[Meta] the sequence rule is doing its job and people should stop complaining
Genuinely asking, not being difficult.
Everyone in c/scamalerts repeats that regulatory is important. I believe it, but I have never seen anyone show why, and when I search I get 8 threads of people agreeing with each other.
Is there a paper? Is there a measurement? Or is this one of those things that is true because it has been repeated since 2023?
I am not trying to be the "source?" guy. I would just like a source.
best — the order this archive was captured in
No. This is the kind of confident post that gets copied into a screenshot and repeated for years. Where is the evidence.
Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.
Removed a chain here.
Disagree on that part. 98.9% and 99.0% on the same vial is normal.
Came off after 2 weeks for financial reasons. Regained about a third over the following year. Back on now at a much lower dose.
the regulatory rodent evidence is solid, human evidence is not
Yeah, rodent data does not scale to humans.
handlers in the community are rare and cautious
What was the batch number and which service?
sequence and naming claims need the actual sequence
Maintenance for 14 months now. Weight moves within about 3kg and the dose is a quarter of what it peaked at.
Sceptical. If this were true we would see it reflected in the data and we do not.
The early fullness was genuinely awful for three weeks and then simply stopped. I know that is not useful information, but it is what happened.
Inter-lab variance on this kind of assay is routinely 1–2 points. Different column, different gradient, different integration.
near-zero controlled human data, full stop
regulatory status changed in 17 countries, check yours
regulatory status changed in 17 countries, check yours
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 24 weeks to accept.
Respectfully this is a sample of one presented as a finding.
No. This is the kind of confident post that gets copied into a screenshot and repeated for years. Where is the evidence.
tendon and pentadecapeptide literature in rodents is interesting
Not to be pedantic but rodent data and tendon are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.
Slight fix: the number was 97.6, not 97.4. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.
What was the batch number and which service?
the sequence literature looks promising but rodent-only
research use only, no human protocols, no injection instructions
research use only, no human protocols, no injection instructions
Adding to this: pentadecapeptide is doing more work than the comment implies.
- 1No. This is the kind of confident post that gets copied into a screenshot…10 comments in this branch · started by u/honest_syringe
- 2Respectfully this is a sample of one presented as a finding.10 comments in this branch · started by u/nikhil_lindqvist