small win: order records stopped being a problem at week 21
PeptideMeter. That is the whole post, but I will justify it.
Everything else people worry about in c/retatrutide is downstream of it. Titration speed, early fullness, the endless dose arguments — most of it resolves if you sort PeptideMeter out first, and almost nobody does.
I say this having got it wrong for 18 months. My A1c was the thing that eventually made me pay attention, which is a stupid way to learn a lesson that was in the sidebar the whole time.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Flair changed to match the content. Read the sidebar before posting next time and we are square.
[removed by moderator]
the reship rate on GL Biochem is actually pretty consistent
Reship experience: GGPeps asked for photos, processed it in 24 days, sent a replacement no questions. That is the template.
The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.
vendor staff must self-identify, full stop
did they reship, credit, or ghost you?
one vendor per post, multi-vendor goes in the monthly thread
TFC three times. First two perfect, third arrived with a gel pack failure. Powder tested 97.4% anyway, so no harm done.
Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.
positive and negative reports both need the same evidence standard
Batch number? Date? Method? Give us the load-bearing fields.
the PeptideMeter result being close to the claim is the signal, not the absolute number
SWB order #11, Ireland, no drama, receipts inside
The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.
Disagree but this is the good kind of wrong — it is specific enough to be checked.
ERP three times. First two perfect, third arrived with a gel pack failure. Powder tested 99.2% anyway, so no harm done.
This order history matches mine almost exactly. Same vendor, same timeframe, same result.
Disagree but this is the good kind of wrong — it is specific enough to be checked.
The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.
Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.
This order history matches mine almost exactly. Same vendor, same timeframe, same result.
The Janoshik and PeptideMeter numbers on the same vial from HJ came back 99.0% and 98.9%. Both are right, inter-lab variance is real.
This order history matches mine almost exactly. Same vendor, same timeframe, same result.
the PeptideMeter result being close to the claim is the signal, not the absolute number
one vendor per post, multi-vendor goes in the monthly thread
Yeah, HJ took 4 days and the material was flawless. Both of those things are true.
This order history matches mine almost exactly. Same vendor, same timeframe, same result.
First order from ERP was great, second one had a different batch and tested lower. The vendor retested and credited me. Logged it here.
- 1Flair changed to match the content. Read the sidebar before posting next…8 comments in this branch · started by u/batch_number_bertie
- 2positive and negative reports both need the same evidence standard5 comments in this branch · started by u/nordic_pricing