Matrixyl vs. Matrixyl 3000

bike6564 · Joined: 30 Aug 2005 Posts: 22

Dr. T. -

I was reading the skinactives newsletter on their website and they say the following:

"Synthetic peptides are still very expensive to make, and the longer they are, the more expensive. Every amino acid added to the sequence costs money (so it is so tempting to shorten the pentapeptide in Matrixyl to the tripeptide in Matrixyl 3000!)."

Is this true and if so, does this mean that Matrixyl 3000 is less potent than plain Matrixyl (stupid me - with the "3000" added I just assumed it was better)?

Thanks.

orangehrzn · Joined: 23 Feb 2005 Posts: 1005

Even if it's true that the Matrixyl peptides are 'very expensive to make' the usual concentrations in skin formulations are 5-10 parts per 1000 which is 5/1000 = 0.5% to 10/1000 = 1/100 = 1%. So my guess is that if you have 1oz of cream, the active Matrixyl peptide in it costs a few cents. So the explanation 'to shorten the peptide to make it less expensive' is hillarious.

drtodorov · Site Admin Joined: 10 Dec 2004 Posts: 3177

I agree. In the case of Matixyl, the active concentrationa are in parts-per-million. If you wish to make a 10 ppm cream, it will take about 280 micrograms of Matrixyl. Even if a pentapeptide were to cost $1000 per gram (which I doubt), the cost per oz of cream will be 28 cents.

Nonetheless, I would be curious to see a head-to-head comparison of Matrixyl and Matrixyl 3000 in a study.

Incidentally, the cost of short peptides is not that high. Creams with 10% Argireline (which is hexapeptide) still cost under $100

orangehrzn · Joined: 23 Feb 2005 Posts: 1005

Yeah, part per million not parts per 1000 as I calculated above. So the price can't be more than a few cents really.

merton · Joined: 12 Mar 2006 Posts: 80

Hi Dr. Todorov.
Although its manufacturer sponsored the study it appears to be double blind and there was clearly considerable effort spent to adhere to scientific protocol.

merton

drtodorov · Site Admin Joined: 10 Dec 2004 Posts: 3177

Thanks. I looked at it briefly and will look some more later. The data is interesting but there are some concerns (besides the study being sponsored by the manufacturer). First, the study was not blind. Second, even if the data is solid, the therapeutic concentration window for Matrixyl 3000 seems quite narrow, which could make it hard to use effectively in real life. Still, these developments are worth watching, and, for the enthusiasts, it may be worth a try since there does not seem to be significant side-effects.

merton · Joined: 12 Mar 2006 Posts: 80

I'm unclear what you mean by a narrow theraputic window . Do you mean that the study was too short? It would be nice to see long term study. What I wonder about the whole time is wasn't it of interest if all three peptides were run at once since they had all the people and equipment together anyway. The danger seems minimal by everyone's reporting. (most everyone's I mean).

-merton

drtodorov · Site Admin Joined: 10 Dec 2004 Posts: 3177

By "narrow therapeutic window" I mean that actives seem to have significant effect only a relatively narrow range of concentrations.

merton · Joined: 12 Mar 2006 Posts: 80

Now I understand. Thank you for clarifying this.

-merton

skincarefreak · Joined: 05 Aug 2005 Posts: 67

Hi Dr. Todorov and all!

I, too, am confused of the difference between matrixyl and matrixyl 3000. I'm using the matrixyl 3000 but would like to know if matrixyl would have been a better choice. TIA

drtodorov · Site Admin Joined: 10 Dec 2004 Posts: 3177

These two products have nothing in common except the name. Regular Matrixyl is somewhat better proven, but it is not inconceivable that some people get better results with the other one.

skincarefreak · Joined: 05 Aug 2005 Posts: 67

Thank you Dr. Todorov!

Do you think that will help with my fine lines? I've read the reviews here but they're on the regular Matrixyl. TIA

drtodorov · Site Admin Joined: 10 Dec 2004 Posts: 3177

Matrixyl 3000 is very new. All data come from manufacturer -- I haven't seen any independent studies, so it's hard to say.

skincarefreak · Joined: 05 Aug 2005 Posts: 67

Hi Dr. Todorov,

Thank you for your response. I'm sure I had put the link but I guess that wouldn't of helped anyhow. We'll see how it affects my skin. If I see it helping...I'll put it on the product review page.

drtodorov · Site Admin Joined: 10 Dec 2004 Posts: 3177

Sometimes, very long links are parsed out beause they distort the page and make the entire thread hard to view. If you link was very long, it may have been parsed out for that reason.