[Lab] SSA tirz — Medutest came back 97.4% against a claimed 98.3%
vendor. That is the whole post, but I will justify it.
Everything else people worry about in c/insurancefights is downstream of it. Titration speed, early fullness, the endless dose arguments — most of it resolves if you sort vendor out first, and almost nobody does.
I say this having got it wrong for 6 months. My eGFR 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
Correct. The batch number is load-bearing information, not optional.
Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.
You have restated the marketing copy. What is the actual substance here.
Edit to your parent would help — the concentration you quoted assumes one scenario and you have written another above it.
Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.
This order history matches mine almost exactly. Same vendor, same timeframe, same result.
Small correction: the trial was 13 weeks, not 23. Does not change your point but people will quote it.
independent test or vendor COA, which is it
Yeah, QSC took 19 days and the material was flawless. Both of those things are true.
positive and negative reports both need the same evidence standard
- 1This order history matches mine almost exactly. Same vendor, same timeframe,…6 comments in this branch · started by u/coa_janitor
- 2Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.4 comments in this branch · started by u/receipts_or_nothing