[Lab] identity confirmed but net peptide content was 71%
identity confirmed but net peptide content was 71%. One vial, one service, one member paying, which is the only kind of result this board should treat as evidence. The relevant figures are 71%, and they come from the same log I have kept the whole time. Bought small, tested identity first, and only then thought about…
most of the claims here trace to the same handful of rodent papers
The published literature is overwhelmingly preclinical, largely in rodent models. Translating a rodent result into a human expectation is not a small step, and almost every confident claim here takes it silently.
research-use-only means not approved for human use, and here that covers everything
Yes — the rodent literature is real and it is rodent literature. The gap to a human claim is enormous and it gets crossed in one sentence here.
Asked Homopeptide for the theoretical mass alongside the certificate and they sent it without asking why.
[removed by moderator]
Same. Solution stability is the practical question and almost nobody asks it.