita has not provided you with publications/studies that should at least have answered part of your questions. That will help to keep this thread moving forward with new info.

Edited by Leni, 30 September 2017 - 03:06 AM.