nobody warned me about reflux and I would have liked the warning
Posting this because I searched for it and got nothing useful.
Setup: 0.5mg, week 95, injection-site soreness present but not ruining anything. I changed exactly one variable — area percent — and tracked it for 15 weeks.
Result: a difference, but a small one, and well inside what I would call noise if someone else posted it. So I am putting it here rather than presenting it as a finding. If two or three other people have done the same thing we might actually learn something.
Not medical advice, obviously. This is one person with a spreadsheet.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Strongly agree. Mass% and area% are answering different questions on the same document.
Slight fix: the number was 97.6, not 98.0. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.
[removed by moderator]
That is net peptide content, not purity. Different number, different meaning.
the batch number or it did not happen
Crossposting this to c/darkspot because the people who need it are not reading this community.
The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.
post the whole document, not the headline number
post the whole document, not the headline number
Disagree on that part. 96.8% and 96.2% on the same vial is normal.
post the whole document, not the headline number
Disagree on that part. 98.9% and 99.0% on the same vial is normal.
area% is not mass%, and here is exactly why it matters
Yeah, 96.8% area is not the problem, the missing impurity breakdown is the problem.
Tracking number removed. It identifies both ends of a shipment.
no "is this good?" without saying what the compound and claimed purity are
Sent one vial to Janoshik and VendorInvestigate. 97.4% and 97.2%. Cost me more than the vial did and I would do it again.
Slight fix: the number was 94.2, not 95.1. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.
post the whole document, not the headline number
purity and net content are two different numbers, same vial
This is the correct framing. The COA structure matters as much as the number.
the related substances line is where the story is
the related substances line is where the story is
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
Strongly agree. Mass% and area% are answering different questions on the same document.
the method line is doing real work, not just window dressing
axis labels included, always
purity and net content are two different numbers, same vial
Crossposting this to c/survodutide because the people who need it are not reading this community.
no "is this good?" without saying what the compound and claimed purity are
- 1Crossposting this to c/darkspot because the people who need it are not…13 comments in this branch · started by u/dario_boateng
- 2Strongly agree. Mass% and area% are answering different questions on the…5 comments in this branch · started by u/low_appetite_lisa