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 testing: the version I wish someone had shown me in week 1 — 30 comments in the full submission. View in context.
1.6k
c/vendorvetting·submitted 1 year ago by u/valeria_cardoso

testing: the version I wish someone had shown me in week 1

PSAbranch of 9 comments

Right, the VendorInvestigate question again, but with numbers this time. I have 5 data points over 6 weeks. The pattern is consistent enough that I do not think it is chance, and boring enough that nobody is going to screenshot it, which is usually a good sign. The thing I would flag for anyone new: the effect I am…

Read the full submission and all 30 comments →

This branch

9 comments, started 1 year ago
u/throwaway_titration192 points·1 year ago

Three years on this site and the questions have not changed at all. Which is depressing or reassuring depending on the day.

replysharereportpermalink
u/amara_haddad121 points·1 year ago

This order history matches mine almost exactly. Same vendor, same timeframe, same result.

replysharereportpermalink
u/nz_unfunded82 points·1 year ago

Slight fix: the number was 99.3, not 93.7. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.

replysharereportpermalink
[removed]36 points·1 year ago

[removed by moderator]

replysharereportpermalink
u/adnan_sandvik18 points·1 year ago

Did you test the vial you received or are we going off the vendor COA?

replysharereportpermalink
u/bence_zielinski175 points·1 year ago

receipts or nothing, sorry but that is the rule

replysharereportpermalink
u/noor_cardoso44 points·1 year ago

Cosigning the evidence standard. Receipts make the community.

replysharereportpermalink
u/mikkel_kimani-22 points·1 year ago

Correct. The batch number is load-bearing information, not optional.

replysharereportpermalink
u/soren_zamora-26 points·1 year ago

one vendor per post, multi-vendor goes in the monthly thread

replysharereportpermalink

← back to the whole thread

About c/vendorvetting

The community due-diligence desk. Vendor experiences, independent third-party test results, shipping and reship records, and the boring paperwork that separates a supplier from a story. Every substantive claim is expected to carry a receipt: an order id, a dated screenshot, or a test report from Janoshik, Medutest, PeptideMeter or VendorInvestigate.

96kmembers
130submissions
Aug 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

PeptideMeter Analytics

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

peptidemeter.com
c/vendorvetting rules
  1. One vendor per post. Multi-vendor comparisons go in the monthly comparison thread.
  2. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Zero tolerance, permanent ban.
  3. Positive and negative reports both need the same evidence standard: order date, product, and what was tested.
  4. Vendor staff must self-identify. Undisclosed vendor accounts are banned on sight.
  5. Independent community. Nobody here sells anything, and anyone who tries is banned.
  6. Not medical advice. Describe what you did; never prescribe to a stranger.
  7. Claims need evidence. Batch numbers, dated screenshots, independent test reports, or a citation.
  8. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Permanent ban, no appeal.
  9. No contact handles, wallet addresses or tracking numbers — they identify people.
  10. Be recognisably decent. Disagree hard, insult nobody.
Moderators
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.