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 tried meta for 12 weeks. here is what happened. — 24 comments in the full submission. View in context.
680
c/meta·submitted 2 months ago by u/camila_marchand

tried meta for 12 weeks. here is what happened.

Appealbranch of 12 comments

wiki. That is the whole post, but I will justify it. Everything else people worry about in c/cagrilintide is downstream of it. Titration speed, early fullness, the endless dose arguments — most of it resolves if you sort wiki out first, and almost nobody does. I say this having got it wrong for 23 months. My eGFR was…

Read the full submission and all 24 comments →

This branch

12 comments, started 2 months ago
u/katrin_marchetti25 points·2 months ago

Genuine question — what concentration were you at?

replysharereportpermalink
u/andres_dahlberg21 points·2 months ago

the disclosure question is policy, not individual

replysharereportpermalink
u/dexa_twice_yearlybody comp6 points·2 months ago

Did anything else change in the same window?

replysharereportpermalink
u/naomi_erdogan6 points·2 months ago

the 13 month rule change is in effect

replysharereportpermalink
u/soren_osei4 points·2 months ago

How many weeks between the two measurements?

replysharereportpermalink
u/kasper_cabrera3 points·2 months ago·edited

the periodic argument about meta standards

replysharereportpermalink
u/tuva_iyer2 points·2 months ago

rules, moderation, ranking, wiki

replysharereportpermalink
u/scam_taxonomyc/scamalerts1 point·2 months ago

Which country? Half the answers in this thread only apply in Germany.

replysharereportpermalink
u/discount_math_dm1 point·2 months ago

Not to be pedantic but rules and moderation are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.

replysharereportpermalink
u/rina_ferreira17 points·2 months ago

No. This is the kind of confident post that gets copied into a screenshot and repeated for years. Where is the evidence.

replysharereportpermalink
u/rosa_almeida8 points·2 months ago

the moderation decision is logged

replysharereportpermalink
u/camila_marchandOP6 points·2 months ago

the moderation decision is logged

Disagree on that part. 99.2% and 98.1% on the same vial is normal.

replysharereportpermalink

← back to the whole thread

About c/meta

Site governance in public: rule changes, moderation decisions and appeals, how the ranking works, wiki maintenance, sponsor disclosure, and the periodic argument about whether c/vendorvetting evidence standards are too strict. They are not.

23kmembers
62submissions
Aug 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

Sigma-Aldrich Standards

Certified reference materials for peptide identity and purity work.

sigmaaldrich.com
c/meta rules
  1. Moderation appeals go through modmail first; Meta is for policy, not individual cases.
  2. Rule-change proposals need a concrete wording suggestion.
  3. Sponsor and disclosure questions are always answered publicly.
  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.