GLOW and KLOW are Worthless

0:09 Hey everybody, this is Hunter Williams. I hope you're doing amazing wherever you might be in the world. Today's video, I won't call it a response video but it's addressing something that I've been getting a ton of questions about recently. And it really I think it is about the Glow Blend and the Clow blend, which obviously Glowe is BPC, TB 500 and GHKCU and then Clowe, is the glow blend plus KPV. So I don't know what goes on social media anymore, guys, because I've had every social-media account, with the exception of my Twitter or X account taken down.

0:44 So people ask me if I see stuff on Social Media, and even if wanted to, I can't, Because I have every single social Media channel, at least the ones that most people talk about peptides on, taken-down. And so I do not have Social media on my phone. I spend much of the day either reading, researching, creating content, and interacting with clients and people inside of my group. So I don't go on social media. Again, even if I wanted to, I can't because when you get your social medias deleted, it's like when your YouTube channel deleted you can actually watch

1:16 YouTube videos. Yes, i can go to YouTube URLs but I dont have a YouTube account so I cant watch youtube videos anymore. When you get your Instagram deleted, not only can you not post to Instagram, you cannot go onto Instagram. So you can't watch Instagram videos. You can look at links that people send you on Instagram because you have to be logged in a lot of times to do that. And then with TikTok, same thing. I never went on TikTok anyway, but I posted there, I had like 12,000 followers. That got deleted. When people sent me links to videos on Tik Tok, yes, You could watch them sometimes, But then sometimes too, it makes you log in to it.

1:47 Anyway, don't go on social media. Don't follow stuff on Social Media. But anyway, it seems like out on the social media landscape from what people send me that there's a lot of confusion around the Glow and the Cloblin. And what I'm going to do today is just systematically walk us through is there or are there bases in those claims? And if there are, what does that look like? If there is not basis or bases on those claim, What does it look And ultimately the short answer is, yes, those blends are stable.

2:17 I'm actually going to show you purity test and HPLC reports, demonstrating that. And I think ultimately, let's just assume for a minute suspension of disbelief. Let's say that those blend weren't stable, The problem that we now have is that every analytical lab that is testing peptides would basically be committing fraud because they would be saying that the blends are no longer stable pre-mixing with bacteriostatic water and post- mixing with bacteria static water.

2:48 So if that were to be true, basically what that would mean is, that all of these testing labs that are verifying purity and providing a service to the peptide world of showing that peptides have purity, they don't have endotoxins, They are what they say they are, et cetera. We would have a massive problem because that would mean that every single one of these labs that is testing these blends showing the peptide exist within those blends would be lying. And I guess there could be the argument that like, well, They're stable pre-mixing with bacteriostatic water, but once they're mixed with water now all

3:20 of a sudden they are inert and useless. But I'm actually going to show you today a test that was done, a 21 day degradation test of the clobland showing that the peptides were still stable. Yes, there was slight degradation, which you're going have with any peptide over a twenty one day window. It wasn't more than like two to three percent for any of given peptids. All that to say, if this were to be true, like the way I like to think about things, I almost went to law school I don't like getting into debates with people because it's kind of silly. I just like to evaluate information and give that information to people so that it helps them.

3:54 But I guess where I'm going with this is that if those things were true. So if glow and clow were garbage and they didn't work. all of these labs would have to be lying and making up false reports. And for me, I'm like, okay, what's more true? You have maybe a handful of people saying that they're garbage and also looking at hallucinated studies from AI, meaning that when I have dug into this and looked up references to this, there's actually not any studies that I could find. Again, not saying they don't exist, but I was not able to find them in the journals that people sent me to say that there were studies about the topic

4:29 that we're talking about today. So I think that's one thing. And then also too, we have the fact that there's a lot of people that are using these compounds, anecdotally speaking, again, show me the baby, don't tell me you're pregnant. Anecdotally, speaking I have seen people inject these components and I've seen results of them. So yes, there might be slight like one to two, 3% degradations over time, like with any peptide. However, you are not seeing in practice that the peptides are completely worthless. Now what I really think is going on is that in the world of social media again, which I don't really exist within because all my channels have been deleted

5:06 across platforms for whatever reason. Maybe it's just cause I'm too measured in how I talk. Cause I like to be based in reality with a lot of things rather than speaking in hyperbole. But, um, when we look at social you have to understand that Argument drives engagement, which drives the algorithm. One of the reasons that my content doesn't get as many views as it does is because I don't speak in things that cause argument because,

5:38 I really just want to help people. So I'm not going to sit here and say things in a black and white lens that causes people to argue that then will cause engagement to cause me to get more views. I've just from a life principle standpoint decided not to do that. And does that make me better than someone? Absolutely not. Is that a moral judgment on someone, absolutely not, it's just not how I choose to run my business. I chose to, do education based content, that hopefully leads you to trust me, then hopefully lead you in some way, shape or form,

6:14 support my businesses, thus I can exist in the world, navigate the matrix, make money so that I can bring content to you guys so I that can help people. That's my mission in life and that's the structure with when living in the matrix that we have to operate within in order to do so. I won't ever do things that are designed to cause shock and awe or fear or argument because that's not the place that I operate from. And I don't say that as a moral judgment to anybody else out in the world. I just say, that for myself, That's why I choose to operate.

6:46 The reason I say is because when I was in real estate, would be a sales tactic in real estate. A lot of the real-estate market, especially the residential market is driven by interest rates and there's always this threat of lower or higher interest rate. And lower interest means it's much more easy for a buyer to get a loan and get payment that fits their budget. A higher interest rate environment means it would be harder for a buyer to qualify to buy the same house because the interest goes up,

7:17 their payment goes and so they can't afford as much. Now what that means practically is that when buyers are driven by fear, they will act out of fear to do something so that they make a decision. And if you are selling real estate, it is a common tactic in the real-estate sales world to say, to reach out to clients and say hey, you know rates are going up, and you need to go ahead and buy. Or rates going are up and need you to list your house on the market to sell while rates still low and more people can afford the price that you want for

7:47 your home. Conversely, if rates were coming down, a lot of buyers are like, well I'm going to wait for the rates to come down. And the Real Estate agent will say well we don't know that for sure. You want to move now because you wanted to get it before if the rate were to give up. All that to say, when you look at content, education-based marketing, there's a side of things that are driven by fear. And when your driven my fear, smart people understand if you're driven be fear and confusion that you are more likely to give them money.

8:17 and engage with their material because you are operating from a place of fear and the way the human mind works is when it's afraid, it is going to act to do something versus if you come from place contentment and peace, you will make a more measured decision that is not based in fear. And a lot of times that decision is probably what's better for you, right? I know in my life. And so when I got into real estate, I saw that and I was like, oh, never wanted to be someone that was, like hey, rates are going down or rates going up, go ahead and buy or go and sell because rates went up. That's silly. I want to help people at whatever point they're at in their life.

8:48 So if someone needs to buy a house and it's time for them to a buy house, because they have a family now and their family's bigger and they need a bigger house. And I'm going to pray upon them with fear to say, hey rates, are growing up I can inform them about rates growing And I can tell them, hey, there's a likelihood that it's going to happen, but you shouldn't operate from a place of fear. All that's said, in the peptide world, There's lot of confusion. There is a lot information out there. And it is very new. It's very, very confusing to a lots of people.

9:19 Its not like a supplement that you order and you just pop the pill, right? There are mixing with pecter or cytokine of water, all these crazy names that don't sound like anything else you've seen from the supplement or health world. that sound like they're Star Wars characters or whatever. And people oftentimes get afraid and they hear people speaking in the peptide place, whoever it is, and I get a freight. So I say that to say, I, will never operate or try to create content for you from a place of fear.

9:50 Everything that I do is education-based. I will give you my experiences, I would give what I know. If I don't know everything, sometimes I'm wrong, and I'll do my best to be right. Sometimes I am wrong but I won't have all the answers. You should check for yourself, verify it, follow other people. Follow people with conflicting views. Don't just listen to what they say. A lot of times I have no answers, but I can give you my best experience. I could give what I know to be true based on what have seen. And just an example, my brother-in-law recently, this was like three months ago, was told he was gonna have to have a fusion surgery on his neck and he's

10:27 kind of into the peptide world. Obviously he is my Brother-In-Law, so he knows what do. He likes peptides and stuff. Anyway, he started injecting the Glow Blend into his Neck before having to do surgery, He's like, I'm just gonna give this a shot and see if it ends up helping and if doesn't I'll have surgery. and use it after just to help with the healing. Anyway, he does the Glow Blend for eight weeks or so, goes back to his doctor. They do the MRI, they do a look at whatever they have to do to its neck. He no longer needs surgery. Now he was injecting the glow blend, BPC, GHK, TB 500. It was injected in the globe and near his neck, the doctor basically had sentenced him to this.

11:03 This was a mandatory surgery he came back. And he's like, I don't know what you did. You no long have have a surgery now. The reason I'm telling you this story is because time and time, and and, time again, Okay, if someone's telling me that it doesn't work, that is just basically inert, the peptide is not working, why would we see that in practice? And then again, I go back to the, you know, like Occam's razor, what is more likely to be true? The fact that we have thousands of peptides purity reports generated per day by multiple labs that are confirming that the peptides exist within the vial,

11:37 or that all those places are lying, they're making it up to try to sell you peptids. Again, i'm not trying to tell you pep tides here, I'm just trying to educate you and do what I do. Obviously that's the business that I operate from within, but I would much rather see an educated market than people that are buying anything from me, believe me. Because everything that i put out comes back to me tenfold and I don't ever need the attachment of like trying, to sell stuff to people. And at the end of the day, I know I am confident in my abilities to go out and make it in this life. Unfortunately for me I've been able to do that in the world and help people anyway.

12:08 That was a very long winded opening. Man I'm already at 12 minutes into opening. So this video, I don't know how long it's going to be. I put together slides to show you. And again, at the end of the day, i don' have all the answers. so i'm not telling you with 100% certainty that what i am presenting to you is the right answer. But I can say with pretty good certainty based on everything that I've researched, based everything I know about the peptide world, that is best foot for it. and I dont want this to a piece of content that gets shared. It's like, oh this person debates this that's so silly, thats so nonsensical. If you look at everyone in the Peptide World, we're like .01% of humanity.

12:40 that is in the peptide world and so like if you're trying to get more peptides to people out there why would you fight each other you know it's kind of like all of the people in The Peptide World should be together and like hey like this is a movement we should push it forward unfortunately when money's involved that's not the case so all the People in Peptide should unite of course we'll have the differences of opinion about stuff but ultimately it is kind like us in peptid world versus big pharma and the rest of What do they say?

13:10 A house divided against itself cannot stand. The way that you bring down unity within the peptide world to help peptid information get out is you just make in-fighting amongst the people that do it. And you have so much in fighting because that's what people do because they fall prey to normal human desires like greed and pride and everything else. Then you a fragmented market to which it will never compete with the People that run the planet. Again, me saying this is probably why I don't have any social media presence because I say things like this. So again, Super long-winded rant. Forgive me for that. I'm not mad or anything like that, it just sucks because I see so much of this and I really truly desire to help the market.

13:45 And when I say confusion and fear in the markets, It kind of upsets me to see that that's what's happening when we're really talking about something that only benefits humanity. Strap in, we're going to talk about this today. I'm going go through it scientifically. And I'll show you some of the reports and then hopefully you can share this around. You can show it with friends or family, or it can be a good piece for you to like kind of rest and, you know, rest in comfort and say like, okay, if I order the Globeland or I ordered the Cloblend, I am not throwing my hard earned money down the drain. So that's it. As always, check out the email list. Like I said, I've been kicked off every social media platform at this point.

14:17 If you want to stay in touch with me, the emails list is the best place to be. And obviously too, if you to join me inside my private group, everyone's like, you know, go on Rumble, going to school inside of my group. I can do whatever I want. So I talk about things that won't get censored. I can do things that I cant do publicly on social media anymore. Again, the group is 99 bucks a month. It's amazing. There's over 200 people in there already. Has only been up for like 45 days now. And so you can cancel anytime. You can come in. If you don't like it, you could always leave after the first month when you pay. But I just say that to say, that's the place where I operate.

14:49 That's a place that I prioritize like answering questions, because I get so many questions per day. I focus on the people that are inside my group, I focused on serving those people and creating an amazing community that is not based in me being the hero or the guru. It's about the community of people who come together and we all learn and benefit from being around each other. Okay, I promise. Now to the slides, let's get into it. Glow or clow, are they garbage? We're gonna find out today. All right, glow and clowe, Are they Garbage? Today we are going to do a scientific rebuttal addressing concerns obviously about GHK, KPV, TB 500 and BPC 157 and whether or not they are stable in a

15:22 combined solution. Again, this is strictly education-based. I reserve the possibility that everything I could say is wrong. However, I don't believe that to be true based on all the research that I've done in practice and in theory. What I wanna do in this video is I'm gonna walk through some of the myths around how it could potentially be true. I think the best way to make an argument for something is to give credence to the other side of argument and actually explain why that wouldn't be truth. So you guys today, like I said, I almost went to law school. You guys there are the jury and I want to be presenting one side to this argument, and decide for yourself.

15:56 Let's look at the first myth, copper coordination disruption and whether or not it's fragile. Basically the claim is that GHK is fragile because copper coordination can be disrupted when mixed with other peptides leading to copper dissociation and loss of efficacy. Now, we have real copper stripping risks. So strong chelators like EDTA and citrate and high dose of sorbate. This is why you don't mix vitamin C with GH KCU because it can strip the copper. Also, thiol compounds like glutathione, this is also why you don't see blends of glutothione and GHK, because this would happen.

16:28 How cool would it if you could inject GHk and glutethione together? You could get two of the worst shots out of way in one shot. However, I don' recommend people mix glutithione with GH K. It will go bad, it will not work. Also, two extreme pH conditions we're going to talk about. And again, so let's put this in perspective. For this claim to hold weight, copper would need to disassociate from the GHK and either remain free in solution or be captured by a competing ligand in the same vial. However, this scenario requires specific chemical conditions that simply aren't present in standard peptide formulations.

17:01 And I also want you to know that in this video, I'm saying some weird chemical words. Do not feel like you have to understand them. Just hang with me. And again, i'm not a chemist. I don't ever claim to be a Chemist, but let's continue. GHK binds to copper with exceptionally high affinity and this type binding is the fundamental property that makes the molecule relevant to our biology. It's what works in our body to help us get the desired outcome. Published thermodynamic measurements demonstrate very low dissociation constants at a physiologic pH, indicating stable complex formulation under normal

17:33 conditions for the purpose of what we're talking about. Also too, when we look at the TB 500 fragment reality, the active sequence of TB500 lacks classic high affinity copper chelating motifs. There are no cysteine thials and no multi-histidine clusters, which means that they're not going to interact with each other to denature. Basically, copper loss is driven by chelators, thiols, and extreme pH, not simply by being another peptide in bacteriostatic water. Oh, hit the wrong arrow. Now, let's talk about the pH discussion and incompatibility.

18:06 The claim is that different pH stability windows mean the blend forces a compromise, pushing peptides into degradation zones to which they are not at the proper pH, to wish they will now no longer work as intended because they rapidly break down. Now for this to occur, the mixtures pH would need to drift into zones where one peptide degrades quickly, which is either strongly acidic or strongly base conditions, or where GHKCU disassociates from the copper. However, when we look at studies, multiple stability studies place GH KCU's optimal zone around physiologic pH, which is around 6.5 to 7.50. Actually,

18:40 in the research that I found, it was actually stable from four to seven point five. Now, does that mean it's the best at four or the fastest 7 point 5? No, but it stable. And again, the degradation warning would come in when it is below that or when is above that. And so why this claim fails is the bacteriostatic water is neither strongly acidic nor basic and peptides themselves are not powerful buffers. You don't magically create pH extremes by dissolving a few milligrams of peptide into sterile water. We're not changing the pH too much outside of those ranges to cause them to become unstable.

19:15 So this is why the PH, Compatibility myth does not hold true because even with all those things, even every peptide plus the bacteriostatic water, we are still in a physiologic pH where all of those peptides have been shown to operate as normal. Most peptid pH instability arises during formulations when manufacturers add acids, bases, buffers, or excipients, not when combining peptides and sterile water at their natural pH. This is why we don't add vitamin C into this blend because then it would cause it to not work properly because it will fall outside those ranges.

19:48 Different pH windows sound scientific, but without added acids or bases or chelators, the solution remains near physiologic pH, exactly where GHKCU demonstrates maximum stability. I'm just giving you what I have researched and what know, now whether or not that's true or you should go decide for yourself. Let's look at this molecular crowding and aggregation risk. The aggregating argument is that combining multiple peptides increases molecular crowdings, which pushes peptide into self-association and aggregate territories

20:19 that compromise stability. Now, when this happens, it's actually sequence dependent. Aggregation risk is highly sequence and condition dependent driven by hydrophobicity, secondary structure propensity, concentration, salt content, agitation, and temperature. For instance, if you were to mix GHK with terzapotide, you would have a problem. Terzapatide I forget exactly how many, It's probably over 50 amino acids long. much more fragile, when you put that with another amino acid sequence, it now causes it to aggregate in a lot of cases to which it would denature and no

20:54 longer be held together in that chain. So small, highly water-soluble peptides like GHKCU and TB500 are generally less aggregation prone than larger, more hydrophobic peptide like trisapatite, like retitrutide, these longer ones. What actually drives peptide aggregation is one concentration. High peptides concentrations increase collision frequency and aggregated probability. Temperature cycling, again repeated free stall cycles and elevated temperatures promote structural changes. This is why you don't want the peptids to get too hot and hot I really mean like above 130-140 degrees Fahrenheit.

21:30 Usually below that, if they're not mixed yet, they are fine. Obviously if there mixed, you want to keep them refrigerated. But this is also why I don't like to freeze peptides long-term, because if you're freezing them and thawing them, that could also potentially affect the molecules, so you are always fine to refrigerate them. And then physical stress, agitation, violently shaking, and air-liquid interfaces accelerate aggregation events. When we look at aggregations, it is a legitimate category of risk. I'm not saying it's a risk, but again it why we don' have trisapatite Mixed with Tessamerelin, mixed with BPC all in the same syringe, but it is not automatic.

22:00 There are different ones that do different things together. It's primarily driven by high concentration combined with temperature stress, agitation, and specific sequence properties. And the best practice is to store cold, minimize handing, avoid agitations, use sterile technique. Now, let's look at Fenton chemistry and oxidative damage concerns. A common concern is that copper in GHKCU causes fentanyl-like oxidative chemistry generating reactive oxygen species that could degrade co-formulated peptides through oxidation of susceptible amino acid revenues.

22:31 Now, what that would mean is the pro-oxidant risk requires appreciable free copper plus oxidant chemistry targeting susceptible residues And in GHKCU copper is tightly chelated and sources note pro-oxidant risk tied dissociation to pH extremes which are below 4 or above 9, which is not happening in a case when we mix it with bacteriostatic water. Realistic GH KCU redox behavior involves specific biological thiols like glutathione, not random peptides nearby. The most oxidation prone amino acid residues are cysteine, which are thiol groups like glutathione, methionine which is thioether groups,

23:07 and to a lesser extent histidine tryptophan and tyrosine and these residue serve as primary targets for reactive oxidant species generated by free copper. The TB500 active fragment lacks cysteine and methionine residues and the amino acids most vulnerable to oxidative attack. This absence significantly weakens the oxidator damage narrative for this specific peptide combination that we're talking about. Basically all of that means that oxidation risk is primarily about free copper in the wrong chemical environment. If we maintain a normal range of pH and avoid introducing chelators or thyls into the bio and oxidated chemistry scenario now loses its mechanistic foundation.

23:43 There's also this co-lyophilization risk assessment. Basically, people would argue that colyphilisation of multiple peptides in the same vial is inherently riskier because different peptide have different drying characteristics, potentially leaving uneven residual moisture or creating microenvironments that accelerate chemical breakdown. However, colysation can indeed be more complex than a single ingredient freeze-drying from a pharmaceutical manufacturing perspective. And this is not acknowledged in pharmaceutical literature.

24:13 But the critical question concerns stability after the vial already exists. If a blend is manufactured correctly with proper lyophilization protocols, the major stability drivers remain consistent. As long as we maintain dry conditions, cold temperatures, and protection from light overexposure, general peptide handling guidance supports long-term probability in properly lyophyllized form under appropriate storage conditions. And again, When we look at that, we have residual moisture content. We want to properly lyophilize peptides. They should have less than 3% residual moister.

24:44 Again, you're not going to see that in any peptide if they're made with any sort of integrity. Obviously, storage conditions. we want them to be refrigerated. Want to protect from light. obviously want the seal protected to prevent moisture from getting in. And then we wanted to maintain sterility. So co-lyophilization is a manufacturing quality question, not a chemically impossible question. This really goes to the quality of the manufacturing, NOT the possibility of these existing alongside each other. And if the vial was properly lyopholized and stored under appropriate dry cold conditions, stability expectations align with general peptide storage questions.

25:18 Now, let's look at correlation versus causation. When we look a common Arguments suggest that because pharmaceutical companies avoid multi API injectables, which is just multi active pharmaceutical ingredient injectibles, peptide blends must be inherently unstable. This inference commits a fundamental logical error conflating regulatory and manufacturing complexity with chemical incompatibility. I would just point to the example that semaglutide and coagulantide are actually made in the same pen. Now, yes, they are in different chambers inside that pin, but they go into the same injection.

25:52 And again, this is talking about something that is not even these molecules we're talking, so it's really not relevant to the argument here today. However, there is evidence to show that in pharmaceutical preparations they do this. It's just not common practice because again pharmaceutical practice is way behind where a lot of the research world is anyway. The pharmaceutical industry's reluctance stems from exponentially increased regulatory, analytical and manufacturing complexity, not from insurmountable chemical instability. Multi-API products require extensive stability testing protocols, comprehensive impurity profiling, leachables and extractables analysis,

26:30 compatibility studies across components and validated analytical assays for each ingredient. Again, this is much more of a regulatory burden than it is a chemical one. Each additional API multiplies validation requirements. So imagine if you have four APIs going into the same thing, imagine all of the legal and regulatory hurdles that a company would have to go over to make these. And again, why would you even do that when you can't make money off of Glow or Clo because they're not really patentable ingredients. All of those are, let me think, Yeah, pretty much naturally in the human body to which you cannot make them.

27:04 So each additional API obviously multiplies this risk, making single API products far more economically attractive. Pharmaceutical formulation conservatism reflects risk management and economic optimization, not fundamental chemical incompatibility. Major peptide suppliers consistently provide stability guidance indicating the peptides solutions have limited refrigerated stability and benefit from aliquoting and freezing to minimize handling exposure. And these are practical handling considerations that apply equally to single peptid and multi-peptide formulations.

27:34 Pharma and Big Pharmas reluctance to provide expensive to validate proves that this is expensive validate not chemically incompatible. Again, it's not a chemical equation. It is an economic one. And then lastly, we have the absence of evidence argument. Now, what does this mean? People that would criticize the blends correctly note that there's no long-term peer reviewed stability studies specifically examining this exact three peptide combination. However, We have lots of stability tatties of purity testing from labs that show that they are.

28:04 Anyway, this represents the most intellectually honest challenge. Show me the data. Again, I'm a person that says show me data, right? Again we acknowledge the frame, the absence of a specific tribal instability paper means we shouldn't claim indefinite shelf life or stability under all conditions. However, a leap from no specific study to therefore being unstable represents invalid reasoning. And especially if we are looking at studies that someone searched with AI that are actually hallucinated to which we can't find the reference for them. But then we possess extensive general peptide stability knowledge, well characterized GHKCU pH stability boundaries and documented conditions promoting degradation.

28:38 So this provides frameworks. What do we know? Liophilized peptides demonstrate extended stability, reconstituted solutions have shorter stability windows, usually of I would say up to three to six months. If they are stored properly, obviously there's going to be some degradation and freeze-thaw cycle should be minimized. For GHKU's parameters, pH stability boundaries are well characterized. Conditions promoting copper dissociation and oxidation are documented. And then for the pH extremes, strong key letters, thiol compounds, heat, light exposure, and contamination, all controllable variables,

29:10 they are not inevitable consequences of mixing the peptides, meaning that just by mixing peptide, we do not magically have these reactions that make them unstable. Now, if we looked at this for the peptides to be unstable, what I said is, okay, these all have to true. We have that pH extremes, so we have a solution pH push to acidic below four or basic which is above nine ranges, conditions that promote copper dissociation and peptide hydrolysis, which we do not. We would have to have strong chelator introduction. The presidents of high affinity copper cheleters like EDTA, citrate, high dose vitamin C that compete for copper binding,

29:46 we do not in this case. We have have thiol and redox chemistry, the introduction of thiocompounds like glutathione or conditions promoting copper catalyzed oxidation reactions, We do NOT in the case Environmental stress, we'd have to have exposure to heat, UV visible light, or mechanical agitation that accelerates degradation pathways. In most cases, as long as the peptide is made and has a good chain of custody, until it gets to you, you do not have this. And then we have contamination, microbial contamination repeated viral puncturing or improper storage, introducing degradation catalysts.

30:17 in most case, if you're doing the right thing, As taught by great people out there in the world, We do NOT have THIS. Now what is the conclusion? None of these failure modes occur because we mix the peptides, meaning that because, we mixed the peptides it does not mean we have these things that are causing them to be degraded. They are environmental handling variables that apply equally to single peptide and multi-peptide formulations. Again, proper storage, using bacteriostatic water, and then doing all the best practices from a handling standpoint. The peptide blend stability argument fails on mechanistic grounds without specific chemical incompatibilities or environmental stressors like the unstable

30:54 blend claim lacks scientific foundation and responsible stability claims should be bounded by established peptide storage principles not dismissed as impossible. And again, I think a lot of cases we're just talking about fodder for social media. Now, what I promise to do is let's look at some reports from various vendors slash testing companies that make their money doing this. I want to frame this in the context that all a testing company really has is trust.

31:24 I mean, I guess all the peptide really company really has is trust, right? This whole industry is stressed. My job is to actually build trust with you. If there's one job, like if someone asked me, what's my role in society, Hunter, it would be to build with people. The more trust I build, with your guys watching this, the more successful I'll be. Hopefully the most successful you will be, so my job to support trust. Everything that I do is on building trust my audience. Fortunately, we live in a world where different information systems allow me to do that at scale.

31:54 Similarly, all a peptide lab like Genoshek, like Chromate, we're going to look at some of these in a second, All they have is trust. And so if it were to come out that these people were lying, their whole business would collapse. A lot of people have pretty big businesses, if I had to guess and venture, just knowing the volume that they do. So when I say that, We either have to philosophically, from an argument standpoint, Either glow in color garbage and they don't work or all of these places

32:25 are lying. And I have a hard time believing if I'm again doing Occam's razor that all these place have some grand conspiracy to lie. It just doesn't make sense to them. that glow and glow magically work into fake results to show that. But anyway, let's get into the results and I'm going to walk you through. The first one is a 21 day degradation test. And if you're watching the video, hopefully you can see this. If you listen to the podcast, just listen So this is Janashik. What they have is a 21-day degradation test, meaning that they've mixed the clove land in bacteriostatic water and they measured it at day seven,

33:02 day 14, and day 21. And what they did is they measure the presence of each of those peptides at each interval and then showed how much was in the vial. So let's look at GHK. In the initial pre-mixed vial, meaning before it was mixed with bacteriostatic water, there was 56.4 milligrams of GH K in the bottle. Day seven, or day seven there is 56 .44. day 14 there's 56 point 41 and day 21 there 55.05. Now the degradation in milligrams means that over 21 days, There was a 1.39 milligram loss of G H K and the vile, which was 2.46%, which we will see, I will say tracks normally with the degree degradation over time.

33:40 Over time, you can expect your peptides to agree by that amount. TB 500, initially there was 10.36 milligrams in the bottle. Then we had 10 point 21 milligrams tested, then we have 10 0.20 milligrams test at day 14, and then 10 .01 tested at Day 21. Meaning that over a 21 day period, we add 0 .36mg lost of TB500 due to degradation, which was 3.48%. Again, tracks with what we would expect. Not to zero, meaning that there's still TB-500 in the bile. Meaning that it's stable.

34:10 BPC-157, we had 12 mg to start. Day 7, there was 11.97. day 14, 11,96. 21,11,69. We had 0.31 mg loss of Bpc. 2.62% degradation, again, tracks with what we would expect. Lastly kpb 11.25 milligrams in the bottle day 7 111 milligrams day 14 11 point zero nine day 21 10 point eight seven So ultimately over 21 days there was a point three eight milligram loss of kbb Meaning that we lost three point.

34:44 Three eight percent of the k.p.b. So on the high end we Lost three four eight on a low end which ironically, the lowest one was GHK, meaning that it was the least amount of degradation was from the GHk, which is kind of the debate here. It was 2.46%. And again, yes, there's degradation, but that happens, right? If you get a fruit the day that you pluck it from a tree, today, 21, it's not going to be as fresh, And so there is a limited life of peptides.

35:15 Ultimately, if we kept tracking this over three months, six months we would continue to see degradation. But what we don't see is that it completely disappears the moment that we mix it. And this is going to be the most important one because obviously this talking about mixing. So the moments you mix with bacteriostatic water, what's happening? What we see over a 21 day period, there's normal degradation that would fall in line with pretty much any peptide that you're going have. I would say that if you were to take any of these vials that were a single vial, like a signal vile of GHK, single-vial of KPB, and did the same test, you would probably see about the degradation in almost all cases.

35:47 Now, Let's move to another one. This is from Chromate. this is just a purity test. It was tested before. And what I wanna show you here, obviously it shows on there, and again, if you're watching this, how much of each is based on the specification and the result once they tested it, everything came back fritty doggone close within a few percentage points. and then the purity was 99.801%. And then you see here down on a graph, what that's testing for is each different compound to show up. We see the GHK, we see that TB 500, the BPC, and the KPV all on there.

36:20 Talk about that on the next one. That was a Globlend, same thing with the GloBlend. So we that everything tested back, it conforms within what it was, a little bit of variation that is not uncommon to see slight underfill or slight overfill. Obviously we don't want that to be too far away. But again, when you're making thousands and thousands of bottles as a manufacturer, It is likely that you will have some slight variation, just like in a bag of chips. Sometimes there's a little bit more, sometimes there is a bit less. It's hard to hit specifically perfect every time. People like to complain about this.

36:51 What they don't complain is if you get a bag of chips and some are slightly overfilled, some slightly underfilled. But the calories say the same on the bag. Obviously each bag a chips is going to actually have a different amount of calories if we were to measure it chemically. Within a range we know that it's going Very similar to peptides. Obviously, it's a nuanced conversation, right? It's not the same thing, but we see this. So again, we say here this is a cloblend, everything comes back, purity is 99.9%. And again so either these people are lying or this coming back and it is real test that shows real things that are measurable based on the machines that they have.

37:24 Now this one here, you see it is the clow blend. So it's got BPC, TB 500, KPB and GHK. Each one has the content amount relatively within a range. The purity was 99.8%. And what's interesting about this is if we can zoom in and you can see this on the video, we have GHk being operated here. And I like this mass spec report because it shows the actual peptide on graph.

37:54 right here. And then we have KPV and then have TB 500 and we had BP 157 showing up on there. What that means is that they are showing on the test. So they do contain it. Now again, these are from different labs. I had three different lab on here, so either all of those labs are lying or this test is what it says it is, meaning that each peptide is in the bottle and it works there Again, I don't have a dog in the fight. I'm gonna continue to use glow and clow as I see fit on myself and continue recommend it to people.

38:25 You can kind of take from this what you want. And I think that was the last slide. So that is it for the slides. I'm of the opinion that they are very efficacious and that do what they say they do. We have lots of data to back that up, and I would rely mostly, if anything, say everything that I said was false in the presentation, which is not, according to me, is my best foot forward, like I've said. But when we look at those lab tests, either there's some grand conspiracy that all these labs are just faking the glow and glow reports,

38:55 or they actually are stable and we were actually seeing them work well. Again, anecdotally speaking, I have used them myself. I've witnessed other people use them that have gotten good results. And I'm not going to say that they're 100% there because obviously we do see some degradation over time when we use it. However, if we're using them within the window of, you know, 30 to 60 days, which most people are using, then you should be fine. enlightening to you, I know is a little bit more chemically complex and I do not claim to be a chemist. There are way smarter peptide chemists out there than me.

39:26 Believe me, not even a peptid chemis to begin with. I think I just do a good job of contextualizing this information and hopefully providing it in a way to, you that is easy to digest and understand so that you can make your own informed, educated decisions in the marketplace going forward. And whether that's supporting me supporting someone else doesn't matter to me I, just want you to feel empowered with information. Now, if there is a rebuttal to this, I would be more than happy to see the argument. So again, not someone that says I have absolute truth, because I definitely don't.

40:00 I am just doing my best attempt at getting to the absolute Truth. And when I dig into everything, this is what comes back to me through the research that I did and obviously through a personal experience I've had with myself and clients. But thank you guys so much. It is truly a blessing for me as I get to do this like I spent two ish, two and a half hours researching this today, putting together the slides and doing it. And it was kind of one of those things that it stopped my normal flow of videos because I had other stuff I was working on. It's like, you know what? I need to sit down today and do this and to get this knocked out because it's something that I know people are afraid of and I don't want there to be fear

40:30 in the marketplace. Now that doesn't mean that there can't be healthy debates about this stuff, but I want people to operating from a place of fear and confusion. We just don't need to do that. Like I said, a house divided against itself cannot stand. The more infighting that there is in the peptide world, the less peptides get out to the masses to help people. And I think something like the Glow-in-the-Clo blend, what it does is it helps people have more convenience around these peptids. I'm not opposed to using them in isolation. Obviously I do it all the time. But anyway, all that to say, When we have infighting inside the peptide world, it just makes everyone look bad, and then it stifles the propagation of

41:14 peptides to the masses, which is one of my missions in life because I see the benefits of them and I can see how beneficial it is to people's health and what it can do. And we don't need to argue against each other inside that 0.01% of humanity that we are. We need that number from 0,01 to maybe 2%. And maybe over the course of my lifetime, that can be something that happened as humanity continues to evolve, as information continues disseminate and get out there and people become more and more interested in living a healthy life as it seems like the environment becomes less favorable to people living healthy.

41:44 But thank you guys so much. I always have the best audience in the world. And whether you disagree with this, agree with, this is totally fine. Again, I welcome healthy disagreement. Not someone that like, like is against that. want to be critiqued and held to a high standard because I want my content, to be the highest standard out there. So thank you guys so much. I love each and every one of you. Whatever shape or form that you support me, being on my email list, be in my group, using my codes at places, sharing this with friends and family, that is the ultimate form of your thanks to me.

42:15 Thank you, guys, for that. It's a blessing to do what I do. Hopefully that comes through in the content that I prepare because I'm so passionate about this and I loved it so, much so thank, you to get to this dream come true for me and hopefully along the way it makes your life better in some shape of form. That's it for this one. I will see you in the next one and I hope you have an awesome day wherever you're at. See ya.