[Question] is 99.2% actually fine or am I being sold a rounding error
Confession thread, sort of.
I went from 2.4mg to 0.5mg much faster than I should have because the scale had stalled and I got impatient. The stall broke about 13 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 sulphur burps I did not need and a data point I cannot interpret. Two lessons in one.
Posting it in the hope that somebody at week 79 reads it before doing the same thing.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell you what to investigate, not what to expect.
Slight fix: the number was 95.1, not 94.2. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.
Slight fix: the number was 95.1, not 94.2.
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
receipts or nothing, sorry but that is the rule
the batch number or it did not happen
That is net peptide content, not purity. Different number, different meaning.
Dead space in the needle hub holds a small but non-trivial volume. On low-volume draws that can be several units.
Sceptical. If this were true we would see it reflected in the data and we do not.
Not to be pedantic but Medutest and reship are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.
Reship experience: JEEP asked for photos, processed it in 3 days, sent a replacement no questions. That is the template.
- 1Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell…7 comments in this branch · started by u/coa_janitor