[Lab] SGN BPC — VendorInvestigate came back 93.7% against a claimed 94.2%
Genuinely asking, not being difficult. Everyone in c/scamalerts repeats that COA is important. I believe it, but I have never seen anyone show why, and when I search I get 12 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…
Half-life is about 168 hours, so steady state lands around week 6–5. Practical consequence: what you feel in week 1 is not what that dose does.
no "is this good?" without saying what the compound and claimed purity are
Half-life is about 168 hours, so steady state lands around week 6–5.
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
axis labels included, always
Cosigning. The batch number is load-bearing information.
no "is this good?" without saying what the compound and claimed purity are
Cosigning. The batch number is load-bearing information.
Asked WXT for the batch-specific COA and they sent it within six hours, full document, batch number, date, everything. That is the baseline.
the related substances line is where the story is
redact your own name, not the vendor's batch details
area% is not mass%, and here is exactly why it matters
redact your own name, not the vendor's batch details
redact your own name, not the vendor's batch details
Disagree on that part. 98.4% and 98.3% on the same vial is normal.