[Question] is 97.9% actually fine or am I being sold a rounding error
is 97.9% actually fine or am I being sold a rounding error. I will put the method line and the batch identifier up front because that is what makes this checkable. 97.9%. Those are measured, not estimated, and not rounded up in my favour. It is a triple agonist at the GLP-1, GIP and glucagon receptors. The glucagon…
Removed the escalation schedule. There is no published protocol for members to follow and inventing one here is exactly what this board does not do.
Nothing containing this compound is approved anywhere. Research-use-only material is not approved for human use, and that is a statement of fact rather than a disclaimer.
small trial, big effect, wide error bars
Watched heart rate on a wearable across twelve weeks because the threads said to. It moved a little and I have no idea whether that means anything.
Independent purity testing on this compound is thin compared with the older molecules, simply because fewer members have paid for it. Fewer results means wider uncertainty, not a verdict.
the escalation is where most of the reported trouble sits
the energy-expenditure story is mechanistically interesting and clinically unproven