Post by: SarahVaughter on May 05, 2010, 06:40:17 AM
We have received the copper peptide facial masks. They are non-comedogenic.
We sell the GHK-Cu facial masks for just 3 dollars, and they are excellent after dermarolling the face with needles of any length. The facial mask is applied after dermarolling. When your face has dried, you can apply Infadolan ointment to selected spots. Our masks contain 2000 ppm GHK-Cu/a>. [url=http://www.owndoc.com/dermarolling/copper-peptides-for-dermarolling/]GHK-Cu is the best copper peptide (https://http://www.owndoc.com/pdf/Prezatide-copper-acetate-ghk-cu.pdf) for skin rejuvenation and collagen regeneration.
Buy our copper peptide facial mask (https://http://shop.owndoc.com/p-173/copper-peptide-facial-mask.html)
<strong>Ingredient list:</strong>
Carbomer (Carboxypolymethylene) 10 %
TEA (Triethanol amine) 0.1 %
Hyaluronic Acid 0.3 %
GHK-Cu 0.1 % (1000 ppm)
Nano Platinum 0.1 %
Centella Extract 2 %
Yam Extract 2 %
Syn-Coll (PALMITOYL TRIPEPTIDE-3) 2 %
Vitamin B3 0.2 %
Vitamin B5 0.3 %
1,3 Butylene Glycol 5 %
Propylene Glycol 3 %
Propyl paraben 0.1 %
Tween 20 0.1 %
Fragrance 0.01 %
The rest is deionized water.
It is found that in poor connective tissue conditions, the triterpenes in<strong> Centella asiatica</strong> are able to renew the collagen, in quantity and quality, and restore tissue firmness and skin elasticity, improving skin appearance and comfort. Apart from this it also has anti-psoriatic properties.
(Reference Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, May-June 2000, pages 227-234;
Phytomedicine, May 2001, pages 230-235; and Contact Dermatitis, October 1993, pages 175-179)
<strong>Pantothenic acid, also called vitamin B5</strong>
Wound Healing
A study in 1999 showed that pantothenic acid has an effect on wound healing
in vitro[51]. Wiemann and Hermann found that cell cultures with a
concentration of 100μg/mL calcium D-pantothenate increased migration, and
the fibres ran directionally with several layers, whereas the cell cultures
without pantothenic acid healed in no orderly motion, and with fewer
layers[52]. Cell proliferation, or cell multiplication was found to increase
with pantothenic acid supplementation[53]. Finally, there were increased
concentrations of two proteins, both of which have still to be been
identified, that was found in the supplemented culture, but not on the
control[54]. Further studies are needed to determine whether these effects
will stand in vivo.
<strong>Acne</strong>
Following from discoveries in mouse trials, in the late 1990s a small study
was published promoting the use of pantothenic acid to treat acne vulgaris.
According to a study published in 1995 by Dr. Lit-Hung Leung,[62] high doses
of Vitamin B5 resolved acne and decreased pore size. Dr. Leung also proposes
a mechanism, stating that CoA regulates both hormones and fatty-acids, and
without sufficient quantities of pantothenic acid, CoA will preferentially
produce androgens. This causes fatty acids to build up and be excreted
through sebaceous glands, causing acne. Leung's study gave 45 Asian males
and 55 Asian females varying doses of 10-20g of pantothenic acid (100000% of
the US Daily Value), 80% orally and 20% through topical cream. Leung noted
improvement of acne within one week to one month of the start of the
treatment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantothenic_acid (https://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantothenic_acid)
<strong>Topical Use of Dexpanthenol in Skin Disorders</strong>
Authors: Ebner F.1; Heller A.2; Rippke F.2; Tausch I.3
Source: American Journal of Clinical Dermatology, Volume 3, Number 6, 1 June
2002 , pp. 427-433(7)
Publisher: Adis International
Abstract:
Pantothenic acid is essential to normal epithelial function. It is a
component of coenzyme A, which serves as a cofactor for a variety of
enzyme-catalyzed reactions that are important in the metabolism of
carbohydrates, fatty acids, proteins, gluconeogenesis, sterols, steroid
hormones, and porphyrins. The topical use of dexpanthenol, the stable
alcoholic analog of pantothenic acid, is based on good skin penetration and
high local concentrations of dexpanthenol when administered in an adequate
vehicle, such as water-in-oil emulsions. Topical dexpanthenol acts like a
moisturizer, improving stratum corneum hydration, reducing
transepidermal water loss and maintaining skin softness and elasticity.
Activation of fibroblast proliferation, which is of relevance in wound healing, has been
observed both in vitro and in vivo with dexpanthenol. Accelerated
re-epithelization in wound healing, monitored by means of the transepidermal
water loss as an indicator of the intact epidermal barrier function, has
also been seen. Dexpanthenol has been shown to have an anti-inflammatory
effect on experimental ultraviolet-induced erythema.
Beneficial effects of dexpanthenol have been observed in patients who have
undergone skin transplantation or scar treatment, or therapy for burn
injuries and different dermatoses. The stimulation of epithelization,
granulation and mitigation of itching were the most prominent effects of
formulations containing dexpanthenol. In double-blind placebo-controlled
clinical trials, dexpanthenol was evaluated for its efficacy in improving
wound healing. Epidermal wounds treated with dexpanthenol emulsion showed a
reduction in erythema, and more elastic and solid tissue regeneration.
Monitoring of transepidermal water loss showed a significant acceleration of
epidermal regeneration as a result of dexpanthenol therapy, as compared with
the vehicle. In an irritation model, pretreatment with dexpanthenol cream
resulted in significantly less damage to the stratum corneum barrier,
compared with no pretreatment. Adjuvant skin care with dexpanthenol
considerably improved the symptoms of skin irritation, such as dryness of
the skin, roughness, scaling, pruritus, erythema, erosion/fissures, over 3
to 4 weeks. Usually, the topical administration of dexpanthenol preparations
is well tolerated, with minimal risk of skin irritancy or sensitization.
Post by: emily100 on May 16, 2010, 09:19:33 PM
Post by: SarahVaughter on May 17, 2010, 04:32:25 AM
Post by: Katarina on June 21, 2010, 07:34:20 PM
Post by: emily100 on June 22, 2010, 11:38:09 PM
I received my Cu peptide masks. Thank you! Ok, I think I have a dumb question so please bear with me.... :( Sorry!
Ok, there are two mask layers within the packaging. I only put on one, right? The real "plastic-y" layer --- is it used for anything besides getting off the copper peptides and putting that lotion elsewhere on my body.......or am I to be placing the plastic mask layer over the softer layer mask part? I have a feeling I might have done it wrong.....
Thank you!!!
Post by: SarahVaughter on June 23, 2010, 02:33:51 AM
Post by: SarahVaughter on June 23, 2010, 09:13:14 AM
However it is impossible to predict the results - you have to try it. You could use one mask a week for a while.
Post by: emily100 on June 24, 2010, 11:53:59 PM
Post by: kakalakingma on July 24, 2010, 12:16:17 AM
Do you think you can ask the manufacturer to remove the fragrance out of the mask in the future. I think that will do a world of good for (very) sensitive skin-type people who already has to endure the pricking of needles, I just don't think they need fragrance to sting them right after. Fragrance is not needed to remodel the skin, right? If it does sting, it will further induce unnecessary inflammation. Plus, this product is in a cloth-mask form, so it is drench with it and you are directed to leave it on the face for a few minutes. This is my request and I wish you consider this.
Post by: SarahVaughter on July 25, 2010, 05:56:55 PM
If you wonder why peptides sting - Peptides are also in the digestive juices of the stomach.. Only these peptides are a bit different :-) Same with Retinoic acid. Stings terribly on open skin. "No pain - no gain", as they say..
I also assume the fragrance is there to mask the smell of all those other ingredients. Without fragrance, the mask may smell weird.
Post by: emily100 on July 26, 2010, 08:50:45 PM
Post by: SarahVaughter on July 27, 2010, 07:27:43 AM
There is a bit too much copper peptide liquid in the mask so it leaks a little. You do not have to use the mask at all - in principle you can wring it out and just use the liquid.
Perhaps the best method is to just discard the plastic part and let the mask drip out in its sachet, then use it.
Using a paperclip, close the sachet with the remaining liquid and keep it in the fridge. Use that liquid later on your skin, applying it with your fingers.
If you want, there is enough liquid in the mask to serve you multiple times. You can cut off a piece of the mask with scissors and smear it all over your face. Put the rest of the mask back. Close it with a paper clip, the next day or some days later cut another piece off the mask and smear it again on your face. In this way the mask will serve you several times. If there are liquids left in the sachet use them as well. The mask is a bit too watery - I agree but it has a high concentration of copper peptides.
Hope this helps :-)
Post by: emily100 on August 05, 2010, 01:30:21 AM
Post by: kakalakingma on January 03, 2011, 04:14:44 AM
I ask them about that, too, via email and on the phone. I was so confused about "hydrolyzed soy protein and copper chloride" (or Skin Remodeling Copper Peptide aka SRCP, as they call it) when I found out about the website. At first I thought GHK-Cu is stronger, but they corrected me and said that SRCP is more stable and stronger and compatible with hydroxy acids. The receptionist does admit to me that the majority of the research available is on GHK-Cu, but reassured me that the benefits (e.g., wound healing & anti-inflammatory effect) found in GHK-Cu is also present in SRCP, but more stable.
This is what Dr. Loren Pickart said via email:
"1. Gly-His-Lys (GHK) is the FGCP. It is in human blood and has been extensively studied. GHK has a huge number of positive action but is very sensitive to enzyme breakdown.
The SGCPs are made from breakdown resistant copper peptides (peptide hydrolyzates) of various proteins and are stronger than GHK."
NOTE: FGCP stand for first generation copper peptide
In another email with Cassia, a wonderful and insightful lady that works for the doc. She is the best, super duper helpful.
"I was able to speak with Dr. Pickart regarding your question on if second generation copper-peptides (which use hydrolyzed soy protein and copper chloride) breakdown or convert into GHK-Cu. He said no, they do not. They are two separate compounds. However 2nd generation products, which are stronger and more stable than GHK, act very similar to GHK-Cu in the effects that they are able to generate in the skin. They imitate what GHK does for the skin with a more potent effect."
Now, Cassia also sent me the link to the web page where the studies done on SCRP are provided. There is quite a load to read on that page. The doc expound on the studies for ya. But I have pasted the studies citation below (I think there is more else where).
I hope I help you. If you are still in need of answer you can call them or email the doc. Cassia says he love answering people's questions. Just don't ask him about concentration; I tried and he says it is confidential. If you have biochemical questions and studies and stuff, he is all for that I think. He is a biochemist after all. :D
Post by: kakalakingma on January 03, 2011, 06:22:33 AM
Also, talk of cost is one thing, and talk of formulation and its technicality is another. And like I said before I tried to ask for concentration, but he won't give it to me.
I am not sure about DIY on copper serums or cream. I mean, I know vitamin C DIY is widely known and plus there are so many positive review on this. I am not so sure about the copper peptide DIY. The other doc from smartskincare.com does not recommend DIY for copper peptide due to his speculation of the risk of free copper ions in the skin (assuming there is too much or high concentration). But remember he has no solid study to prove this, only anecdotal evidence on his forum. Dr. Loren Pickart did refute his claims.
I did remember talking about GHK-Cu over the phone and the receptionist did say their GHK-Cu serum and Cream cost more because it is the ingredient is more expensive.
Who is John by the way?
Post by: SarahVaughter on January 03, 2011, 06:31:11 AM
Hydrolized soy protein (usually made from gene-modified soy) is just a emulsifier and pigment binder. Nothing too special about that really.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080319095952AAo64Ih
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid-hydrolyzed_vegetable_protein
Post by: kakalakingma on January 03, 2011, 06:34:21 AM
He should formulate products for you to sell. lol
Post by: kakalakingma on January 03, 2011, 06:42:21 AM
"GHK-Copper
A human copper peptide complex - GHK-Cu (glycyl-l-histidyl-l-lysine:copper(II)). The tripeptide, GHK, discovered by Dr. Pickart, is generated by proteolysis after tissue injury. Its high affinity for copper(II) allows it to obtain copper from carrier molecules such as albumin and form GHK-Cu.
When injected into skin or applied to the skin’s surface, GHK-Cu activates the processes of removal of damaged scar tissue and deposition of new tissue. Francois Maquart and colleagues at Reims have presented evidence that GHK-Cu is the inducer of the second phase of healing when skin remodeling processes remove scars and tissue debris while rebuilding healthy skin. Laboratory evidence indicates that GHK-Cu concomitantly stimulates the degradation of existing collagen and synthesis of new collagen. At the molecular level, GHK-Cu aids the rebuilding of new skin by increasing angiogenesis, the production of m-RNA for collagen, elastin, proteoglycans, glycosaminoglycans and decorin, while it also stimulates the m-RNA production of, and synthesis of, certain metalloproteinases and anti-proteases that clear damaged protein and remove scars. In addition, it suppresses secretion of scar-forming TGF-beta-1 by fibroblasts. GHK-Cu acts indirectly as a chemoattractant for cells that stimulate repair, such as macrophages and mast cells, which release protein growth factor proteins that stimulate tissue repair.
GHK-Cu also possess anti-inflammatory actions and may function in humans as a circulating non-steroidal anti-inflammatory. After episodes of tissue damage, ferric ion is released from ferritin and catalyzes damaging tissue oxidations. GHK- Cu counters this action by blocking ferritin channels, and the release of oxidizing iron ions. GHK blocks the oxidation of low density lipoproteins by loosely bound copper. Interleukin-1-beta is also released after tissue injury producing cellular damage. At hormonal levels, GHK-Cu prevents damage to pancreatic cells by interleukin-1."
"Hydrolyzed Soy Protein
Hydrolyzed soy protein (glycine soja) is derived from soybeans and broken down by water to form a complex with copper to produce copper peptides. See copper peptides."
There is another page in which he provide organized and brief and easy to read table of comparing peptides including his first and second generations of copper peptides. LINK
Post by: kakalakingma on January 03, 2011, 09:13:18 AM
I have found another article spotlighting on copper peptide by Dr. Torodov from www.smartskincare.com. I have pasted the entire article below if you are interested in reading his findings on copper peptide
"Copper peptides: Can you 'repair' a wrinkle?
If aging, as some say, is a disease, then wrinkles can be viewed as small, improperly healed wounds. Indeed wrinkles are characterized by incorrect deposition of collagen and imperfect skin cell layering, which is also seen in healed wounds albeit on a much larger scale. If so, could the agents that modify the process of wound healing (by minimizing scar formation and improving skin remodeling) have a potential to prevent or even reduce wrinkles? Well, possibly. A good example of a wound-healing agent that appears to also have anti-wrinkle potential is the class of compounds called copper peptides.
What exactly are copper peptides and how can they boost skin rejuvenation? Generally speaking, peptides are small fragments of proteins. (And the proteins are the key building blocks of most living tissues.) Certain kinds of peptides have an avid affinity for copper, to which they bind very tightly. The resulting compound consisting of a peptide and a copper atom has become known as a copper peptide.
The benefits of copper peptides for tissue regeneration were discovered by Dr. Loren Pickart in the 1970s. He found and patented a number of specific copper peptides (in particular, GHK copper peptides or GHK-Cu) that were particularly effective in healing wounds and skin lesions as well as some gastrointestinal conditions. One of the end results of this research was Iamin gel approved by the FDA for the treatment of acute and chronic wounds and ulcers.
A lot of substances can have a positive effect on wound healing. A distinctive feature of GHK copper peptides is that they reduce scar tissue formation while stimulating normal skin remodeling. In other words, they help better restore the damaged area to its original look.
The mechanism of copper peptide action is relatively complex. GHK-Cu induces the degradation of "extra-large" collagen aggregates found in scars and promotes the synthesis of smaller more regular collagen found in normal skin. It also promotes the synthesis of elastin, proteoglycans, glycosaminoglycans and other components of skin matrix. Other important effects of GHK-Cu include the ability to regulate the growth rate and migration of different types of cells; significant anti-inflammatory action; and the ability to prevent the release of oxidation-promoting iron into the tissues. The net result is a faster, better and "cleaner" healing.
You might say it's nice to have cleanly healed wounds, but what about people who do not have any wounds or ulcerations to heal? Can copper peptides be useful for regular skin protection and rejuvenation? It appears that they can. However, while the wound healing effects of copper peptide have been investigated and documented in many studies, much less research has been done so far on their cosmetic and anti-aging use. The available evidence indicated the following potential skin benefits:
* Many existing skin care treatments are based on the concept of removing the outermost or even deeper layers of the skin. The resulting healing process stimulates skin remodeling leading to smoother, younger looking skin. Since copper peptides optimize healing and improve skin remodeling, then can augment the effect of treatments based on various forms of controlled skin injury. In particular, copper peptides can be useful after various forms of laser resurfacing, dermabrasion, and chemical peels. IMPORTANT: If you are considering using copper peptides after a particular procedure, make sure to discuss it with your physician.
* Copper peptides are effective against various forms of skin irritation, mainly due to their anti-inflammatory effects. Skin irritation, even in the absence of open lesions, dramatically accelerates skin aging by promoting the formation of free radicals and other toxic byproducts. Some common skin rejuvenation treatments, such as tretinoin (Retin A, Renova) and alpha hydroxy acids, can cause irritation. If during treatment you experience skin irritation for an extended period of time, your skin will likely end up in a worse shape than when you started. In many cases, copper peptides can reduce or eliminate the irritation and help maximize treatment benefits.
* It is always easier to prevent the damage than to fix it later. To a significant degree, skin aging is caused by the accumulation of minor day-to-day damage from sun, wind, detergents, acne, abrasions and so forth. As these minute lesions heal, they leave microscopic imperfections, which, eventually, accumulate to become visible signs of aging. While it remain to be further researched, it appears that copper peptide can help minimize the damage from daily wear and tear of the skin. For instance, one study demonstrated that copper peptides helped recover skin integrity after exposure to SLS, a common detergent found in many shampoos, cleansers, and dishwashing/laundry products.
* It remains unclear whether copper peptides can reverse wrinkles and other signs of aging in the intact skin. Theoretically, it is possible since copper peptides promote the degradation of abnormally large cross-linked collagen (the one found in scars and, to a lesser degree, in wrinkles). They also stimulate the production of "regular" collagen found in normal skin. In one small study, copper peptides stimulated collagen production in the intact skin. In fact, in that study copper peptides produced a stronger stimulation of collagen sysnthesis than tretinoin (Retin A, Renova) or ascorbate (vitamin C).
At present, several skin care companies offer a range of copper peptide products. However, to the best of my knowledge, all copper peptides in these products are based on Dr. Pickart's patents.
Caution: While moderate use of copper peptides stimulates collagen synthesis and has antioxidant effect (by stimulating the antioxidant enzyme superoxide dismutase), excessive use can have an opposite effect by increasing the levels of free copper and/or by triggering excessive production of metalloproteinases. Free copper promotes free radical damage and collagen breakdown leading to accelerated skin aging. Metalloproteinases can digest collagen and elastin, weakening the skin and causing sag. These problems do not seem to occur among the majority of copper peptide users. However, there are anecdotal reports indicating that such side-effects might happen with overuse or, rarely, even normal use in sensitive individuals. Ideally, a sufficiently large study is needed to better quiantify these risk.
The bottom line
Copper peptides are a promising skin treatment with a good safety profile. Their ability to improve the healing of various types of skin lesions is well established. It is likely that copper peptides may slow down the development of the signs of skin aging by limiting the consequences of daily wear and tear. Also, copper peptides may augment the results of the skin rejuvenation treatments based on controlled skin injury, such as laser resurfacing, dermabrasion and peels. There are also indications that copper peptides have the potential to improve wrinkles and skin texture on their own. However, more extensive and prolonged studies are required to definitively prove it. Also, it appears that copper peptides may cause rare but significant skin damage in some cases of overuse or unusual sensitivity. Further practical details of optimal selection and prdent use and using copper peptides products are discussed in Skin Rejuvenation Infopack. " (LINK)
I do wonder though, most of the research on GHK-Cu is on wound healing, and a lot of people wants anti-wrinkle treatment.. Is wrinkle considered wounds?
Post by: emily100 on January 03, 2011, 04:16:54 PM
Post by: emily100 on January 03, 2011, 04:27:36 PM
Post by: emily100 on January 03, 2011, 04:30:22 PM
Post by: SarahVaughter on January 03, 2011, 04:59:41 PM
I'll check out the details on Copper peptides and surgery scars and come with an answer later. Or perhaps Kaka can come up with a clear, concise and authorative answer?
Post by: kakalakingma on January 03, 2011, 10:32:37 PM
Look, I think it is more likely in forums generated by companies selling their own set of products that may have that type of business mentality and the worries with it. I understand that perspective. But I do not know how many time I have say it in order to satisfy your worry that I mean no harm intentionally. I am a 20 year old who happens to be a skin care junkie. I just like to share information!
I have no authoritative power over anyone or anything on this forum. Funny though, now I feel like helping people in this forum beyond the basics (i.e., giving lots of information and product suggestions) is a blessing and a curse. I get the “thank you” and then I also get the worries from the administrator… oh, and don’t forget from sweet Emily. LOL. Will this be my demise? I mean, I think what I am doing is altruistic in a sense. I never expect to earn anything in return. I just type without knowing whether or not the person I helped really got the helped needed. A forum that is restrictive and controlling of what people have to contribute (without obscenity and foul language) is a forum that is hiding the truths from the public interest. If you have a very structured forum, all people ever going to get is what you want them to get, which is not the public interest. The public wants public information, not private messages. People have the right to know more and judge information for themselves.
Just think, even if I do not put a hyperlink on the product I have suggested, people can still readily place that name and Google it. I just put the extra effort and place the link so people don’t have to open another tab or window. If you really think about it, I hope you would agree that it is really really harmless. Another thing, I make product suggestions on stuff that Sarah does not sell, too, for example, cleansers, toners, alpha/beta hydroxy acids exfoliants, antioxidant serums (including retinoids and regular retinol products), moisturizers and sunscreen. I even make the extra step and ask what skin type the person has so I can search for the right products are right for him/her. Not only that, I also provide citations of scientific studies for anyone who wonders where the science behind the product is at. Also, it is one thing to make suggestions it is another to say “you MUST buy this product!”-no I have never done that. But I guess now that making “suggestions” come with its risks. I am not getting paid from any other company and I am definitely not getting paid by Sarah (lol). It seems to me that it is only a problem when I make a suggestion regarding copper peptide, like that is where the line is drawn. Am I right? You start to question me on this whole thing on this copper peptide thread only.
If people get to know your company and assessing its integrity (claims backed up by studies?), product affordability (in comparison to other companies), product quality (good ingredients? irritants free?), product range (gels, lotion, cream, masks?), and if they determine it fitting for their skin type and need, they will surely give their loyalty to your products. I cannot promise you that, but it is the logical ideal that I hold.
In sum, I understand your mentality, but I reassure you I mean no harm. If you still do not believe, then that is way beyond my control.
Post by: kakalakingma on January 03, 2011, 10:35:31 PM
According to dermatologic blog, Futurederm.com, this is run by dermatologist-to-be-student named Nicki Zevola (there is a picture of her in her bio; her skin looks flawless), she provide her knowledge on the available treatment on topical treating scars. She does not consider highly of topical Vitamin E, maderma, and aloe vera gel, but she does recommend silicone sheeting and GHK-Cu. (LINK 1; LINK 2)
I have included below studies she and I found.
---VITAMIN E---
The Effects of topical Vitamin E on the cosmetic appearance of scars
Failure of topical steroids and vitamin E to reduce postoperative scar formation following reconstructive surgery.
---MADERMA---
Onion Extract Gel Versus Petrolatum Emollient on New Surgical Scars: a Prospective Double-Blinded Study
Effect of Mederma on hypertrophic scarring in the rabbit ear model.
---SILICONE GEL SHEETING--- (product suggestion is ScarAway Long Silicone Scar Healing Sheets)
An Evaluation of Evidence Regarding Application of Silicone Gel Sheeting for the Management of Hypertrophic Scars and Keloids
A review of the biologic effects, clinical efficacy, and safety of silicone elastomer sheeting for hypertrophic and keloid scar treatment and management.
The role of the epidermis in the control of scarring: evidence for mechanism of action for silicone gel
http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/ot/pdfs/Selected%20Resources%20book%20MAy%202009.pdf#page=8
---ALOE VERA GEL---
Influence of Aloe vera on collagen characteristics in healing dermal wounds in rats.
---Copper Peptide---
I have already done a lot of research on this one so I am not going to post any studies. If you prefer GHK-Cu, then Sarah’s Copper peptide Mask is a great and affordable option.
Post by: kakalakingma on January 03, 2011, 10:38:16 PM
emily100;1053 wrote: And one question I have is this....I have some 8mpo surgical scars. Will topical application of copper peptides help? The verbage you posted from various articles seem to say it's great for scars, but at what point in the recovery will it be best and do I just put it on top, once it's sealed and healed? (I am about to have some more surgical scars at the end of the month. That is why I ask....) Thank you! (Sidenote: both of you are really "too smart for me" on this topic. I just need the basics.) :D
I can only find you information to the best of my knowledge. But if you want the best of the best, you definitely have to go to your trusted dermatologist or plastic surgeon. Okay, here we go!
According to dermatologic blog, Futurederm.com, this is run by dermatologist-to-be-student named Nicki Zevola (there is a picture of her in her bio; her skin looks flawless), she provide her knowledge on the available treatment on topical treating scars. She does not consider highly of topical Vitamin E, maderma, and aloe vera gel, but she does recommend silicone sheeting and GHK-Cu. (LINK 1; LINK 2)
I have included below studies she and I found.
---VITAMIN E---
The Effects of topical Vitamin E on the cosmetic appearance of scars
Failure of topical steroids and vitamin E to reduce postoperative scar formation following reconstructive surgery.
---MADERMA---
Onion Extract Gel Versus Petrolatum Emollient on New Surgical Scars: a Prospective Double-Blinded Study
Effect of Mederma on hypertrophic scarring in the rabbit ear model.
---SILICONE GEL SHEETING--- (product suggestion is ScarAway Long Silicone Scar Healing Sheets)
An Evaluation of Evidence Regarding Application of Silicone Gel Sheeting for the Management of Hypertrophic Scars and Keloids
A review of the biologic effects, clinical efficacy, and safety of silicone elastomer sheeting for hypertrophic and keloid scar treatment and management.
The role of the epidermis in the control of scarring: evidence for mechanism of action for silicone gel
http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/ot/pdfs/Selected%20Resources%20book%20MAy%202009.pdf#page=8
---ALOE VERA GEL---
Influence of Aloe vera on collagen characteristics in healing dermal wounds in rats.
---Copper Peptide---
I have already done a lot of research on this one so I am not going to post any studies. If you prefer GHK-Cu, then Sarah’s Copper peptide Mask is a great and affordable option.
[Update: I have done a search on "surgical scar" on the forum of reverseskinaging.com and I got a several thread results if you are interested!
Thread 1
Thread 2
Thread 3
Thread 4
Thread 5
Thread 6
Also, there is a fantastic and organized diagram showing the benefits of GHK-Cu.
Yikes, it is so big. lololol.]
[Update 2: from the research I have seen, i think your skin care regimen for surgical scar healing may be: gentle cleanser, gentle hydroxy acid (8-10% AHA from Alpha Hydrox), copper peptide (GHK-Cu) for wound healing and scar reduction and collegen production and anti-inflammatory action, Tretinoin like Sarah's A-ret 0.05% Gel to boost collagen production, an ointment like Eucerin Aquapor Healing Ointment or Sarah's A + D Infadolan Ointment for protective barrier , Silicone gel sheeting, and broad spectrum sunscreen (!). I am not sure if you can mix GHK-Cu with tretinoin, so you have to ask Sarah for that one. Maybe use them at opposite end of the day or on alternate day. Also, I think you use the silicone sheet occasionally and separate from other products. I am not aware of any compatibility issues with GHK-Cu or Tretinoin so I think you are better off using it alone. Besides, you have to wear that thing for 12 hours at a time.]
[Update 3: I found a video from Dr. Neil Schulz on How to treat Raised Scars]
[video=youtube;bSCkzr3-Vho]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSCkzr3-Vho[/video]
I hope I help you a bit
Best wishes!!!
Post by: kakalakingma on January 04, 2011, 04:08:28 AM
The Human Tripeptide GHK, Copper Switch/Treatment of Degenerative Conditions of - Loren Pickart, PhD
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogAmT4tH6-g
knowledge!
Bye
Post by: SarahVaughter on January 04, 2011, 05:26:58 AM
Just to be clear: We have no problems with you and we appreciate it that you post here!
Just to show that we appreciate you, email me at sarah@owndoc.com and we will send you a present :-)
Post by: emily100 on January 04, 2011, 10:13:08 PM
Now, Sarah, the other day, I ordered your Retin-A creme. Do I use copper peps and RetA alternately? It's all so confusing.
I found this from one of the links provided above:
A product called Dermaroller is often reported to work well with
our copper peptides. It is available on Internet.
8.Using Retinoic acid (Renova or Retin-A) with SRCPs often produces
faster scar reduction. Use 0.25% to 0.50% retinoic acid creams which
are strong.
I wanna single needle the scars, so I know I am to put the Vitamin C on the area a few days before. then, I guess I will single needle....and then afterwards put the Copper Peptides and RetinA on there (just don't know when CP vs RetA after the needling is all)? Sidenote: I have this fear of single needling. For some reason, I am so scared my scars will go in the opposite direction and then be freaked out. I know it will be inflamed or red the next week or so afterwards, right? aaahhhhh, scary to think I might mess up something. Scared of risking it. My scars are very flat. Thin white line across my body (tummy tuck). I would love for the line to be able to tan again and I think I read where single needling might cause melanocytes to come to surface and tan the skin again. Ugh. Just thinking out loud here. Thanks for letting me ramble.
btw, I've been using silicone sheeting for a few months now so that is good.
=============================
UPDATE: Just bought the Skin Biology Scar Reduction Kit, which contains the exfol, lacsal, Super Cop cream, Sup Cop 2X. Pretty excited to try it out. I read that I need to start out very slow. Instead of the emu oil, I am going to use Infadolan. Think that is ok?? Also, I still would like to know where to fit Sarah's RetinA in there......and the Vitamin C.... so much stuff to remember. Will I ever get it straight, I have no idea! I guess if I don't, something is better than nothing. I just don't want to cause any bad reactions.....again, thank you to both for all the input. Both of you are awesome.
Post by: kakalakingma on January 04, 2011, 11:36:24 PM
You can use Retin-A with copper peptide as recommended by Dr. Loren Pickart:
"How to Use Retin-A and Copper-Peptides Together
Retin-A can be used along with Skin Biology's copper-peptide products. Here is our recommendation:
• If you are using a copper-peptide oil-free serum (or liquid) version: Apply the copper-peptides first then your Retin-A cream can be applied lightly on top.
• If you are using a copper-peptide cream:The cream versions of copper-peptides with their fatty molecules may actually block the Retin-A uptake. So it may be best to first apply your Retin-A product, then use SRCPs lightly on top.
We can advise clients that Retin-A, depending on the percentage prescribed to them, might increase the uptake of copper-peptides applied directly on top. So our copper-peptides may feel stronger when used along with Retin-A. " (LINK)
Dr. Loren Pickart does not recommend Vitamin C with Copper peptide due to compatibility issue. I am pretty certain with Vitamin C and Retin-A together, too.
So here is the game plan. Apply your hydroxy acids and vitamin C serum onto thee scar and sunscreen in the morning. At night, apply accordingly copper peptide with Retin-A. This way, you get the benefit of all four VERY BENEFICIAL ingredients. RIGHT!?
Your best bet with any surgical scar or whatever scar treatment is with your doc. I bet your doc recommended silicone sheeting, right? Stick with that first for a little while. I don't know if you should needle fresh wounds. Probably let it close first while having a proper skin care regimen. Don't take my word on this particular note, though, except the skin care part lol. I have no idea if there is any interaction between silicone gel and the ingredients in the regimen. I doubt it, though.
:D:D:D:D:D:D
Best wishes
[Update: Emily, please make sure you update us on your copper peptide experience and scar healing. Thanks in advance. Post it on this thread of make a new one for copper peptide experience or something. i would love to read your testimony]
[Update 2: I found two thread on surgical scar on this forum if you want to see:
Thread 1: Dermarolling fresh surgery scars?
Thread 2: anyone on the forum that has used single-needling on surgery scars...... ]
[Update 3: I say you pick Sarah's Ointment than emu oil. Why? The oil spread and drips; it's all fatty acids. The ointment sticks and stays in one place unless you sweat a lot. Plus, you get the benefit of Vitamin D and (non acidic so it is gentle) Retinyl Acetate cell communicating capabilities]
Post by: kakalakingma on January 04, 2011, 11:41:51 PM
I am very happy that I got to clear up my name! I rather people see me as reasonable as possible than a jerk. Yeah, I wanna be a doc one day. LOLOLOLOL.
Sarah, I don't think it is a good thing I accept your present. I don't think I deserve it at all. I don't want people to think that I have been all helpful and nice as a way to manipulate you to give me stuff. Oh my goodness, that is the last thing I want! I don't mind being interactive on your forum as long as you accept me and treat me reasonably. It is when I found out about your website that I got all into the skin remodeling craze! So I have to thank you very much. I heard of copper peptide and derma roller before long ago, but it is not until your website was on my screen that I got all enthusiastic. That is why I bought your derma roller and ELMA. Haven't started it yet, still dealing with last bit of pimples!
Post by: emily100 on January 05, 2011, 02:32:01 AM
Actually, my surgeon recommended doing nothing for scar management, saying it's the person's genetics and ability to just naturally heal that means the most ....that and time. However, I am one of those that cannot just sit back and do nothing. So in addition to scar massage, I have used Bio-Oil, Scar Esthetique, Shea Butter, and here recently, I bought a vat of virgin coconut oil after seeing one girl's wonderful results on another surgery forum I am on. When I wear the silicone sheeting, no oils/lotions can be underneath. So I probably won't be able to wear the sheeting once I start doing all the SRCP's/RetinA/Vit C / AHA's. oh well. I'll figure it all out.
Ok I am headed to bed. It's 1:30am where I am. Interesting stuff on this site and the SkinBiology site. Very cool and I hope all this is really true ....how skin can be "remodeled". Gahhh, that would be wonderful. Oh, and really quick....I am considering putting the SRCP's on my tummy skin. As i mentioned, I had a tummy tuck. My skin elasticity is about as poor as it comes - hence the surgery. Well, I can tell it's already kinda loosening up. :( so I am thinking of doing something for my overall stomach too. Will report back. BTW, how long do the products last? Is it like every 30 days or a few months?
Ok goodnight and thanks to both of you once again!
Post by: kakalakingma on January 05, 2011, 04:16:40 AM
I hope everything will go well with your scar management. I think your doc is right that your skin heals on its own, but the point of skin care products is to speed it up! Here is an analogy, if you know about our skin natural exfoliation cycle, it is around 28 days or a month. But for some people, waiting that long can lead to having flaky and dull looking complexion if you don't remove the dead skin cells. In other words, some people flak faster than their skin can shed the cells off making them look ashy. Not good. Not good. That is where exfoliants comes in! A gentle exfoliants faciliate our natural exfoliation process by unglueing the "mortar" that holds our skin cells together. Not everyone's genetics are the same so some people get the healing process slower than others along with other factors influencing the healing process like diet and lifestyle.
I have no proof yet, but I think you are safest with silicone sheeting on "fresh" wounds (please check with your doc on this) for a month or so or longer. Maybe use that at night and copper in the morning to speed things up. Then, you won't have to worry about mixing them together. You can alternate the days for copper peptide and tretinoin. Be careful on SRCP super cop 2x from the kit you bought because it is touted as the strongest; you probably want to dilute it with water. On the mornings after you apply copper peptide or tretinoin, you should apply ointment like Sarah's Infadolan. Or even 100% petrolatum would work, but Sarah's ointment is better because of the vitamin A and D. The point of the ointment or vaseline is to provide a protective barrier so your wound can HEAL!
Emily, another thing is you need to be careful about falling into the claims and anecdotal evidence to satisfy your worries. All of those shea butter and oils and coconut oils are really... emollients. Shea butter is good because it has antioxidant similiar to green tea. But really in general when you hear oils you should think fatty acids like linolenic acid, oleic acid, omega fatty acids, stuff like that. You might as well go to your kitchen pantry and apply extra virgin olive oil on your wound if you want something rich in emollients and antioxidant and cheap at the same time! You really should just stick with simplicity before you get all worried up again. The LAST thing you want is to used up so many "hyped" products that you end up developing irritantion to your wound area, which is NEVER good.
Think this over, and if you agree with me (better yet ask your doc!), then you should follow that regimen I have put up there. Remember: gentle cleanser, alpha hydrox, copper peptide, retinoid, vitamin C (this I think optional), ointment, and sunscreen. There is no need to splurge on expensive skin care products. Sarah sells affordable copper peptide and retinoid and vitamin C DIY. I say everything should be less than 70 dollars (excluding derma roller)
I check the kit and I don't think it will ask that long. I think the kit is for you to test if your skin is compatible with the product. You know, to try it out. But you do get an official 1 oz size super cp serum, which lasting matter depend on how large your wound is!
best wishes
Post by: SarahVaughter on January 05, 2011, 07:52:44 AM
By dermarolling and especially by single needling or derma stamping you can achieve remodeling of the scar - the alignment of the scar tissue will remodel. Unfortunately it will not remodel back into scar-less skin but in many cases it softens the scar, improve its color, texture and depth.
You can certainly needle your surgery scar eight months post-surgery.
As Kakalakingma said, you can use A-Ret in combination with copper peptides but you should not apply it in combination with vit. C. Vit. C stays in the skin for several days (the levels are going down - its tissue half-time is 4 days) so applying it every second or third day is sufficient.
I normally do not recommend using acidic products such as Retinoic acid (A-Ret ) immediately after needling/rolling because it will sting and irritate the skin but in case of scars or stretch marks it is OK provided you can handle the stinging. Wait a little and then you can top A-Ret off with a little bit of Infadolan.
I always advise to do a needling test patch on a small part of the scar.
Thus you will find out how it turns out. Keep in mind though that remodeling of a scar takes months. Do not give up too soon.
Needling by itself often "wakes up" melanocytes.
In addition, you can attempt a transfer of melanocytes:
Needle your scars and immediately roll all over the area (scars and surrounding scar-free skin) with a 0.5 mm roller. The melanocytes are at the bottom of the epidermis, which is about the depth to which the 0.5 mm roller penetrates.
Read more here (scroll down for my answer number 2)
http://forums.owndoc.com/dermarolling-microneedling/Melanocytes-transfer-for-white-scars-and-hypopigmentation
Post by: emily100 on January 06, 2011, 02:43:49 PM
SCAR MGMT: Needling, Vit C (every few days...not close to SRCPs or Ret-A); LacSal exfoliant; strongest SRCPs of Dr. Pickart ("Super Cop 2X and Super CP Serum"); manual exfoliation with dermabrasion cloth; Infadolan
FACE: Needling every 3 weeks w/ 1.0mm roller. Needling every other day w/ .25 roller for product penetration (or is this .25 rolling needed now? if so, how do I incorporate it?) starting out w/ one of Dr. Pickart's milder 1st gen SRCPs, called "Protect & Restore High Retinol" followed by Emu Oil; also using LacSal as exfoliant at opposite end of day. Eventually, I will move up the SRCP concentration continuum as my skin can tolerate it. EYE AREA: "Skin Signals Creme" (1st gen)
TUMMY ELASTICITY (which is poor, even after having had a tummy tuck!!!!): Dr. Pickart's "Skin Signals Creme" --- due it being his only product with the fragmented collagen and elastin. Since this is a 1st gen creme, I will eventually work up to adding a 2nd generation SRCP for the big daddy skin remodeling, but I will always use SS Creme, due to the elastin and collagen fragments.
ALL OVER BODY ELASTICITY (namely thighs and chest): Dermarolling 1.5mm; "Protect & Restore" Body Lotion. (Note to self: wondering if I need to do some type of body exfoliation to go along with this)
Note to Sarah: In switching over to these stronger SRCPs, is there still a place for your GHK-Cu masks, as I just bought ten of them last week.
-----
Ok, I think I am getting the hang of it. Boy, that was confusing at first. I spent all last night reading the SB Forum trying to get my head around all the different choices. It's making more sense now. I see some immediately start out w/ the strongest on their face and got great results. However, I am scared to do that. I also read where overuse of SRCPs can cause temporary sagging and crepey-ness. That would freak me out, even if only temporary. So anyways, thank you for all your input, Sarah and Kakalakingma! This has been very informative! Hope I can turn back the hands of time slightly!
Post by: SarahVaughter on January 06, 2011, 04:02:50 PM
We are very sceptical towards those "2nd generation SRCP's".
As Kakalakingma said, the ingredients are Copper chloride (which has nothing to do with copper peptide and is just cheap blue blue dye basically) and hydrolized soy protein, which is a run-of-the mill emulsifier.
I avoided criticizing Dr. Pickart but since you leave me no choice - It is our position that his SRCP's can be assumed to contain hardly any GHK-Cu unless it is proven by lab analysis that it does. Copper peptides are extremely expensive because this complex molecule is devilishly hard to synthesize. The copper peptide we are talking about, GHK-Cu, is called Glycyl-L-histidyl-L-lysine-Cu(2+) and as any chemist can see, this has little to do with the simple Copper chloride salt. Copper peptides cost almost twice the price of gold, gram-for-gram. You can verify that for yourself. It is therefore hard to make a profit on a large bottle with a GHK-Cu product. At the very least, one would have to sell such a bottle for several hundred dollars to make a modest profit. If there is no GHK-Cu on the ingredient list (in a high concentration) and if this can't be independently verified, it's safe to assume it's a scam, sorry to say. Dr. Pickart can come here and elaborate - I just go by Kakalakingma's remark that the stated ingredients are CuCl2 and hydrolized soy protein. No mention of GHK-Cu. If that's correct, and his further observations/remarks suggest so (even though he himself gives Dr. Pickart the benefit of the doubt), then I do not believe the product contains any significant concentration of copper peptides. Please bear in mind that Dr. Pickart is in the Copper "peptide" business to make money and the fact that he is mentioned half a dozen times in the footnotes of the copper peptides Wikipedia article and in many studies can either mean he is a respected scientist or a relentless self-promoter. The studies I found on copper peptides that mention him, seem to have largely been paid for by himself. He donated the copper peptides, for example, making him an investor, influencer and stakeholder in the study. This is all too common nowadays. Don't forget that he used to be, and to a large extent still is, the only one hyper-promoting and agressively selling these products, using near-fraudulent claims and doubtful formulations of products that have no copper peptides on their ingredient list, but are suppost to perform "much better". To the bottom line, no doubt. Searching for "Dr. Pickart" on Google gives as search result #1 "Stay young / fountain of youth". Snake oil, people. Copper peptides, the real GHK-Cu ones, have some beneficial effect on the skin but they can by no means make you "stay young" or are the "fountain of youth". Commercial hype. It is highly questionable whether his "second generation skin remodelling copper peptides" in fact contain a medically significant amount of them.
Peptides do form when proteins and CuCl are combined, but then I'd like to know the exact type of peptides and their concentration. There has been no study on his 2nd gen copper products, they don't contain GHK-Cu and the FDA did not approve them as a drug. Kakalakingma called his office and his assistant said the type and concentration of the peptides was their secret. Dr. Pickart would already be a multi-millionaire if he started a copper peptide factory according to his magical chemical miracle method. A gram of GHK-Cu goes for around 70 dollars on the world market. 13 kilo of soy and copper chloride would then be sufficient to yield him a million dollars worth of GHK-Cu. All he'd need is a bucket of soy protein and a bucket of Copper chloride, mixed in a bathtub filled with water of the required purity and temperature. Say 250 dollars' worth of ingredients.
Post by: emily100 on January 06, 2011, 09:43:59 PM
The "Stay Young" google search....well, that is not really surprising to me at all. I just let that stuff go in one ear and out the other. It's the catch phrase for almost all beauty products these days; I don't think most people are that naieve anymore. Copper peptides do seem to reverse years of aging/skin blemishes for people though. I am interested n the science behind copper peptides, which I have received from both yours and Dr. Pickart's site now (via Kakalalingma).
By the way, I will not be offended if you delete all the Dr. Pickart related posts from me on your forum. Not trying to do any harm here.
Post by: SarahVaughter on January 07, 2011, 03:42:59 AM
This forum is a place to exchange views, that's all. I am not "against" Kakalakingma, not at all. I think he brings a lot of useful information to the table and I think he answers many questions here very thoroughly and properly. He has answered many questions better than I could do without doing a lot of research first. He clearly is extremely educated about these topics. That does not mean he knows everything. I already voiced my concern a few days ago in this thread, about the ingredients and my scepticism. He said that perhaps there was something "special" about Dr. Pickarts 2nd generation blue water. I left it at that. It is for the reader to draw conclusions and investigate further. I said I was sceptical and I gave my reasons, Kakalakingma said perhaps there was something we did not know about Dr. Pickarts formulation. Who knows. But you interpreted this wrongly. You interpreted this as my endorsement for everything K said.
This forum used to be a place where I answered 100% of all questions posed. But I can't remain the "dictator" of this forum much longer. Too many questions are asked about too many things that do not concern our products. We can't possibly answer all questions about all (competing) products for example. We also don't want to say too many bad things about competing products. What we want is this forum to be a place of discussion by the forum participants, and we will answer what we can, and we will give our opinion when required. When you said that our GHK-Cu product was in fact obsolete because Dr. Pickart implies so, it went too far and I stated my detailed opinion. Writing my detailed, well-argued opinion took me an hour, however. I can't spend my life here, dissing other people's products. There are too many questionable products out there. Buyer beware. Do your research. When I say that his "peptides" likely don't have any peptides in them and "Kaka" says perhaps they have something special that we don't know about, then you can't just believe whomever posted last. You have to use your own brain :-)
"People have been using these products for 5 years" - People have been smoking for 50 years and more. Why do people do things? In this case it's marketing. And I'm not sure people used his "2nd generation peptides" for 5 years. Why do people use ThreeLac while it doesn't work against mycelial Candida or the symptoms commonly misdiagnosed as intestinal Candidiasis? I can't help but noticing a linear relationship between marketing effort and product purchase. People believe a lot, as long as "everybody else is using it" and "everybody says that it helps". Sorry to say, but 95% of people are "sheeple". They follow the herd without thinking for themselves.
All that counts are the facts. FACT: - No copper peptides in the ingredients list. FACT: Promises of eternal youth. ERGO: A bunch of nonsense.
I will later add something to this thread/posting. I know that Pickart cheated, documenting the efficacy of his products. He used a girl that had an acid burn wound and he claims his product made her heal nicely. However, it is scientifically arguable that she would have healed just as nicely without. He twisted the facts in that case. I hope it's still on his site.
Pickart is singlehandedly responsible for hyping Copper peptides. They have but a limited effect on skin enhancement. We do not think you should spend much money on them at all, due to the limited added value they have. Vit. A and C likely are an order of magnitude more beneficial to the skin healing process than even the best copper peptides formulations. Coper peptides are a nice "icing on the cake" but by no means essential. Just about the only one benefiting from the hype is Dr. Pickart. He most likely wrote the Wikipedia article on Copper peptides himself and he seems to be sponsoring most research into them as well. Someone asked us to sell copper peptides and we found a very good product with a high (the highest recommendable) concentration of CHK-Cu, for a low price (we sell them for 3 dollars per mask). We did not find any other copper peptide products that are both trustworthy and reasonably priced. None. Otherwise we would be selling it already. We do not think that copper peptides are such a miracle product that one should spend much money on them.
About deleting postings: I value everyone's input, so as long as people don't post SPAM or impolite attacks on others, I think we should just leave things be, so that others can easily follow the discussion. It would be very boring, a forum where everybody always agrees with everybody :-)
Post by: SarahVaughter on January 07, 2011, 10:55:06 AM
Kakalakingma is a valuable asset to this small forum. He has brought a lot of good information to this forum and answered many questions very thoroughly.
Post by: SarahVaughter on January 07, 2011, 01:15:36 PM
Post by: SarahVaughter on January 07, 2011, 01:50:01 PM
He sent me these histograms to prove it. You can see that picture 1 is much darker than picture 2 and 3 (which have identical luminosity spectrums). He says that picture 2/3 is the original, because the spectrum is narrowest. Pic. 1 and 4 are photoshopped to exaggerate resp. hide detail.
Original:
Picture 1: (darkened - wider spectrum due to brightness reduction)
Picture 2 (original):
Picture 3 (identical to picture 2 except for minute modifications):
Picture 4 (wider spectrum due to brightness increase):
The histogram spectrum analysis was performed on the lower 3/4 of the photographs to avoid introducing a bias, an innaccuracy due to the pink quotes on a white background in the upper left of the first photo.
So these photo's are fake, plain and simple. even when picture #4 is perhaps a combination of "Photoshopping" and extra lighting, extra lighting is just as much manipulation as is image manipulation. Any trick to make it seem "progress", be it Photoshop or a halogen lamp is fraud. In order to be taken seriously, the pictures should all have roughly the same spectrum. Same X-position and same width. The fact that they are vastly different shows digital manipulation as well as possible lighting tricks.
On top of that - and here comes my own expertise - even if these photo's were real, they would prove exactly nothing. The acid burn would have healed just as well with copper peptides as without. But the photo's show nothing. They are so heavily manipulated that nothing can be derived from them at all. Those red marks aren't stretchmarks, they are burns from acid peels. The stretchmarks themselves did not improve visibly. Most likely, these photo's were taken in the same session, and they were 100% certainly Photoshopped to make it seem "progress". I am only the messenger, people. I know Pickart is loved and respected by many. We knew for a long time that he is a questionable player in this field. We avoided exposing him because we are not in the business of tarnishing people's reputation and starting wars. Most likely, this is going to reflect badly on us and people will be posting bad things about us because we attacked their Dr. Pickart. However, the line is drawn when someone suggests that his "peptides" are stronger than ours. We have to defend ourselves when people start sugegsting on our own forum that Pickart's "peptides" are better than ours.
I want to ass that Dr. Pickart is more than welcome to criticize our products and we will not prevent him from posting here either.
Post by: SarahVaughter on January 07, 2011, 02:43:16 PM
The research is neither independent nor unbiased. We found plenty research where Pickart provided the peptides. He can provide one thing and sell another, obviously. He is not even denying it. And since he is the only one to benefit greatly from a positive result, it is questionable whether research done by obscure researchers have any merit at all - especially seen the fact that we've already established that the before-and-after pictures are crude fakes and that his 2nd generation Skin Remodeling Copper Peptides are in fact a suspension of weed killer in soya sauce, to take some poetic liberties.
But please - if you do not want to hear my opinion on people's products, don't ask me for it. If I do give my opinion, don't be angry when I express it, based on a solid understanding of resp. chemistry and image manipulation. What we don't know, we get outside expertise for. Everything we say is based on science and logic. We greatly encourage people to find flaws in our reasoning, so that the truth may emerge. I will be the first to apologize for mistakes made.
Post by: SarahVaughter on January 07, 2011, 02:51:56 PM
You are free to buy Pickart's products but please refrain from evangelizing for them here. We are not an advertizing platform for scammers.
As to the "different lighting": The luminosity histogram analysis shows the pictures are heavily manipulated. If it simply had been a lighting issue, the peaks in picture 1 and 4 would be as narrow as the peaks in picture 2 & 3, only shifted. If you do not believe us, please consult any image manipulation expert of your choice and report back here with their judgement and credentials. Dr. Pickart is also invited to explain and he can come with any outside expertise to prove that his claims of "peptides" and his photographs are genuine.
And sorry for being blunt! If I were a sweet old lady, I would never have started this site - a lot is about separating the wheat from the chaff.
Post by: SarahVaughter on January 08, 2011, 12:29:04 PM
1. She said she did not understand my arguments but she also was not interested in them, preferring to believe Dr. Pickart instead of me, strongly suggesting that I was basically libelling him.
2. She suggested that our analysis of Pickarts' fake before-and-after pictures was bogus, disinformation. Without offering an alternate explanation or refuting our arguments.
3. Then she went on to strongly endorse Dr. Pickart's products, even though our (understandable?) rule is that promoting competing products here is not allowed. Especially not when the competitor has just been exposed as a scammer. Don't tell me I'm a liar. Just don't. Not on my own forum.
4. Various rude remarks directed towards you, and towards me. It is a well-known phenomenon on forums that the most valuable contributors such as yourself face vehement opposition from certain other discussion participants. We have chosen to have a zero-tolerance policy towards such meta-critiscism. (criticism against the person and character and intentions and ulterior motives and behavior and prolificness and topic-selection of a poster, not against the actual content of the postings). We ban spammers and since yesterday we ban rude people who provide no substance. It is an act of extreme disrespect to say that you do not understand the argument, that you are not interested in the argument, but that you prefer to believe that the site owner is the scammer, and not Dr. Pickart in this case. She even said that she did not like me any more, and that she would not post here any more, and that I should delete her postings. I do not want her postings to be deleted, because they document her increasingly rude remarks over the course of this thread. To avoid that she deletes her own postings and then accuse me of rudeness on other forums without us having the ability to defend ourselves, I blocked her from accessing her own posts.
I know that emily100 made nice remarks about me in the past but I won't tolerate suggestions that I am a slanderer, that I lie and mislead, that I cause customers financial damage out of negligence, that I am a bad forum moderator etc. Not on my own forum.
No amount of flattery will make me tolerate such insults. This forum is provided as a service to whomever is seeking answers to questions. It is not a platform for Sarah-bashing. Zero tolerance for anyone attacking other forum members, zero tolerance for spammers and zero tolerance for rudeness and accusations of malfeasance towards myself. If emily wants to post again, she can create another account, it is trivial. She's banned to prevent her from deleting or editing her offending postings.
I have just started reading several long threads about Dr. Pickart's copper products. It seems that the more informed the people are, the more sceptical they are of his claims. Some report skin damage. Others report contradictions, false statements and other irregularities. A lot of critiscism towards the "research". Let Pickart show the original image files if he can be bothered. And let him explain how he can turn weed killer into gold. A quote from that thread: "I have tried the SkinBio CP Serum (regular strength) and it was a disaster for me!" "Honestly, I never thought that a skin care product could do this to someone's skin." and "i only wish my experience with cps was as pure and simple as throwing the little green bottle away along with my $40. instead, my skin aged 10+ years in six months"
A forum poster on that Essential Day Spa thread says that when he asked Pickart to clarify about the danger of free copper in his 2nd generation products, he answered that he does not want to discuss it with laypeople.
"I too find Dr. P to be full of contradictions. I've been to their forum a few times & his asnwers to questions are short & rude IMHO. I have also noticed a defitinite double-standard. He trashes every other skin care line out there & says not to use anything that is not supported by placebo-controlled, double blind, peer reviewed studies, but then his products don't meet those criteria either."
To sum up my opinion on copper peptides: GHK-Cu has at least some documented beneficial effect on skin remodeling in case of healing scars. And on collagen production in general. But Pickart's "second generation skin remodeling copper peptides" are a scam. Buy his 1st generation line if you like. Not the 2nd- they are dangerous and they aren't GHK-Cu. On other forums, similar discussions about Pichart's latest copper products ignited a firestorm of ad-hominems. It seems the topic of copper peptides is a passionate one, almost like religious fundamentalism, Pickart being the main deity. As I said, we want to avoid that - we ban people who start insulting others.
Here's what experts have to say about Pickart's second gen copper products:
"Dear Heather,
Thank you for your email. I can understand your frustration & confusion in
regard to copper peptides. Due to patent restrictions, open research on
this ingredient until recently has been somewhat restricted. We use the
GHK-Cu (Gly-His-Lys+Cu2) in our Bio-Copper Serum due to the fact that this
is the only copper peptide complex that has published research to support
its safety & efficacy. To be frank, it is the belief of our chief
scientist that the so called “second generation” copper peptides or copper
chloride+hydrolyzed soy protein is not a real copper peptide, but a copper
and protein complex. Unlike GHK-Cu, this copper complex is not naturally
found in the body. Skin cells have no receptors to accept this molecule.
Therefore, it is broken down into free copper ions and protein fragments
which apparently have little to no benefit for skin.
Until more research is done on the copper/soy digest complex, I would not
recommend its use to any of our customers. This would be the case even if
we did not produce a GHK-Cu product. Copper is a trace metal that can
trigger edema, contact dermatitis, pro-oxidation by hydroxyl radicals &
DNA damage if not bound to a particular peptide in a specific, controlled
sequence. Copper complexes other than those naturally found in the body
(such as GHK-Cu) have been found to promote double-strand DNA damage,
dependent on their geometric structures and types of ligands. This is why
we have concerns with the copper chloride/hydrolyzed soy protein material.
Please note that the INCI ingredient name for this material denotes that
it is not an actual peptide, but a combination of two different
ingredients (copper and protein). This view is also shared by the Procyte
Corporation, which for years held the patent to GHK-Cu and sponsored &
published many of the studies on the use & safety of GHK-Cu on skin.
As for studies, there are published studies on GHK-Cu and wound healing,
collagen synthesis & inhibition of scar tissue formation. We are currently
doing a pilot study investigating the use of GHK-Cu on intact, aging skin.
We do not how far this study will go – if the pilot study stirs up enough
interest that a third party wishes to undertake more research on this
topic, then we will be thrilled. The problem that we face as a
manufacturer is that any independent studies that we carry out, even if
published & peer reviewed, will be criticized and doubted, since we are
also selling this material. For credible research to ensue on this
subject, a third party would have to find this topic deserving enough to
take over the research on their own, devise & carry out a study & report
their findings. With cures for diseases such as cancer and AIDS still
evading the scientific & medical community, I do not know that a
researcher would find the use of copper peptides on wrinkles a worthy
endeavor, and would spend the time acquiring funding for such a study that
would provide no long term benefit in their eyes. And if we were to
sponsor the study, as has been done in the past by other cosmetic
manufacturers, then the findings again would be constantly questioned &
dismissed as purchased research.
I understand your desire to compare GHK-Cu with the “second generation”
copper/soy protein complex, however we believe that such a comparison is
impossible for a few reasons. Firstly, the two materials are completely
different – maybe not apples & oranges, but…let’s say oranges &
grapefruits. One material is a true copper peptide, and the other is a
combination of copper and soy protein. Secondly, there is no publically
available research on the copper/soy protein material. The firm that holds
the patent on this material cites only research done on GHK-Cu and will
not release any studies (if they exist) on the copper/soy complex for
comparison. This makes it impossible for me to answer your question. I’m
not trying to be evasive, but I only deal with facts, and I do not have
enough information on the copper/soy material to make an informed argument
other than to again state that it is the belief of our scientists that
random mixtures of copper and proteins should be avoided and that the only
safe & effective copper protein complex that can or should be applied to
skin is GHK-Cu (Gly-His-Lys+Cu2).
I hope that I was able to answer some of your questions. Thank you again
for contacting Pure Skin Formulations."
There you have it. Dr. Pickart's 2nd generation SRCP's can cause cancer as well as skin damage. There is no GHK-Cu in it at all. There is no evidence that it works. The before-and-after pictures are fake. The promises are commercial hype.
Some more "testimonials" on 2nd gen SRCP's:
"The premature ageing effect I personally experienced happened only when I used the copper, and it occured very quickly. It stopped once I discontinued the copper, and it took me coming up to 2 years to get my skin 95% back to normal again (ie. not prematurely aged)."
"So, as someone who saw first hand the havoc this stuff can wreak on your skin, I believe you 100%. I was shocked that a cosmetic could do this to someone!"
Post by: SarahVaughter on January 09, 2011, 05:59:59 AM
The rest don't contain Copper peptides but Copper chloride and hydrolized soy protein.
His real Copper peptide products are:
- Super GHK Copper Cream
- Super GHK Copper Serum
Buy these if you are interested in using Copper peptides on your skin. They are likely genuine. Buy his real products. I believe the above can be beneficial to skin.
Pickart's fake "Copper peptides" are:
- BioHeal
- Skin Signals Solutiion
- Regular CP Serum
- Super CP Serum
- Skin Signals Cream
- P&R Classic
- P&R High Retinol
- Day Cover
- TriReduction
- Regular Super Cop
- Super Cop 2x
These products likely do not contain any GHK-Cu and are possibly harmful to the skin. There have been plenty of people reporting damage that took a year to heal. We link to some in this thread (to EDS).
I think he could not make enough money with his "1st generation". GHK-Cu is extremely expensive. Even Chinese-produced GHK-Cu would cost him 100 dollars to color a large bottle deep blue. GHK-Cu products are very expensive and therefore a niche market. But Copper chloride is not much more expensive than ordinary table salt. His marketing genius lies in saying: "Look, I'm a Chemist, I invented this stuff, I file patents, give lectures and sponsor studies".
Post by: SarahVaughter on January 09, 2011, 02:33:52 PM
Who is the "chemist"? Does he have a real name? Did he go to a real school? Has he published any papers on copper peptide chemistry? If he is that confident about his statements he certainly can reveal his name and background. He then can come to Seattle and explain is his ideas in a court of law.
I have a BA degree in chemistry and mathematics from the University of Minnesota and a PhD in Biochemistry from the University of California at San Francisco.
I seriously doubt this "chemist" is real. Copper peptides are prepared by a very simple procedure. A copper salt is dissolved in water. An adequate amount of peptides is added to the solution to bind the copper ions. The pH of the mixture is raised to pH 7 and the copper peptides are formed. Copper ions cannot stay in solution as the pH is raised. If there are no peptides to bind the copper ion, then the copper ions form copper hydroxide which precipitates from the solution. The binding affinity of small peptides for copper 2+ ion is about 10exp(+9). This means that for each billion molecules of copper-peptide, there is 1 free copper ion.
A grade school student, with proper direction, could make copper peptides in about 10 minutes.
........................................
The safety tests on the 2nd generation copper peptides were published.
In vivo nickel contact dermatitis: human model for topical therapeutics. Zhai, Chang, Singh, and Maibach (University of California, San Francisco, USA) Contact Dermatitis Vol. 40, pp. 205-208, 1999
Stripped skin model to predict irritation potential of topical agents in vivo in man. Zhai, Poblete, and Maibach (University of California, San Francisco, USA) International Journal of Dermatology, Volume 37, pages 386-389, 1998
Sodium lauryl sulfate damaged skin in vivo in man: a water barrier repair model. Zhai, Leow, and Maibach (University of California, San Francisco, USA) Skin Research and Technology, Volume 4, pages 24-27, 1998
Human barrier recovery after acute acetone perturbation: an irritant dermatitis model. Zhai, Leow, and Maibach (University of California, San Francisco, USA) Clinical and Experimental Dermatology, Volume 23, pages 11-13, 1998
Howard Maibach is considered the top expert on the safety of skin products in the world and has published about 2,400 papers and books.
......................
Further safe tests on second generation copper peptides were performed at the Shanghai Medical University, a top medical school in China, and the testing facility of the Shanghai Municipal Government. The 2nd generation copper peptides were found to be non-toxic, non-carcinogenic, non-poisonous, and non-allergic.
...................
The methods of making such peptides are detailed in:
Pickart US Patent 5,382,431 Tissue protective and regenerative compositions US Patent 5,554,375 Tissue protective and regenerative compositions US Patent 5,698,184 Compositions and methods for skin tanning and protection US Patent 5,888,522 Tissue protective and regenerative compositions.
The basic method of making copper peptides is also in:
Tripeptide in human serum which prolongs survival of normal liver cells and stimulates growth in neoplastic liver. Pickart and Thaler (University of California, San Francisco, USA) Nature New Biol 1973 May 16;243(124):85-7
Growth modulating tripeptide (glycylhistidyllysine): association with copper and iron in plasma, and stimulation of adhesiveness and growth of hepatoma cells in culture by tripeptide-metal ion complexes. Pickart and Thaler (University of California, San Francisco, USA) J Cell Physiol 1980, 102(2):129-39
Growth modulating plasma tripeptide may function by facilitating copper uptake into cells. Pickart, Freedman, Loker, Peisach, Perkins, Stenkamp and Weinstein Nature 1980, 288, 715-7
...............
In over 10 years of clients using our 2nd generation copper peptides, we have had zero claims for damage on our liability insurance.
Post by: kakalakingma on January 09, 2011, 03:21:21 PM
You wrote:
“I have just started reading several long threads about Dr. Pickart's copper products. It seems that the more informed the people are, the more sceptical they are of his claims. Some report skin damage. Others report contradictions, false statements and other irregularities. A lot of critiscism towards the "research". Let Pickart show the original image files if he can be bothered. And let him explain how he can turn weed killer into gold. A quote from that thread: "I have tried the SkinBio CP Serum (regular strength) and it was a disaster for me!" "Honestly, I never thought that a skin care product could do this to someone's skin…
I too find Dr. P to be full of contradictions. I've been to their forum a few times & his asnwers to questions are short & rude IMHO. I have also noticed a defitinite double-standard. He trashes every other skin care line out there & says not to use anything that is not supported by placebo-controlled, double blind, peer reviewed studies, but then his products don't meet those criteria either. "
My response:
I know about this website and its forum before. This forum is a lot more built, so of course, more information has been shared. I am interested in reading the entire thread. But in regard to the quote you provide here, I will say this: it is a complaint that can be made by anyone. This person, doodlebug, has visual no evidence to back up his or her claim, thus, leaving only partial to no credibility. This person even states that s/he has no experience in science. Plus, even if s/he does provide a picture, it must go through further analysis to test its authenticity. Or, even if the picture is real, there are a plethora of other things to consider: what is s/he using in conjunction with the CP serum that may have caused a bad reaction or accumulated reaction? Perhaps his or her skin is too sensitive to the strength of CP serum. Dr. Pickart does say that for those with sensitive skin, they should start with GHK-Cu Serum or Cream and stay there OR acclimate to SRCP. The time of acclimation I would have to speculate that it is on an individual basis.
In regard to the second quote, I will say this: this is partially false. I have already provided studies done on the efficacy of his products on skin irritation that is in vivo and placebo-controlled. Granted, I haven’t seen “double-blind” yet. I need to double-check on that, though. Plus, in regards to GHK-Cu research, there are well-designed studies reinforcing its safety and efficacy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You quoted Dr. Torodov:
"Free copper promotes free radical damage and collagen breakdown leading to accelerated skin aging".
My response:
I was disturbed by that statement, too, Sarah! I tried to look in his forum and I see no research substantiation on that claim. I am very interested to see he post up independent publication or testing on copper chloride breaking into free copper ions in Dr. Pickart’s present product formulation or in the present with hydrolyzed soy proteins. Just a speculation on my part, could it be that the hydrolyzed soy proteins have an affinity for copper and prevents free copper ions from causing free radical damage? And just to be clear: it’s copper chloride not free copper ions that are present in his products. I am not aware of any testing or research showing that copper chloride can easily break down into free copper ions… then again… under what condition? With which chemicals? Also, which ion form of copper is dangerous? Cu(I) or Cu(II)? Copper chloride is CuCl2. I would love to see the research to this!!!
So… I ask Dr. Pickart’s team myself. Cassia sent my concern to Dr. Pickart and he replied. His reply consists of his opinion and counter-argument:
“In part, here is Dr. Pickart's reply to those who ask:
"We are often asked about assertions from a Dr. Todorov. He says that copper peptides, especially our 2nd generation peptides, cause skin damage and inflammation by increasing skin oxidation. Todorov's assertions are ignorant and not supported by clinical studies or tests in animals and humans.
Todorov is really an advertising salesman who sells advertising for his website. He called me once in the past on our Toll Free 800 line and tried to get me to buy ads on his website. I declined, then he started attacking our products.
We do not put ads on "information" websites. It is too much like buying Mafia Fire Insurance. We tried this at times on certain websites and always received great comments on our products. But as the website fees increased and we dropped using such sites, then we would receive nothing but negative reviews.
Todorov has a website smartskincare.com. Todorov claims to have many academic degrees (BS, MS, PhD, plus an additional degree in nutrition) but does not say when they were and where they granted, so we cannot check to see if they are real. Todorov passes himself off as a scientist who performed research on but never seems to have published papers in reviewed journals on skin or cell biology.
If he has data to support his contentions, then he should publish the findings in scientific journals. He also claims to be an expert on skin care and cell growth but I have working this area for 47 years and never heard of him. None of my friends in cell biology and dermatology have every heard of him. A search of Google for "german todorov" brings up nothing of value. A search of PubMed for published papers for "todorov g" also brings up nothing pertinent. Real scientists give talks, publish papers and file patents . He has his name on a 1992 paper of the actions of tumor promoters on cultured fibroblasts which he claims make him and expert on skin. But this is a cancer research paper and not about skin or dermatology.
The effects of copper peptides have been studied in over 1,000 people have been in various types of studies. Because the SRCPs were originally intended for clinical use, there were a great number of safety studies in animals and humans. Even at high SRCP concentrations, no researcher ever reported skin irritation or inhibition of skin repair.
Todorov has said that the copper complexes complexes oxidize tissue, but if this happened, then there would have been tissue inflammation observed in the studies. There are zero reports of skin damage from the academic studies.”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, there are people talking about Dr. Torodov on Dr. Pickart’s Skin Biology forum, and vice vera. On Dr. Torodov forum, a poster allegedly pasted what Dr. Pickart’s wrote in an email regarding Dr. Torodov on the topical of free copper radical damage:
“Copper-peptide oxidations were never observed on skin in any study in humans or animals. Even at copper levels that exist in Super Cop 2X. Todorov does not understand skin remodeling and confuses it with skin oxidations. Skin remodeling removes the older, damaged skin and proteins and replaces them with new skin cells and proteins. Too fast a pace on skin remodeling can remove older, hardened skin before the new skin and new protein is rebuilt and this can produce a temporary skin laxity but this always tightens later. But this is a tightly controlled regenerative process and not a biological oxidation. I will be giving a talk on skin remodeling at The 1st International Symposium on Wound Healing and Technology (WHAT I) in August. Todorov should attend so he understands what he is writing about.
But if what Todorov says is true, he should publish his studies in reviewed science journals. The world awaits his article.” (LINK)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the email reply Cassia sent to me, she provided three thread from Dr. Pickart’s forum on his reply to Dr. Torodov
Thread 1
Thread 2
Thread 3
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pure Skin Formulation (PSF) is a skin care company, not an independent testing company that does tests for other companies’ products. If I am wrong, I would love to see some credentials on their part. From the letter, PSF says,
“The problem that we face as a
manufacturer is that any independent studies that we carry out, even if
published & peer reviewed, will be criticized and doubted, since we are
also selling this material. For credible research to ensue on this
subject, a third party would have to find this topic deserving enough to
take over the research on their own, devise & carry out a study & report
their findings.”
This is true and I am glad to hear this company is honest about that. But remember Dr. Pickart do have independent researchers testing his SRCP and GHK-Cu, perhaps not all of the studies, but some studies are better than none. Also, Dr. Pickart and his team agrees that the majority of the research has been done on GHK-Cu, he is not dishonest on that note.
Post by: kakalakingma on January 09, 2011, 03:29:34 PM
I have research 5 independents studies on free copper ions and I found out something interesting. All five studies says that Cu(II) alone do NOT induce DNA damage, only in combination with other chemical, especially hydrogen peroxide. Each study uses a variety of tests to examine whether or not copper (II) ion cause DNA damage. I think 5 articles mean five times the reinforcement of credibility. There are so many articles I have to read, but I don't want to take days to read. Also, remember that copper chloride is CuCl2 in Dr. Pickart’s product, so even if it breaks down, it will be Cu(II), which should not cause DNA damage. And there is no H2O2 in his SRCP products. I think Dr. Torodov and the biochemist from PSF should have been specific about which copper ion generate free radical damage because Cu(II) surely does not according to these independent peer-reviewed published studies. I have a bad feeling the whole free copper ion issue is based on misinterpretation or a way to attack Pickart on the assumption that probably people will take their credentials for granted and decide not to look at the research themselves? Hmm… I have! Unless someone find me a contradicting research, I am sticking to what I found myself. Plus, Dr. Pickart was not a participant in this study, either. There is no acknowledgment that he plays a financial role for this study. If someone finds it, then tell me please.
Another important thing:
I am not chemist or a doctor (yet). I do like to do research and I research what I can. Also, I never say I know everything about chemistry, biology, dermatology, biochemistry or whatever; I just happen to be a skin care junkie and I don't mind sharing information. These published scientific articles are VERY scientific and esoteric about biology and chemistry or biochemistry. But no denying in reading statement like "Cu(II) alone do not cause DNA damage" that is pretty darn clear cut to me, especially when study after study reinforce it's credibility. Just saying. Oh, and sorry for not posting in a day or so. I have gathering information. lololololol
Also, I would like to apologize in advance if I misinterpret anything from the quotes I have provided. But I am fairly sure it is clear.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STUDY 1
Hydroxyl free radical is not the main active species in site-specific DNA damage induced by copper (II) ion and hydrogen peroxide.
I have partially pasted the result section (you can read the rest with the link):
“ Cleavages of "'P-labeled DNA Fragments Induced by Cu(II) plus H2O2—The extent of DNA damage was estimated by gel electrophoretic analysis. Fig. 1 shows the autoradiogram of double-stranded DNA fragments treated with Cu(II) plus H202. Oligonucleotides were clearly detected on the autoradiogram as a result of Cu(II) plus hydrogen peroxide-induced DNA cleavage. Cu(II) or H2O, alone caused no DNA damage. The cleavage increased with time (Fig. 1) and with the concentration of H2O2 (data not shown). The cleavage without piperidine treatment suggests the breakages of deoxyribose phosphate backbone by active species (Fig.1 B).T he increased amount of oligonucleotides with piperidine treatment (Fig.1A) suggests that the base alterations and/or liberations were induced by Cu(1I) plus H202.
Effects of Concentration of Bathocuproine on DNA Damage Induced by Cu(II) plus H202—Fig. 2 shows the effects of the bathocuproine concentration on DNA damage induced by Cu(II) plus H202. When 40 µM bathocuproine was added to the reaction solution containing 20 µM Cu(II), DNA damage was completely inhibited. Since bathocuproine is a specific chelating agent for Cu(I), Cu(I) is considered to participate in DNA damage. When DTPA in a concentration a t least 20 µM was added to the reaction solution containin2g0 µM Cu(II), DNA cleavage was inhibited (data not shown). The results suggest that Cu(II) binds to DNA and reacts with H2O2, resulting in DNA damage.”
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STUDY 2
Free-radical generation by copper ions and hydrogen peroxide Stimulation by Hepes buffer.
The study provided the reaction for the formation for radical:
“CU(2+) + H202 – Cu(+) + HO2 • + H(+)
The Cu(+) ions thus generated are able to generate OH• via reaction (2).
In the body free copper ions are not normally available but are bound tightely to serum albumin or incorporated into caeruloplasmin. The tendency of copper ions to bind readily to amino groups of proteins has often made it appear that proteins will thus prevent copper-ion-dependent OH• formation. Actually, the OH• generation is not prevented but rather localized to the site of binding of the copper ions, and the protein molecule itself will be damaged by the OH• radicals (Gutteridge & Wilkins, 1983; Hunt et al., 1988)….
In this paper we have studied the Cu2+/H202-dependent generation of chemiluminescence (CL), deoxyribose degradation and benzoate hydroxylation, which, used in conjunction, can be taken as markers of OH• production…”
“RESULTS
(1) Hepes-enhanced CL generated by Cu2+/H202
With the standard conditions of 5 mM-H202, 0.5 mMCuSO4 and 10 mM-phosphate buffer, the presence of Hepes was an absolute requirement for the generation of a CL response, but its effect was biphasic (Fig. 1). Below 0.5 mM-Hepes no response was seen, between 0.5 and 2.5 mm a concentration-dependent response was seen, and higher concentrations (> 10 mM) inhibited the response. Neither Cu2+ nor H202 alone, with or without Hepes, induced a response. Therefore, at low concentrations, Hepes seemed to be facilitating the reaction by keeping Cu2+ in solution and/or facilitating copper cycling in the redox potential reaction.
The effect of Hepes was also tested in the absence of sodium phosphate (Fig. 2). Again Cu2+ alone did not catalyse a CL response. With the addition of Hepes (as well as Cu2+) a CL response was obtained that was of much greater intensity, reached a maximum more rapidly and was of shorter duration than that which had been obtained in the presence of phosphate. The response showed a biphasic dependence on concentration: low concentrations (2.5-10 mM) stimulated the response in a dose-related fashion, and high concentrations (20 mM) inhibited it completely. After the spontaneous termination of CL the response could be regenerated by the addition of H202 but not by any of the other system components. In this system (with no phosphate present) Cu2+ remains in solution, and yet Hepes (at low concentrations) still stimulated the response and so can be presumed to act at least in part, by interaction with Cu2+ and subsequent generation of a more redox-active complex. High concentrations of Hepes inhibited the response to a similar degree as in the system with phosphate present…
With the use of the standard Hepes (4 mM) and phosphate (10 mM) concentrations the effect of varying the Cu2+ concentration was studied. The CL response was dose-related up to 50 mM, above which a plateau in the response was obtained and therefore less than 10% of the normal concentration of added Cu2+ was necessary. In the absence of Hepes no CL response was obtained even with concentrations of Cu2+ up to 5 mM.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STUDY 3
Copper-ion-dependent damage to the bases in DNA in the presence of hydrogen peroxide
The abstract states:
“It is proposed that Cu2+ ions bound to the DNA react with H202 and ascorbic acid to generate hydroxyl radicals, which then immediately attack the DNA bases in a site-specific manner. A hypoxanthine/xanthine oxidase system also caused damage to the DNA bases in the presence of Cu2+ ions. This was inhibited by superoxide dismutase and catalase. The high activity of Cu2+ ions, when compared with Fe3+ ions, in causing hydroxyl-radical-dependent damage to DNA and to other biomolecules, means that the availability of Cu2+ ions in vivo must be carefully controlled.”
The result of the study
“Derivatives of hydrolysed DNA samples were analysed by g.c.-m.s. with selected-ion monitoring. Products arising from free-radical attack upon the DNA bases were identified and their yields are shown in Tables 1-3. The isolated DNA used in our experiments already contained some products of base modification (Table 1), as observed previously [16,17]. Addition of H202 alone, hypoxanthine/xanthine oxidase alone, Fe3+ alone, Cu2+ alone or ascorbic acid alone produced no significant increase in the amount of base modification (results not shown). Cu2+/H202 produced significant increases in the amounts of DNA base products, in contrast with the much smaller amount produced by Fe3+/H2O2 (Table 1). The major base product formed was 8-hydroxyguanine, although increases in the amounts of almost all the other base products were observed. This wide range of base modification suggests that a highly reactive species had attacked
the DNA. Addition of ascorbic acid to the Cu2+/H202 system produced a striking increase in DNA damage, with 8-hydroxyguanine, 8-hydroxyadenine, cytosine glycol and thymine glycol being the major products formed. Also, very high proportional increases over the background levels were observed in the yields of 5,6-dihydroxycytosine, 4,6-diamino-5-formamidopyrimidine and 2,6-diamino-5-formamido-4-hydroxypyrimidine (about 170- fold). Similarly, the Fe3+/H202/ascorbic acid system produced more DNA damage than the Fe3+/H202 system. However, the amount of DNA damage by Fe3+/H202/ascorbic acid was much less than that produced by the Cu2'/H202/ascorbic acid system (Table 1).”
My commentary:
Again, it is the combination effect including Cu(II) that cause DNA damage, NOT Cu(II) alone.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STUDY 4
Site-specific Oxidative DNA Damage at Polyguanosines Produced by Copper Plus Hydrogen Peroxide*
“Result
DNA Strand Break Induced by Copper Plus H202—Untreated DNA showed a major band corresponding to the supercoiled form (form I) and a minor band corresponding to nicked circular form (form II) (Fig. 1, control lane). No linear form (form III) was evident. Plasmid DNA remained intact after incubation with 10-4 M Cu(II) or 10-3 M H202 alone (Fig. 1, lanes 3 and 4). However, when DNA was incubated with a mixture of 10-4 M Cu(II) plus 10-3 M H202 DNA damage occurred as shown by the decrease in the amount of form I molecules and concomitant increase in form II and III (Fig. 1, lane 5). This indicates that both Cu(II) and H202 were required for the production of single and double strand breaks in DNA. Up to 10-2 M Cu(II) or 10-2 H202 alone did not result in detectable loss of form I molecules (data not shown).
The rate of production of breaks by DNA by Cu(II) plus H202 as a function of incubation time was measured at different temperatures (Fig. 2). The decrease in proportion of form I DNA followed single hit kinetics as a function of incubation time with 10-4 M Cu(II) plus M H2O2. An average of one single strand break/DNA molecule (37% form I molecules remaining) was obtained after incubation periods of 11, 52, and 300 min at 37, 23, and 6.5 °C, respectively. This represents an exponential decrease in incubation period/strand break with increasing incubation temperature.
The effect of the concentration of copper plus H202 on the production of DNA strand breaks was studied (Fig. 3). With 30 min of incubation at 24"C, a mixture of 0.01 M Cu(I1) plus 0.01 mM H202 resulted in about 94% form I molecules remaining. 0.1 mM Cu(I1) plus 0.1 mM H202 resulted in 31% remaining form I molecules or slightly more than one single strand break/5400-bp molecule. This concentration corresponds to about 1 molecule of Cu(II) and 1 molecule of H202 DNA base pair. 10 mM Cu(II) or 10 mM H202 alone did not produce any detectable loss of form I molecules (data not shown).”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STUDY 5
Copper salt-dependent hydroxyl radical formation. Damage to proteins acting as antioxidants.
“Result
Both cupric (Cu 2+) and ferric (Fe 3÷) salts in the presence of hydrogen peroxide generate free radicals capable of degrading deoxyribose with the formation of thiobarbiturate-reactive products (Tables I and II). More thiobarbiturate-reactive material is formed by the use of copper salt than by an equimolar concentration of ferric salt (TableII). The cupric ion-dependent reaction can be inhibited by copper chelators, the hydroxyl radical scavengers mannitol and thiourea and significantly by all proteins added. Catalase was by far the most effective protein and its activity could be reduced substantially by heat denaturation (Table I). In comparison, the ferric salt-dependent reaction was markedly inhibited by catalase, and only slightly inhibited by superoxide dismutase, albumin and gamma-globulin (Table II).”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UPDATE: I found another study reinforcing that only a combination of chemical including Cu(II) induce DNA damage, not copper alone. Another interesting to note that all these studies mention and/or test specific antioxidant or chelator, such as EDTA or catalase or superoxide dimutase, that can suppress the damage done by the combination of chemicals. That being said, perhaps in skin care formulation, adding catalase, for example, to prevent or suppress any possible free radical occurrence. Am I missing something?
Also, I apologize I cannot post up the tables and figs for this study because only max of 5 attachment is permitted per post. Maybe in another post later.
STUDY 6
Cupric ion/ascorbate/hydrogen peroxide-induced DNA damage: DNA-bound copper ion primarily induces base modifications.
"Result
....
Induction of frank DNA strand breaks by copper ion/ ascorbate/hydrogen peroxide; the effect of dialysis of target DNA
Neither Cu(II) alone, Fe(III)-EDTA alone, ascorbate alone, nor HzOz alone induced detectable frank strand breaks after 10 min at room temperature in purified human genomic DNA, regardless of whether the DNA was dialyzed (Table 1). Dialyzable substances supported production of frank strand breaks in the presence of ascorbate + H202; dialysis of the DNA in EDTA containing buffer made DNA/ascorbate/H20~ absolutely dependent upon added transition metal ions for frank strand break generation. Also, Chelex ® resin or EDTA treatment of nondialyzed DNA suppressed induction
of frank DNA strand breaks by ascorbate + H202 in the absence of supplemental Cu(II) (Fig. 1). In this respect, the dialyzable substances behaved like transition metal ion contaminants. In the complete reaction, when Cu(II), ascorbate, H202, and DNA were added, the presence of dialyzable substances markedly enhanced the contribution of copper ions to frank strand break production; for instance, the effect of copper ions could not have been assessed if the contaminating dialyzable substances were not removed from the DNA . The presence of these dialyzable substances in the DNA substrates may explain why DNA strand breaks have been observed in previous studies using low copper ion concentrations.19,20 Dialysis partially suppressed frank strand breaks caused by Cu(II)/ascorbate/ H202 at any H202 concentration up to 100 mM (Fig. 2), although small amounts of degradation are visible at ---1 mM H202. The relative insensitivity of the glyoxal gel analysis at damage levels below 1 per 10 kilobases does not permit quantitation of the strand break frequencies observed in Fig. 2. The suppression of strand breaks caused by H202 without supplemental transition metal ion by dialysis in EDTA-containing buffer had been previously observed by others.
Post by: kakalakingma on January 09, 2011, 04:15:38 PM
Another thing, that list of ingredient list she sent to you is readily available on their website. Do you want me to send you the link to each product?
I hope everything is good between you two.
Post by: SarahVaughter on January 09, 2011, 04:28:10 PM
Post by: kakalakingma on January 09, 2011, 04:31:40 PM
Post by: thehalokid on January 15, 2011, 01:23:10 PM
Post by: SarahVaughter on January 15, 2011, 04:09:49 PM
Pickart was notified of this thread by Emily100 and he replied to her. I pasted his full answer a bit earlier in this thread.
Post by: SarahVaughter on January 28, 2011, 04:15:56 AM
1. It was a Copyright violation (copy of a full article),
2. The article had many links to commercial products by vendors we do not trust. It's OK to posts links, but this poster has been posting hundreds of links to usually the same websites. It's starting to get on my nerves :-)
I hope that the poster does not do the same with my articles (post them on other websites) because we then have to ask these websites to remove them, etc. This looks too much like SPAM, sorry. The problem with hundreds of links to always the same sites on this forum is that Google will consider this entire forum to be SPAM for those sites, and that may result in consequences in our search engine rankings.
Post by: kakalakingma on January 28, 2011, 01:07:59 PM
SarahVaughter;1210 wrote: I deleted the posting that was put here because:
1. It was a Copyright violation (copy of a full article),
2. The article had many links to commercial products by vendors we do not trust. It's OK to posts links, but this poster has been posting hundreds of links to usually the same websites. It's starting to get on my nerves :-)
I hope that the poster does not do the same with my articles (post them on other websites) because we then have to ask these websites to remove them, etc. This looks too much like SPAM, sorry. The problem with hundreds of links to always the same sites on this forum is that Google will consider this entire forum to be SPAM for those sites, and that may result in consequences in our search engine rankings.
Hi Sarah, I had no idea it was a violation because I had posted full articles on this thread before (post of article I found from Dr. leslie baumann and Dr. Torodov). I thought it was OK. I thought as long as I give credit to the original author and LINK to the original article, it would be safe. I didn't think that constitute as SPAM. I did make a disclaimer that those products are hers and not mine endorsements. So far I am only active on your forum, I have not use your articles on any other forum you can do a check on Google if you worry.
Clearly there is some specifics on SPAM that I am not understanding. I am just confused because you didn't say anything about my other similar posts. I guess I am a little confused as to where the line is drawn on how to post. But in the end it is your forum and not mine. I am owning up to my wrong doing. Sorry!
So it is only okay to put JUST the link to the orginal article instead? Would that be best? Or am I allowed to just paste a "part" or so?
Post by: SarahVaughter on January 28, 2011, 02:41:45 PM
This forum is not intended to keep reminding people how wonderful the products are of a select few companies. This forum is for help with our products and to answer questions. You are answering people's questions by posting countless links to producs we totally disagree with, to companies we do not trust and you keep doing it, day after day until this forum has nothing but hundreds of links to the same few companies.
So I would like you to link more to scientific studies and less to the same cosmetics companies with expensive, questionable products, that's all. Some people here have expressed concern about your excessive link-dropping and I gave you the benefit of the doubt but this really is getting out of hand. I think you should stop posting links to cosmetics products. There is absolutely no need for that. We decided that you've posted enough links to those companies.
We value your help to others but if your massive link storm continues then it will have negative consequences for this forum. Google does not favor, or likely will not favor, in the search engine result pages, forums with overly many links, especially not when they are for the same companies. Google will start to think that this forum is not a real forum but a fake forum, created solely to SPAM for some companies. We like this forum to be high-quality and not a link farm.
About posting articles from other sites: It's just not allowed by law, and we like to avoid trouble with other webmasters. Attribution is OK, but attribution does not absolve you from Copyright law. Attribution plus a few sentences is all that's permitted by law, and we like to keep friends with other sites.
Post by: Sonny on October 24, 2012, 03:06:12 PM
What about copper peptide products that claim to contain:
"Copper aminoacetylamino imidazolyl propanoate"
Does anyone know what that is? I tried researching it but came up with nothing.......
Thanks
Post by: SarahVaughter on May 26, 2013, 03:58:41 PM
I have heard that Pickart was not allowed to sell his 1st generation copper peptides anymore because of the threat of a patent lawsuit, hence the need to launch something else. I do not know the veracity of the claim.