peptide calculator is wrong

so i've noticed many people get referred to http://peptidecalculator.com/calculator.php to calculate dosage for peptides. as far as i can tell there is a fundamental flaw in the calculation; the calculator does not take into account the volume of the peptide.

let's say you have 5mg of peptide and you add 5cc of water, making a solution of water and peptide. the solution will be greater than 5cc because the 5mg of peptide must displace a certian volume of water. if something has a mass (5mg in this example) then it must have a volume.

don't believe me? try this; measure 200ml water, then add 50g sugar to the water to make a solution. now measure the volume of solution. it should be around 250ml, because the sugar takes up space.

so, if we were to pretend for a minute that we didn't measure the volume of the solution after the sugar was added to the water, and assume that the amount of solvent (water) and solution are the same (pretending that sugar does not take up space), and then try to calculate the amount of sugar in 20ml of solution, you would be left with 5 grams of sugar. right?

NO. THAT IS WRONG.

20ml of 250ml is 8%. 8% of 50g sugar is 4g. NOT 5g.

to get an accurate dose you need to either know the amount of bac water your peptide displaces, OR measure the volume of solution (assuming you know how much peptide you have). i don't know about y'all, but i'd rather measure the volume of solution.


the calculator will only give an accurate measurement if you put in the total volume of the solution where it says "Bacteriostatic water"


so, if you've been following the calculator and basing your dosages purely on what it says, you're probable shorting your self. just a heads up.

Your making this way more difficult than it needs to be.... over thinking leads to compulsions that will simply make your life miserable.

I see both sides of this. I agree with Pittsburgh.... is it really that important? On the other hand some of us, me included, can be anal about precision. If the calculator can be fixed to take that into account, well then why not change the calculations to be totally accurate?

I think Slappy should contact the calculator author, and point this out. They do have contact info.

Pittsburgh63 said:

Your making this way more difficult than it needs to be.... over thinking leads to compulsions that will simply make your life miserable.

Click to expand...

^lol. yeah, you are right.


but the calculator is wrong. all i really want to know is, when i mix 5cc with 5mg ghrp2 what is the total volume of the solution.

jerseydevil said:

I think Slappy should contact the calculator author, and point this out. They do have contact info.

Click to expand...

i'm on it brotha

The calculator is good enough to use...the amount of "displacement" as you called it is like taking the ester weight of testosterone in to account for dosing. Like...hey my prop is only 83.72 mg so I need to pin 1.19445772 mls to get my 100mg per day.

ok, i see your point. i might be splitting hairs, but if accuracy doesn't matter then why measure your dose at all? just load it up and shoot it. right? (i know that's not what you're saying Pitt)

i just see room for improvement. i emailed them and will report back what they have to say. i don't think i'm the first person to notice this.

http://anabolicsteroidforums.com/sh...hrp-cjc-**BLENDS**-review?highlight=ghrp6/cjc

this is what originally got my OCD going. 5mg GHRP-6 and 5mg CJC-1295 reconstituted with 4ml because 5ml wouldn't fit.

this looks like a bad ass product that i would love to run for 6-8 months. if the measurements are consistently off for that amount of time you are either wasting product (and money) or under dosing.

looks like i'll be getting some of this and reporting back. stay tuned. . .

Pittsburgh63 said:

The calculator is good enough to use...the amount of "displacement" as you called it is like taking the ester weight of testosterone in to account for dosing. Like...hey my prop is only 83.72 mg so I need to pin 1.19445772 mls to get my 100mg per day.

Click to expand...

Being off by less then 17mg a day does sound anal.... but, that's 114mg a week and 1,140mg after 10 weeks. That equates to more then a whole vial less during a typical cycle. In my view that is fairly significant. I think Slappy's point is just if the author of that program can include displacement in his calculation, then why not? If he can't no big deal, but it is worth noting.

jerseydevil said:

Being off by less then 17mg a day does sound anal.... but, that's 114mg a week and 1,140mg after 10 weeks. That equates to more then a whole vial less during a typical cycle. In my view that is fairly significant. I think Slappy's point is just if the author of that program can include displacement in his calculation, then why not? If he can't no big deal, but it is worth noting.

Click to expand...

Don't forget the amount of oil that remains in the pin...lol.

Damn! I knew I was missing something

Pittsburgh63 said:

Don't forget the amount of oil that remains in the pin...lol.

Click to expand...

yes. that is uncontrollable loss. and that's the damn needles fault.

damn stingy needles.