GLPHubglpresearchhub.com
Read-only archive. GLP Research Hub is a static community record — nothing here is for sale, no account is needed, and no vote you cast is counted. Why?
Single comment threadYou are looking at one branch of switched from 1.0mg to 0.5mg and the early fullness got better, not worse — 69 comments in the full submission. View in context.
2.9k
c/labresults·submitted 1 year ago by u/refund_ledger

switched from 1.0mg to 0.5mg and the early fullness got better, not worse

Janoshikbranch of 9 comments

Posting this because I searched for it and got nothing useful. Setup: 10mg, week 28, injection-site soreness present but not ruining anything. I changed exactly one variable — Medutest — and tracked it for 17 weeks. Result: a difference, but a small one, and well inside what I would call noise if someone else posted…

Read the full submission and all 69 comments →

This branch

9 comments, started 1 year ago
u/diego_szabo372 points·1 year ago

ERP claimed 93.7%, Medutest came back 99.2%. 10 points is inter-lab variance, no drama.

replysharereportpermalink
u/refund_ledger131 points·1 year ago

Slight fix: the number was 98.7, not 98.3. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.

replysharereportpermalink
u/santiago_rasmussen34 points·1 year ago

the VendorInvestigate and PeptideMeter results differ by 3 points, both inside inter-lab variance

replysharereportpermalink
u/lina_almeida65 points·1 year ago

Slight fix: the number was 95.1, not 94.2. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.

replysharereportpermalink
u/priya_ogunleye35 points·1 year ago

multiple batches from QST show a spread, that is the data

replysharereportpermalink
u/meera_sandvik-30 points·1 year ago

multiple batches from WWB show a spread, that is the data

replysharereportpermalink
[deleted]1 point·1 year ago

[deleted]

replysharereportpermalink
u/yusuf_kirchner1 point·1 year ago

Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.

replysharereportpermalink
load more comments (1) →

← back to the whole thread

About c/labresults

A running record of independent test results people paid for themselves. Every post follows the same shape: vendor, product, batch, testing service, method, and the number. Good results and bad results are equally welcome and get equal scrutiny.

44kmembers
95submissions
Oct 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

PeptideMeter Analytics

Independent testing plus vendor-level trend data. Community-funded, unaffiliated.

peptidemeter.com
c/labresults rules
  1. Template required: vendor / product / batch / service / method / result. Freeform posts get removed with a template reply.
  2. Do not editorialise in the title. Put the number in the title and the opinion in the body.
  3. Sample of one. Say so.
  4. Independent community. Nobody here sells anything, and anyone who tries is banned.
  5. Not medical advice. Describe what you did; never prescribe to a stranger.
  6. Claims need evidence. Batch numbers, dated screenshots, independent test reports, or a citation.
  7. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Permanent ban, no appeal.
  8. No contact handles, wallet addresses or tracking numbers — they identify people.
  9. Be recognisably decent. Disagree hard, insult nobody.
Moderators
Volunteers. Unpaid, unaffiliated, and reachable through modmail only.
Before you read on

Several compounds discussed on GLP Research Hub are sold for research use only and are not approved for human use anywhere. Nothing here is medical advice and none of it is written by your clinician. If a post reads like an instruction, treat it as a description of what one stranger did.