What did @peptokprice actually say?
The creator walked through a list of peptides that, in their words, "don't reconstitute properly with BAC water" and offered solvent alternatives for each. Specifically, they claimed ARA 290 needs phosphate buffered saline, AOD 9604 works best with a 2.4 mL BAC water to 0.6 mL acetic acid split, IGF-1 LR3 needs roughly a one-to-one acetic acid and BAC water ratio, kisspeptin does better with larger BAC water volumes (around 3 mL), and tesamorelin ("tessa") gels when exposed to repeated temperature swings. They also flagged SLU-PP-332 and dihexa as compounds requiring DMSO due to poor water solubility.
Critically, the creator framed everything as "anecdotal experience" and explicitly said so. That framing matters. This is not a clinician giving protocol guidance. It is a hobbyist sharing trial-and-error observations from what they call the "research space," which is an open reference to gray-market peptide use.
Does the science back this up?
Partially, and the parts that do check out are grounded in basic peptide chemistry, not clinical trial data. The solubility behavior of these compounds is not mysterious.
ARA 290 is an erythropoietin-derived peptide studied in peer-reviewed settings. Research by Brines et al. (2014, Molecular Medicine) confirms it is poorly soluble in standard aqueous solutions at physiological pH and that PBS is a standard reconstitution vehicle in experimental protocols. That part is accurate.
Acetic acid as a co-solvent for acidic peptides like IGF-1 LR3 is well-documented. A review by Kamerzell et al. (2011, Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews) covers how low-pH environments stabilize certain peptide structures by preventing aggregation. The one-to-one ratio the creator mentions is not from any published protocol, but the chemistry rationale is sound.
Tesamorelin gelling under thermal cycling is real. The FDA-approved prescribing information for Egrifta (tesamorelin) specifically warns against temperature extremes and repeated freeze-thaw cycles, citing peptide aggregation as the mechanism.
DMSO for SLU-PP-332 and dihexa aligns with how these compounds are handled in preclinical research settings, where water solubility is genuinely limited.
What did they get wrong (or right)?
The creator got the broad strokes right on most compounds, but the specific ratios they give for AOD 9604 and IGF-1 LR3 have no published basis. That does not make them wrong, but presenting precise numbers ("2.4 mLs of BAC water and 0.6 mL of acetic acid") gives the impression of calibrated precision when these are personal guesses that worked for them.
The AOD 9604 naming is worth flagging. The creator says "AOD 9064" at one point, likely a slip. The compound is AOD 9604, a C-terminal fragment of human growth hormone. Published solubility data for this specific compound is thin in open literature, and most reconstitution advice circulating online is community-generated, not clinician-validated.
The kisspeptin advice, "add as much BAC water as you can, typically 3 mL," is vague and not tied to any solubility rationale. Kisspeptin-10 and kisspeptin-54 have different solubility profiles. Treating them as a single compound with one approach is an oversimplification.
On the other hand, the tesamorelin temperature warning is genuinely useful and aligns with the prescribing literature. Credit where it is due.
What should you actually know?
Reconstitution chemistry is not trivial, and this video captures something that formal prescribing literature often ignores: peptides sold outside the pharmaceutical supply chain are handled by people with no formulation training, using community heuristics. That gap is real and worth acknowledging.
But that gap is also exactly why this advice carries risk. Acetic acid concentration matters significantly. The creator does not specify what concentration of acetic acid they are using. Glacial acetic acid versus a 0.1% solution versus a 1% solution will produce very different results and different pH environments inside the final solution. pH affects both peptide stability and injection site safety.
DMSO is a penetration enhancer with its own toxicity profile and is not appropriate for injection without specific pharmaceutical-grade preparation. The creator says to "avoid" these compounds rather than inject them in DMSO, which is the right call, but the framing is casual about a genuinely hazardous solvent.
Anyone using peptide therapy should be doing so through a licensed prescriber with access to compounded formulations prepared by a registered 503A or 503B pharmacy, where reconstitution is handled under sterile conditions. Community reconstitution tips, however chemically plausible, are not a substitute for that.