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 help me understand fake COA, I have read the wiki twice — 26 comments in the full submission. View in context.
548
c/scamalerts·submitted 3 months ago by u/halima_boateng

help me understand fake COA, I have read the wiki twice

Resolvedbranch of 9 comments

Confession thread, sort of. I went from 0.5mg to 12.5mg much faster than I should have because the scale had stalled and I got impatient. The stall broke about 15 weeks later, at which point I had no way of knowing whether the dose increase did anything or whether it would have broken anyway. So now I have reflux I…

Read the full submission and all 26 comments →

This branch

9 comments, started 3 months ago
u/archived_thread_a63 points·3 months ago
genuinely useful, thanks
replysharereportpermalink
u/aleksi_marchand50 points·3 months ago

PDF metadata is checkable in fifteen seconds

replysharereportpermalink
u/mei_cardoso31 points·3 months ago

PDF metadata is checkable in fifteen seconds

Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.

replysharereportpermalink
u/ledger_modmod · vetting42 points·3 months ago

no doxxing, company registration is fine, individuals are not

replysharereportpermalink
[deleted]28 points·3 months ago

[deleted]

replysharereportpermalink
u/tomas_lundgren23 points·3 months ago·edited

That is net peptide content, not purity. Different number, different meaning.

replysharereportpermalink
u/valeria_karlsen12 points·3 months ago

fake COAs always have the same tell: perfect results, zero variance

replysharereportpermalink
u/ignacio_silva3 points·3 months ago

That is net peptide content, not purity. Different number, different meaning.

replysharereportpermalink
u/freya_onwuka-33 points·3 months ago

evidence required, dated screenshots, metadata, order records, or independent test

replysharereportpermalink

← back to the whole thread

About c/scamalerts

Documented fraud: cloned storefronts, recycled COA PDFs, batch numbers appearing across unrelated vendors, fake test reports, group-buy exit scams, and the small number of patterns that account for almost all of it. Accusations without evidence are removed — not because we doubt you, but because unverifiable accusations make the community useless.

58kmembers
95submissions
Sep 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

PeptideMeter Analytics

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

peptidemeter.com
More in c/scamalerts
c/scamalerts rules
  1. Evidence required: dated screenshots, PDF metadata, order records or an independent test. No exceptions.
  2. No doxxing. Company registration details are fine; individuals are not.
  3. If a dispute resolves, edit the post and say so. We keep the record honest in both directions.
  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.
Full rules and how they are enforced →
Moderators
u/ledger_modu/scam_taxonomyu/coa_forgery_watchu/whois_wandau/sock_puppet_spotter
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.

Full disclaimer →