Hi Dr. Pickart:

I've been using generous amounts of CP serum day and night on my face, and 2X Super Cop on some scars (bad left by the "flesh eating bacteria") on my neck. I've been happy with results. BUT, I just read a comment by a PhD in biochemistry (who consults skin care companies) that too much copper peptide can promote protein breakdown. Interestingly, she cites some of your work. Please clarify as I am afraid I may be over doing it -- thanks much.

could you site the dr/article/comment?

Thanks,

RK

The comment was made by Hannah Sivak, PhD in response to a question regarding duplicating a skin care forumlation. She vetoed the idea because of the apparently high percentage of copper peptide in which she made the comment that too much can break down proteins.

Hence my concern about overdoing SRCPs.

I have never heard of Sivak before.

We had Prof. Howard Maibach at the University of California test Skin Biology products as strong Super Cop 2X on normal human skin and damaged human skin. In all of these studies, the strong copper peptide creams only increased skin repair and were anti-inflammatory (reduced skin redness).

No skin damage or inflammation occurred with the strong SRCP creams.

Remodeling is a mixture of the removal of damaged older proteins and their replacement by newer proteins. But it is a balance.

Okay --- by bringing up the subject, I felt it important to find supporting scientific evidence.

I couldn't find a study specially saying that too much GHK-Cu kills skin proteins (as Dr. Sivak contends) BUT, I found the abstract of a study reporting that too much GHK-Cu can be damaging to the repair work.

Please note that the authors talk about nanomolar concentrations, really low. And that higher concentrations of GHK-Cu undid the good that was done -- hence, higher concentrations are called into question.

Wegrowski, Y.; Maquart, F. X.; Borel, J. P. (1992) Stimulation of sulfated glycosaminoglycan synthesis by the tripeptide-copper complex glycyl-L-histidyl-L-lysine-Cu2+. Life Sciences 51: 1049-56.


Glycyl-L-histidyl-L-lysine-copper(II) complex (GHK-Cu) is a naturally occurring tripeptide with potential healing properties. The authors studied the effect of GHK-Cu on the synthesis of glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) by normal human fibroblasts in culture. Cells were incubated with 3H glucosamine and 35S sulfate and the radioactivity of isolated GAGs was detd. GHK-Cu induced a dose-dependent increase of the synthesis of total GAGs secreted into the culture medium and those assocd. with the cell layer. The effect of GHK-Cu was biphasic with a maximal stimulation at 10-9 to 10-8 M. At higher concentrations, the rate of synthesis returned progressively to that of control cultures. Electrophoretic analysis he different GAG populations showed that GHK-Cu preferentially stimulated the synthesis of extracellular dermatan sulfate and cell layer assocd. heparan sulfate. No influence of GHK-Cu on the synthesis of hyaluronic acid was obsd. GHK-Cu stimulation of GAG synthesis may be one of the phenomena implicated in the would healing properties of the peptide.

Dr. Pickart -- I hope I don't appear rude. I was writing this last post (the one above) at the same time you were replying to mine.

I am a fan of yours, holding great respect for your work.

Not wanting to be a pest here . . . but I opened the can of worms.

Okay--I found out Sivak's problem, and I quote her below:

quote:

The beneficial effects of copper tripeptide do not show a linear relationship with copper tripeptide concentration. As concentration increases, there is an optimum range and then the benefits decrease. There is also the problem of copper stimulating the activity of proteases, enzymes capable of breaking down collagen and elastin.

FURTHER,

Sivak contends that hydrolyzed soy protein and copper chloride DO NOT a PEPTIDE make. While that may be true -- Sivak doesn't seem to give Dr. Pickart credit for apparently identifying the enzyme that will bind the molecules in the solution into a peptide -- hence he has synthesized a copper peptide (I guess).

Sivak recommends the colorless copper peptide (synthesized copper tripeptide) in a solution of 2 parts per million (ppm) -- insisting that a higher concentration breaks down skin proteins.

Thank you Dr. Pickart.

Sivak works for Skin Actives. I am unaware of any publications by Sivak on copper peptides and skin. Some of Sivak's comments indicate a very poor understanding of the methods and results of experimental studies.

1. The key is the actual studies of the effects on copper peptides on skin of live humans. As I said above, these studies found only skin repair using the same copper peptides that are found in Super Cop 2X. There were no indications of protein breakdown or protease action on the skin in the studies.

2. In the cell culture studies, the stimulation by GHK-Cu of protein synthesis of all proteins, peaked at about 10-8 to 10-9 Molar. This includes the proteases.

3. The only studies that looked at the overall balances between protein synthesis and breakdown (actually collagen synthesis vs metalloproteinase synthesis) were studies on healing in dogs that found that GHK-Cu switched the balance more toward collagen synthesis.

4. Sivak recommends 2 nanograms/milliliter of GHK without copper.

4.1 No studies ever found colorless GHK to stimulate skin repair or increase collagen production. The intensely blue GHK-copper (2+) has all the skin repair actions.

4.2 The 2 nanogram level for GHK-copper was for cell cultures studies where the peptide can directly approach the cells. But skin products are put on the surface of the skin barrier. Much greater levels of peptide-copper are need to get anything through the skin barrier. Sivak does not understand the difference between cell culture studies and human cosmetic skin renewal studies.

5. The peptone digests are mixture of pure small peptides. Other materials are removed. When the peptides in solution are mixed with copper (2+), this forms copper peptides which are extremely stable and binds tightly together. Less than one copper molecule per billion copper molecules is not bound to the peptides. Sivak does not understand protein and peptide chemistry and also is ignorant of the binding constants between proteins or peptides and copper 2.

6. Sivak seems to produce a lot of advice books on skin, hair, etc., but I cannot find any published research that she performed.

7. Many skin companies hire unemployed PhDs and tell them to hype their products.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: SkinBiologyWebmaster,

Thank you very much. Particularly for your prompt reply. I was confident you'd assuage my concerns--but---I honestly wasn't going to sleep well until we heard from you.

Much obliged

Hannah owns Skin Actives, and her methodology is extremely flawed.

Hi Lili -- thank you for your comment on Skin Actives' methodology. I've had my concerns but couldn't really put my finger on it. Will you please write more about the "flawed methodology?" We will all benefit from your knowledge. Thank you!

And a quick note of appreciation for Dr. Pickart -- I think of him and this forum often as an example of how to do things right.