390120
GLP-1 Apprentice
I’m interested to hear about people’s experiences with injecting SLU-PP-332
Effects noticable?
Effects noticable?
Experiences with SLU-PP-332 (injectable)
- Thread starter 390120
- Start date
- Status
FartfulCodger
GLP-1 Enthusiast
Curious to hear if you were able to start yet. How did you reconstitute?Wardor said:
Of all the peptide choices for weight loss, why did you decide on this one? STG won't even let it be discussed on their channels and DMSO, the recommended reconstitution agent, is an industrial solvent. There is also recent research that points to SLUPP as an angiogenitor.
marraqy
GLP-1 Apprentice
Been researching SLU-PP-332 for a while now and something keeps bothering me after reading so many experience reports.
The fatigue crash people describe, that heavy wipeout feeling by end of day, doesn't really match what SLU-PP-332 should be doing. It works through ERRa, reprogramming muscle fibers at the gene level toward oxidative metabolism. It shouldn't be hitting your energy system like a truck acutely, it's a slow transcription-level shift, not an acute metabolic stressor.
AICAR though? That's AMPK activation, which literally forces the body into a simulated energy deficit state. The fatigue, heavy legs, crash by evening, that's textbook AICAR. The profiles are just too different to overlap by coincidence.
I genuinely wonder if some of what's circulating as SLU-PP-332 is actually AICAR, or a mix of both. The endurance benefit would still show up so most people wouldn't notice the difference or question it.
Anyone actually had their batch tested by a third party? The pattern of side effects reported here is too consistent to ignore.
The fatigue crash people describe, that heavy wipeout feeling by end of day, doesn't really match what SLU-PP-332 should be doing. It works through ERRa, reprogramming muscle fibers at the gene level toward oxidative metabolism. It shouldn't be hitting your energy system like a truck acutely, it's a slow transcription-level shift, not an acute metabolic stressor.
AICAR though? That's AMPK activation, which literally forces the body into a simulated energy deficit state. The fatigue, heavy legs, crash by evening, that's textbook AICAR. The profiles are just too different to overlap by coincidence.
I genuinely wonder if some of what's circulating as SLU-PP-332 is actually AICAR, or a mix of both. The endurance benefit would still show up so most people wouldn't notice the difference or question it.
Anyone actually had their batch tested by a third party? The pattern of side effects reported here is too consistent to ignore.
I have been using SLU-PP-332 oral drops for over a month and only noticed a slight placebo-like improvement in my cardio. Then I got 20 vials of the injectable version and WOW . It really is ' exercise in a bottle .'I started with 250 mcg and my heart rate jumped from about 74 to 101 bpm for around 15 minutes ( I did not expect that at all ). After that, my heart rate went from 82 up to 96 in waves, happening 3–4 times over the next 1.5 hours. I guess this kind of spike can happen the first few times you inject it. Not sure if I enjoyed playing with it, lol. maybe ill drop to 100mcg next time...390120 said:
I've researched this and you may be on to something. I found that SLU-PP-332 is NOT orally bioavailable. The guy who synthesized it actually made a variation called SLU-PP-915 that is supposed to overcome this problem. It's still in research, but it's promising.DjJoshua said:
The injectable version is supposed to be reconstituted with a solvent of DMSO or PEG400, or both, which scared me away from it.
JoonyO
GLP-1爱好者
- Member Since
- Oct 26, 2025
- Posts
- 5
- Likes Received
- 0
So after reconning a vial from a kit I bought last Oct, the stuff never fully "dissolved" in the BAC water. I followed a peptide site's ( don't recall which one now ) recommendation for reconning it-Bac water-just like most peps. Ugh. Of course someone had to quip, " you're too stupid to use it if you don't know how to properly recon it"...something along those lines.Chili777 said:
. I'd researched it but apparently not enough to learn that I wasn't the only one having issues. My supplier said use acetic acid. Others said DMSO. I just keep the others in the freezer till I am confident about it. YMMV
DunningKruger
GLP-1 Enthusiast
I'm hearing transdermal (with DMSO as the carrier) is the way to go with SLUPP. It's highly hydrophobic and will precipitate if you attempt to mix it with bac water. I definitely wouldn't inject it.
I've heard claims that oral has 40% bioavailability, which if true isn't terrible, but there are better options...like actual exercise.
I've heard claims that oral has 40% bioavailability, which if true isn't terrible, but there are better options...like actual exercise.
The issue with DMSO is that it's an industrial solvent. It will take everything in that vial, whatever it is, and put it in your bloodstream topically. Doesn't matter what is it, it goes.DunningKruger said:I'm hearing transdermal (with DMSO as the carrier) is the way to go with SLUPP. It's highly hydrophobic and will precipitate if you attempt to mix it with bac water. I definitely wouldn't inject it.
I've heard claims that oral has 40% bioavailability, which if true isn't terrible, but there are better options...like actual exercise.
I did notice that there was small undissolved small specs in the vial and was wondering what would happen when I filter this ie what % of unmixed compound would I loose in the processes . I did bounce this info off of Grok ...JoonyO said:So after reconning a vial from a kit I bought last Oct, the stuff never fully "dissolved" in the BAC water. I followed a peptide site's ( don't recall which one now ) recommendation for reconning it-Bac water-just like most peps. Ugh. Of course someone had to quip, " you're too stupid to use it if you don't know how to properly recon it"...something along those lines.
Gork. typically under 5–10% total, often closer to 2–5% if the specs are truly “small”
Example:
If you reconstituted a 5 mg vial with 2 ml of solvent, and you use a 4 mm filter, you lose 0.07 ml → that’s only 3.5% of your total volume (and therefore ~3.5% of the dissolved peptide).
Overall realistic loss when the specs are small:
≈ 3–8% total (undissolved particles + hold-up volume).
Most people consider this negligible compared to the safety benefit of removing particles.
390120
GLP-1 Apprentice
I tried reconstituting multiple vials but I end up with a cloudy mess
I injected one sterile vial with 2mL bac water
Reconstituted the vial of SLU with 0.5mL DMSO
Draw the dmso and very very slowly one drop at a time and like 20 seconds wait after each drop with gentle swirling into the vial with 2mL bac as per reverse titration method and still, no luck
Wasted 5 vials like this and a hell of a lot of time
I injected one sterile vial with 2mL bac water
Reconstituted the vial of SLU with 0.5mL DMSO
Draw the dmso and very very slowly one drop at a time and like 20 seconds wait after each drop with gentle swirling into the vial with 2mL bac as per reverse titration method and still, no luck
Wasted 5 vials like this and a hell of a lot of time
Peptidesearch
GLP-1 Enthusiast
Janoshik Interview on SLU-PP-332 Vials not containing SLU after being lyophilized. [archived internal link]
View: https://youtu.be/y6bVs5CFdAE?t=1078
View: https://youtu.be/y6bVs5CFdAE?t=1078
lessthanhalf
GLP-1 Specialist
I did a bit of research on SLU and bam15 when I first saw them. Both are genuinely interesting , but I would argue nowhere near ready for human testing or experimentation yet, having only a few basic studies done in animal models, which I will admit sound interesting, but a very very long way away from safe to use in humans. They are both still being actively investigated, but I think they are more likely to focus on slu-pp-915 for better bioavailability. The way SLU works is interesting, but definitely not fully understood at this point. Estrogen related receptor science is quite new and unexpected effects are not unlikely.
The main problem I saw was dosing, the doses used in the mouse studies were 50mg/kg via ip injection, the extremely rough math translation is about 5mg/kg/dose in humans, or about 350mg/dose for a 70 kg human. The correct way to determine dosing is a dose ranging phase 1 study, so I am not suggesting anyone actually should use this to determine doses, but it does strongly indicate that most of the doses people have described using online are more likely placebo doses. The very rough calculation from mouse doses may not be correct but is not likely to be off by three orders of magnitude. The person who noted the increased heart rate from a microgram dose is no doubt observing a real effect, but injecting an interesting and maybe slightly dangerous drug is most certainly enough to generate an increase in heart rate without requiring any actual drug effect, this is not intended as a criticism, just my different interpretation of the same data. The problem with the doses required that I calculated which are similar for bam15, is that they are just a bit too expensive to be practical, even if they work and do not cause problems. Around $30-50 per gram in bulk ( not sterile ) . or around 10 doses for $30, and more expensive for the injectable versions.
Solubility is definitely an issue, it would require dissolving in DMSO or something similar first for oral or injectable use, bioavailability is not great but studies were done in rodents using oral dosing so some is absorbed, though they did pre dissolve it in solvents first before giving it orally. DMSO is not regarded as safe for injecting into humans, it probably will not kill you and they inject it into lab animals all the time and obviously do not believe it will stuff up their results, but not quite the same thing as safe.
The main problem I saw was dosing, the doses used in the mouse studies were 50mg/kg via ip injection, the extremely rough math translation is about 5mg/kg/dose in humans, or about 350mg/dose for a 70 kg human. The correct way to determine dosing is a dose ranging phase 1 study, so I am not suggesting anyone actually should use this to determine doses, but it does strongly indicate that most of the doses people have described using online are more likely placebo doses. The very rough calculation from mouse doses may not be correct but is not likely to be off by three orders of magnitude. The person who noted the increased heart rate from a microgram dose is no doubt observing a real effect, but injecting an interesting and maybe slightly dangerous drug is most certainly enough to generate an increase in heart rate without requiring any actual drug effect, this is not intended as a criticism, just my different interpretation of the same data. The problem with the doses required that I calculated which are similar for bam15, is that they are just a bit too expensive to be practical, even if they work and do not cause problems. Around $30-50 per gram in bulk ( not sterile ) . or around 10 doses for $30, and more expensive for the injectable versions.
Solubility is definitely an issue, it would require dissolving in DMSO or something similar first for oral or injectable use, bioavailability is not great but studies were done in rodents using oral dosing so some is absorbed, though they did pre dissolve it in solvents first before giving it orally. DMSO is not regarded as safe for injecting into humans, it probably will not kill you and they inject it into lab animals all the time and obviously do not believe it will stuff up their results, but not quite the same thing as safe.
- Status
