What Strength Cosmeceutical Ingredient are You Actually Getting?

[This discussion about Peptide Concentration in consumer skin products started Wednesday.]

Hi Jean,

Thank you for your thoughts on GHK-Cu and the pointer to the Matrixyl Concentration article.

I did some more research after I left the message to your website. The situation is really confusing throughout.

First, the percentages stated are wrapped in a veil of marketing mystery. Both Sederma (Matrixyl) and Lipotec (Argireline) sell a stock solution of their peptides in water. The concentration of the peptide in this solution is already quite low (0.05%)!

I agree with your observations on Cu-GHK. In this case, the concentration that one can find in the scarce literature is indeed the pure peptide. No marketing games here! Matrixyl is Pal-GHK, so you can expect that the functional dose should be comparable to Cu-GHK. Again, going through some simple arithmetic, we find that Prof. Pickart’s statement is correct even with respect to Matrixyl creams ([that his strongest products contain] 50 times more peptide)!

I had a private discussion with Prof Pickart. Understandably, he does not disclose the concentration in Skin Biology products. I bought the Super GHK-Copper Serum and I am testing it on myself. I am tempted to put a drop of it in an atomic absorption spectrometer and measure the Cu concentration. This will certainly give me a better understanding. But just looking at price, cost and margin requirements, there is room for 4% Cu-GHK in SkinBiology products.

I hold back my judgment, but just at the face of it, there is something fishy about Matrixyl.

I hope that these thoughts were a bit helpful to you.

Best regards,

Willy

Tags: ingredient disclosure, ingredient concentration, anti-aging skin care, full ingredient lists, ingredient effectiveness, product disclosure, truth in advertising, trustworthy cosmeceutical companies