$64.99
Research Studies:
FREE Shipping on
orders over $200
ALL ARTICLES AND PRODUCT INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WEBSITE ARE FOR INFORMATIONAL AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. The products offered on this website are intended solely for research and laboratory use. These products are not intended for human or animal consumption. They are not medicines or drugs and have not been evaluated or approved by the FDA to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease or medical condition. Any form of bodily introduction is strictly prohibited by law.
Pinealon 20mg is a research-use-only laboratory material supplied for controlled research workflows, compound characterization, and analytical documentation review. It is manufactured under rigorous quality standards to support consistency, traceability, and batch-specific verification for qualified laboratory settings.
Pinealon 20mg is intended strictly for laboratory research use only. This product is not intended for human or animal consumption, therapeutic use, diagnostic use, clinical use, veterinary use, or as a food, drug, cosmetic, dietary supplement, or household product.
| CAS No. | 114841-67-5 |
|---|---|
| Molecular Formula | C15H26N8O8 |
| Molecular Weight | 446.42 g/mol |
| Purity | ≥99% |
| Sequence | Glu-Asp-Arg |
| Applications | Neurological research, anti-aging studies, cognitive enhancement research |
| Synthesis Method | Solid-phase synthesis |
| Format | Lyophilized powder |
| Solubility | Water/Sterile Diluent |
| Stability & Storage | Up to 24 months at -20°C. Avoid repeated freeze-thaw cycles. |
| Appearance | White to off-white powder |
| Regulatory/Compliance | Not for human consumption. For research use only. |
| Safety Information | MSDS available upon request |
Consider these supplementary peptides for a comprehensive research approach.
Researchers evaluating where to buy Pinealon for research should begin with compound identity, RUO labeling, COA availability, and batch-specific analytical documentation. Pinealon is discussed in published literature as Glu-Asp-Arg, a short synthetic tripeptide listed by PubChem as C15H26N6O8 with a computed molecular weight of 418.40 g/mol [1]. This page frames Pinealon peptide information for laboratory research only, separating literature context from product claims.
To buy Pinealon for research in an RUO-safe way, research buyers should review the compound name, RUO label, batch-specific COA, HPLC purity data, LC-MS or mass-spectrometry identity support, lot number, and storage documentation before procurement [15], [16], [18], [22]. Products discussed in this article are intended for laboratory research use only and are not intended for human or animal consumption.
The phrase buy Pinealon becomes safer and more precise when it is completed as buy Pinealon for research. That framing shifts the page away from consumer intent and toward technical procurement, research use, compound identity, batch documentation, and RUO labeling.
A query such as buy Pinealon peptide should be answered with documentation-first content. For research peptides, the key question is not a promised outcome; it is whether the research material is clearly identified, traceable, and supported by testing records.
The first documentation layer is the product identity record: compound name, sequence, molecular formula, and listing information. PubChem identifies Glu-Asp-Arg as a tripeptide composed of L-glutamic acid, L-aspartic acid, and L-arginine joined by peptide linkages [1].
The second layer is batch-specific evidence. A certificate of analysis should connect the product listing to a lot number, purity method, identity method, date, and laboratory record where available. ISO Guide 31 describes reference-material documentation as a way to accompany materials with clear information that helps users confirm suitability for a defined purpose [23].
RUO labeling keeps a product page aligned with laboratory research use. FDA guidance describes RUO and investigational labeling in the context of products intended for research or investigation rather than established diagnostic positioning [21].
The eCFR also emphasizes labeling statements, lot or control numbers, purity and quality statements, and storage instructions for certain laboratory reagent contexts [22]. For a Pinealon research page, that same documentation mindset supports clearer procurement review.
A Pinealon product-page research guide should serve laboratory buyers, technical procurement teams, and qualified researchers who need documentation before evaluating a research material. It should not read like a wellness article, personal-use guide, or claim-centered product page.
Product-page positioning for Pure Lab Peptides should keep four priorities visible: RUO scope, compound identity, analytical documentation, and literature boundaries. That structure supports commercial research intent without turning published literature into a product promise.
Pinealon fits the bioregulator peptide research lane because the literature identifies it as the EDR peptide, a short peptide associated with Khavinson-group research on gene expression and protein synthesis models [2], [10]. Pinealon is a synthetic tripeptide, so its product-page identity should remain anchored to Glu-Asp-Arg rather than broader claims.
A safer product-page description can say that Pinealon appears in published short-peptide literature as a research tool for controlled research settings. It should not suggest that the product is intended for non-laboratory applications.
When researchers compare where to buy Pinealon for research, documentation should do the heavy lifting. Product documentation should identify the compound, match the lot, show available testing methods, and keep RUO labeling consistent across the product page, label, and COA.
That is the practical difference between commercial research intent and consumer buying intent. The page can support procurement decisions without promising product performance or implying direct application outside laboratory research.
Research buyers should compare the compound name, sequence, COA availability, purity method, identity method, lot number, certificate date, and storage documentation. Analytical procedure guidance from ICH Q2(R2) treats identity, purity, impurities, and assay as common analytical objectives for validated procedures [18].
A simple supplier documentation matrix can help: product listing, COA, label, lot record, analytical method, and storage note. If those records conflict, the listing deserves closer review before procurement.
Pinealon is described in research literature as Glu-Asp-Arg, also known as EDR peptide [1], [2]. The compound belongs to the short peptide and peptide bioregulator research context associated with Khavinson literature, though product-page copy should describe that context neutrally.
The literature includes molecular modeling, DNA interaction, gene expression, oxidative stress, and preclinical model discussions [2], [4], [5]. None of those areas should be reframed as claims for a research-use-only product.
PubChem lists Glu-Asp-Arg with molecular formula C15H26N6O8 and computed molecular weight 418.40 g/mol [1]. That identity record is useful for checking whether product-page documentation, COA information, and analytical records describe the same compound.
Pinealon peptide documentation should also distinguish compound identity from literature interpretation. A compound identity statement can be factual; a claim about what a product does is a different category and requires strict RUO boundaries.
Glu-Asp-Arg means glutamic acid, aspartic acid, and arginine in sequence. IUPAC amino acid nomenclature lists Glu for glutamic acid, Asp for aspartic acid, and Arg for arginine [14].
This sequence context matters because a short peptide can be described by both its name and residue order. For Pinealon, the EDR peptide naming convention helps connect the product-page record to literature that may use either Pinealon or Glu-Asp-Arg.
Synthetic tripeptide identity matters because purity alone does not prove identity. HPLC can separate and quantify peptide-related peaks, but mass spectrometry can add mass-based evidence that supports identity review [15], [16].
For research procurement, Pinealon identity should be checked across product-page text, COA documentation, and analytical testing records. The same compound name and sequence should appear consistently.
Pinealon peptide bioregulator research sits within a broader literature area on ultrashort peptides and gene expression. Reviews of peptide regulation describe short peptides as a class studied for interactions with gene expression and protein synthesis pathways [10], [12].
This background can improve topical relevance, but it should remain a literature overview. Pure Lab Peptides should not frame Pinealon research as a consumer outcome, clinical claim, or wellness claim.
Khavinson literature has examined short peptides, including EDR, in relation to molecular genetics, gene expression, and protein synthesis [2], [10]. The EDR peptide review discusses Pinealon in the context of gene expression models and protein synthesis regulation [2].
Because much of this literature is mechanistic or model-specific, the article should use careful language: researchers have investigated, the literature describes, and model-specific findings suggest. It should not say that Pinealon produces outcomes in a product-page context.
The term Pinealon can invite confusion because neighboring bioregulator literature may discuss the pineal gland. For Pinealon documentation, the primary identity anchor remains Glu-Asp-Arg rather than a tissue-origin assumption [1], [2].
Pineal gland literature may help map the broader bioregulator research lane, especially when reviewing Khavinson-group short peptide publications. Still, Pinealon product-page content should focus on verified identity, research context, and documentation.
Published Pinealon research includes cellular and gene expression themes. The EDR peptide review analyzes gene expression and protein synthesis regulation in molecular research context [2].
Gene expression itself is a broad biological process involving transcriptional control and interactions between regulatory factors and DNA regions [27]. On an RUO page, that context should explain research models, not make product claims.
Gene expression models can examine changes in transcription, promoter-associated activity, protein synthesis markers, or pathway-linked signals under defined experimental conditions [2], [10], [27]. In Pinealon research, EDR has been discussed in relation to DNA interaction and gene-expression regulation [2], [4].
A safer interpretation is that Pinealon may be relevant to gene expression research questions in controlled laboratory models. The phrase suggest that Pinealon may should remain tied to model-specific literature, not product positioning.
Cellular stress response models can include oxidative stress, programmed cell death markers, cell signaling shifts, or protein expression changes. A Pinealon study reported EDR-related observations in cerebellar granule cells, neutrophils, and PC12 cell models under oxidative stress conditions [5].
That kind of literature belongs in research context. It should be presented as model-specific evidence, not as a product claim or product-use statement.
Reactive oxygen species appear in Pinealon literature through oxidative stress cell-model work [5]. In the same study, the authors reported changes in ROS accumulation and ERK 1/2 timing in specific cell models [5].
Oxidative stress language can be useful for topical coverage, but it requires disciplined phrasing. The page should say that literature has examined ROS-related models; it should not claim that the product changes oxidative stress in any non-laboratory setting.
Pathway research for Pinealon includes gene expression, DNA interaction, cell signaling, and oxidative stress model language. The most useful product-page approach is to map these pathways as literature categories.
A pathway map can show where EDR peptide appears in the literature: DNA interaction, transcription-related models, protein synthesis, ERK signaling, and cellular stress. That map should include limitations, because pathway relevance is not the same as a product claim.
The Pinealon oxidative stress study reported delayed ERK 1/2 activation timing in its cell-model system [5]. ERK 1/2 is part of the broader MAPK/ERK pathway, a cell signaling lane often discussed in cellular stress response research [5].
This is useful for laboratory research interpretation, especially when reading Pinealon research alongside cellular stress models. It is not a basis for outcome-based product positioning.
A pathway connection shows what a study examined. It does not show that a research material has a defined outcome outside the study setting.
This is the central RUO boundary. A study label such as cognitive function belongs to literature interpretation, not product-page positioning. Phrases about product performance also require careful framing because they can become product claims if separated from model-specific evidence.
Cell models add controlled research applications because they let researchers examine defined molecular markers under defined assay conditions. For Pinealon, in vitro research has included cell models and DNA-interaction studies [3], [5].
Cell-model data can support research hypotheses and source discovery. It cannot replace analytical identity documentation, lot traceability, or RUO labeling on a product page.
Published Pinealon research should be read through an evidence landscape, not as a single claim set. The safest framework separates in vitro findings, preclinical literature, review articles, analytical documentation, and RUO boundaries.
| Research Area | What Literature Examines | Evidence Type | RUO Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Compound identity | Glu-Asp-Arg formula, tripeptide composition, and molecular record [1] | Official database | Supports identity review, not product claims |
| DNA interaction | EDR interactions with DNA and nucleic acid structures [3], [4] | In vitro and physicochemical literature | Useful for research context; not product positioning |
| Gene expression | EDR peptide discussion in gene expression and protein synthesis literature [2], [10] | Review and mechanistic literature | Supports literature mapping only |
| Oxidative stress | ROS and ERK-related observations in defined cell models [5] | Cell-model research | Model-specific evidence with limits |
| Preclinical model literature | Rat offspring from prenatal hyperhomocysteinemia and NMDA receptor gene-expression literature [6], [7] | Preclinical literature | Should not become product-use guidance |
| Same-lane model mapping | Cortexin and Pinealon in hypoxia and hypothermia literature [8] | Preclinical literature | Useful for source discovery and limitation review |
Preclinical findings should be read as model-specific literature. The Pinealon literature includes preclinical settings such as prenatal hyperhomocysteinemia and NMDA receptor subunit gene-expression research [6], [7].
Those findings can guide source discovery and evidence mapping. They should not be converted into product-page claims, consumer-facing language, or direct application statements.
In vitro data can support mechanistic questions about cell models, DNA interaction, signaling, and stress response markers. Fedoreyeva and colleagues reported short fluorescence-labeled peptides, including Pinealon, in cellular and nuclear compartments in a HeLa model and described interactions with nucleic acid structures [3].
That does not make the product a validated tool for every research setting. It means that in vitro literature can inform research context when interpreted narrowly.
Animal model literature requires caution because it reflects a controlled study context. Pinealon research includes animal model literature, including rat offspring from prenatal hyperhomocysteinemia and older rat stress-model literature involving Cortexin and Pinealon [6], [8].
A product page should identify these as evidence categories only. The page should not give application guidance or imply that a research material is intended beyond laboratory research.
Same-lane entities for Pinealon include EDR peptide, Glu-Asp-Arg, short peptide research, peptide bioregulator research, Cortexin and Pinealon literature, gene expression, DNA interaction, oxidative stress, and cell signaling. These entities help build topical coverage without drifting into unrelated peptide categories.
A same-lane entity map should answer one question: does the entity help explain Pinealon research documentation, identity, literature interpretation, or analytical verification? If not, it does not belong on the product page.
The EDR peptide review identifies Pinealon in relation to Cortexin-derived peptide literature [2]. Separate literature also discusses Cortexin and Pinealon in older rat stress-model research [8].
This same-lane mapping is useful because it helps researchers find adjacent sources without stacking unrelated compounds. It should remain a research-literature map, not a comparison of product outcomes.
The phrase hypoxia with Cortexin and Pinealon belongs to a specific preclinical literature lane, not a product-page claim [8]. It can be used to explain why some Pinealon research appears in stress-model and neurobiology contexts.
A safer source-quality filter asks whether the paper is peer-reviewed, whether the model is clearly described, and whether the page keeps the finding separate from product positioning. That filter prevents literature terms from becoming commercial claims.
Rat offspring literature appears in Pinealon’s published evidence base through prenatal hyperhomocysteinemia research [6]. It is useful for understanding how the compound has appeared in preclinical research models.
The limitation is just as important as the finding. Preclinical literature can support a research context section, but it cannot be treated as direct product guidance for a research-use-only material.
Research literature and product claims are different categories. Literature can describe what a study examined; a product page must describe what the research material is, how it is documented, and what RUO boundaries apply.
This section is the claim-boundary framework for the article. It keeps Pinealon research, Pinealon peptide documentation, and buy Pinealon for research intent aligned with RUO positioning.
Claim boundaries mean that the product page should not promise outcomes, summarize study findings as product actions, or present research terms as intended applications. FDA RUO guidance emphasizes that RUO labeling should be consistent with the product’s research-only positioning [21].
For Pure Lab Peptides, the safer emphasis is documentation: compound identity, COA review, analytical testing, lot traceability, storage documentation, and supplier transparency.
Study findings need documentation framing because readers may arrive with mixed search intent. Some searches can blend published literature, commercial procurement, and non-RUO expectations.
Documentation framing solves that problem. It explains that Pinealon research literature exists, but procurement review should focus on the label, COA, analytical methods, lot number, and research-use-only statement.
Product-page copy keeps research focus by using neutral academic verbs: examined, investigated, evaluated, characterized, reported, and described. It avoids turning pathway relevance into a product claim.
For Pinealon, this means the page can discuss gene expression, protein synthesis, oxidative stress, reactive oxygen species, and cell signaling as literature context. The product-page offer remains a research material listing supported by documentation.
A COA review section helps research buyers evaluate documentation before procurement. It should explain what the COA identifies, what it does not prove by itself, and how it connects to lot traceability.
For Pinealon, a strong COA review should connect the certificate to the product listing and batch. It should also identify whether HPLC, LC-MS, mass spectrometry, or other analytical methods are listed.
COA documentation should identify the compound, lot number, test date or certificate date, method, purity result, and identity support when available. eCFR labeling provisions for laboratory reagent contexts include purity and quality statements, storage instructions, and lot or control number information [22].
For reference-material documentation, ISO Guide 31 describes certificates and product information sheets as documentation intended to help users assess suitability [23]. That same documentation logic supports peptide COA review.
Batch-specific documentation supports traceability by connecting the physical research material to a particular lot. NIST describes reference materials as having certificates that state certified property values, which illustrates why documentation should be tied to a defined material record [24].
Traceability also improves comparability across lab records. A review of metrological traceability describes traceability to recognized reference systems as a key element in assuring comparable measurement results [26].
Certificate dates and lot numbers matter because research documentation should be batch-specific and time-specific. The eCFR identifies lot or control numbers as information that can help determine manufacturing history in relevant laboratory contexts [22].
For Pinealon research procurement, the COA date, lot number, and product label should match. If the records do not align, the listing should be reviewed more carefully.
Analytical testing supports product-page trust by showing how a supplier documents peptide identity and purity. For Pinealon, the most relevant methods are HPLC, LC-MS, and mass spectrometry.
Here is a numbered lab-test verification sequence for documentation review:
ICH Q2(R2) places identity, purity, impurities, and assay among common analytical measurement objectives, while ICH Q14 addresses science- and risk-based analytical procedure development [18], [20].
HPLC supports peptide purity review by separating peptide components and related impurities under chromatographic conditions. HPLC methods are widely used for peptide analysis and purification, including reversed-phase, ion-exchange, and size-exclusion modes [15].
For a Pinealon product page, HPLC data should be treated as purity support. It should be paired with identity-focused evidence where available.
LC-MS supports identity verification by pairing liquid chromatography with mass-spectrometry detection. LC-HRMS has been used for qualitative and quantitative characterization of peptide drugs and related impurities in analytical research [17].
For Pinealon peptide identity, LC-MS can help connect observed mass data with the expected compound record. It does not replace the need to match the lot number, COA, product listing, and label.
Mass spectrometry adds mass-based evidence that can support synthetic peptide characterization. Reviews of synthetic peptide mass spectral analysis describe MS as a tool for evaluating peptide detection and characterization limits [16].
For short peptides such as Pinealon, mass data can strengthen identity review when the expected molecular record is known. It should be interpreted with method details and batch documentation.
Supplier documentation review brings the page back to commercial research intent. The goal is to help laboratory buyers compare documentation quality without creating consumer-facing claims.
A strong procurement review checks whether the supplier makes the RUO scope clear, provides batch-level documentation, identifies analytical methods, and keeps product-page language focused on research purposes.
RUO labeling should be consistent across the product page, product label, COA, and supporting documentation. FDA guidance explains RUO labeling for certain research products and emphasizes alignment between labeling and intended research positioning [21].
Consistency matters because research-use-only pages can lose clarity when literature language is mixed with product positioning. Pinealon research use should remain a laboratory research context, not a claim about the product.
This checklist supports procurement review without moving into application guidance. It is a documentation checklist, not a product-use guide.
Storage documentation supports research workflows by giving laboratories a record of conditions that protect material integrity within the supplier’s stated framework. ICH Q1A describes stability testing as evidence for how quality varies with time under environmental factors such as temperature, humidity, and light [25].
For Pinealon, product-page storage information should be recorded as documentation. Laboratory teams should follow supplier documentation and institutional procedures without treating the product page as a handling manual.
Several misunderstandings can make a Pinealon research page drift away from RUO positioning:
These misunderstandings are common because Pinealon research sits near gene expression, oxidative stress, neuroprotective research models, and preclinical literature. The safer editorial approach is to keep every claim anchored to research context and documentation.
Pinealon 20mg and buy Pinealon 20mg are catalog descriptors, not separate SEO targets. The canonical compound remains Pinealon, and the product-page research guide should not build a separate content lane around a listing amount.
The same applies to buy Pinealon peptide for research. The safe commercial phrase should point readers toward RUO labeling, COA review, analytical testing, and supplier documentation rather than variant targeting.
Review the product-page documentation, COA details, analytical testing references, lot traceability, and RUO labeling before evaluating Pinealon for laboratory research. For research teams comparing peptide suppliers, prioritize transparent documentation, consistent labeling, and batch-level records.
Pure Lab Peptides product information should be read as research-use-only documentation support. Keep the focus on compound identity, research context, COA review, and supplier documentation before selecting any RUO peptide compound.
Research use only means Pinealon is positioned solely as a laboratory research material. An RUO Pinealon page should focus on product documentation, compound identity, COA review, lot traceability, analytical testing, and supplier documentation. It should not frame published literature as product guidance, non-laboratory positioning, or a claim about outcomes outside controlled research settings.
Researchers should consider documentation consistency before they buy Pinealon for research. The product listing, RUO labeling, batch-specific COA, lot number, and analytical testing records should align. For Pinealon, the compound identity should also match Glu-Asp-Arg documentation, including peptide sequence and molecular record where available [1].
A COA matters for Pinealon because it provides batch-specific documentation that can connect the listed research material to purity, identity, lot number, and certificate details. A COA should be reviewed alongside the product label and supplier documentation. It supports research procurement review, but it should not be treated as a stand-alone substitute for complete analytical documentation.
Researchers can verify Pinealon purity and identity by reviewing analytical testing documentation. HPLC can support peptide purity review, while LC-MS and mass spectrometry can support peptide identity confirmation when paired with batch-specific documentation [15], [16]. The strongest review compares the COA, product listing, lot number, and expected Pinealon peptide identity in one documentation record.
Published literature about Pinealon should be interpreted as research context, not product-positioning language. Literature may discuss neuronal models, receptor signaling, epigenetics, redox context, kinase pathways, or other model-specific mechanisms, but those topics should remain tied to study conditions and limitations. Product-page copy should return to RUO labeling, COA review, analytical testing, and documentation.
Pinealon product pages should stay research-use-only by separating literature language from product claims. Terms such as nootropic, cognitive enhancement, brain health, and peptide therapy can drift into consumer-facing or clinical-use language if framed incorrectly. RUO pages should instead focus on compound identity, published literature boundaries, COA review, analytical testing, lot traceability, and product documentation.
The following authors are recognized for published research that helped shape the scientific context discussed in this article.
Author profile: RUDN Journal Profile
Vladimir Khatskelevich Khavinson appears across the Pinealon and short-peptide literature that informed the article’s research context. His publications are relevant to Pinealon as Glu-Asp-Arg, EDR peptide literature, gene expression models, protein synthesis discussion, and oxidative-stress research framing. His work helped shape the article’s emphasis on keeping bioregulator peptide research separate from product claims while focusing on compound identity, model-specific literature, and documentation review. The selected publications below were used for scientific background, pathway-focused interpretation, and research-language context.
Selected publications:
Author profile: SciProfiles
Natalia Sergeevna Linkova is a coauthor on multiple publications that informed the article’s short-peptide and Pinealon research context. Her work is relevant to gene expression, epigenetics, DNA–peptide interaction models, and literature interpretation within bioregulator peptide research. These themes support the article’s focus on research documentation, compound characterization, and model-specific discussion rather than product-positioning language. The selected publications below provide useful background for understanding Pinealon within the broader literature on ultrashort peptides, gene expression, and pathway-level research interpretation.
Selected publications:
This research disclaimer clarifies how this page handles published literature and search language around Pinealon. In bioregulator peptide research content, terms such as nootropic, cognitive enhancement, mental clarity, brain health, nasal spray, peptide therapy, effects of Pinealon, bioavailability, clinical outcomes, and product performance can drift into consumer-facing, wellness, administration-focused, clinical-use, or product-claim territory when framed incorrectly.
Here, those phrases are treated only as research-language examples that require separation from product positioning and model-specific literature interpretation. The focus remains on Pinealon compound identity, product documentation review, COA review, analytical testing, peptide purity, lot traceability, research-use-only labeling, supplier documentation, and published literature boundaries.
Our team is ready to assist you with any inquiries regarding our catalogue of peptides and their applications.
Discount Applied Successfully!
Your savings have been added to the cart.
There are no reviews yet.