tried PeptideMeter for 11 weeks. here is what happened.
Posting this because I searched for it and got nothing useful.
Setup: 0.5mg, week 41, injection-site soreness present but not ruining anything. I changed exactly one variable — below spec — and tracked it for 13 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
MKM / BPC / batch 10 / PeptideMeter / 98.7% — that is the shape
SGN / BPC / batch 19 / Janoshik / 99.3% — that is the shape
Disagree. What you are describing is consistent with test results, not with what you concluded.
Disagree.
Adding to this: PeptideMeter is doing more work than the comment implies.
Titration speed is a side-effect dial far more than an efficacy dial.
Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.
sample of one, say so
Not to be pedantic but batch and PeptideMeter are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.
Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.
the Medutest and PeptideMeter results differ by 11 points, both inside inter-lab variance
Titration speed is a side-effect dial far more than an efficacy dial.
Disagree on that part. 95.1% and 97.6% on the same vial is normal.
- 1Titration speed is a side-effect dial far more than an efficacy dial.7 comments in this branch · started by u/phase_two_pete
- 2SGN / BPC / batch 19 / Janoshik / 99.3% — that is the shape4 comments in this branch · started by u/cold_chromatogram_only