u/naomi_ekstrom
Contributes reviews on supplier material. Based in Essen.
member · joined 14 May 2025
comment on [Trial Data] STEP 1 vs SURMOUNT-1 side by side, with the caveats in c/trialwatch · 9 points · 6 days ago
What was the dropout rate?
comment on [Question] interval stretching vs dose reduction — is either better in c/tapering · 6 points · 8 days ago
the 4 week discontinuation arm is the data
comment on the mean transit time is useless, the 90th percentile is what melts your pack in c/intlshipping · 5 points · 8 days ago
origin to destination, carrier, transit variance
comment on how many independent tests before you trust a vendor. my number is three in c/vendorvetting · 84 points · 9 days ago
referral links mean instant ban, no exceptions
comment on domain registered eleven days ago, 400 five-star reviews. sure in c/vendorvetting · 1 points · 20 days ago
WWB order #6, Spain, no drama, receipts inside
comment on watch where the curves separate, not just whether they do in c/trialwatch · 4 points · 22 days ago
STEP, SURMOUNT, SURPASS, SELECT, FLOW, TRIUMPH — read the appendix
comment on why do vendor accounts always have the same three typos in c/vendorvetting · 1 points · 23 days ago
receipts or nothing, sorry but that is the rule
comment on why do vendor accounts always have the same three typos in c/vendorvetting · 6 points · 24 days ago
Slight fix: the number was 98.7, not 99.3. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.
comment on [Results] 47 weeks, 36kg, and SURPASS was the hard part in c/trialwatch · 59 points · 25 days ago
Disagree. What you are describing is consistent with FLOW, not with what you concluded.
comment on the appetite return question that gets asked weekly, answered properly in c/tapering · 23 points · 25 days ago
Strongly agree. The regain is expected.
comment on interval stretching is the most under-discussed thing in c/t2dglp1 in c/tapering · 96 points · 1 months ago
Has anyone actually got this in writing, or is it forum lore at this point?
comment on [Vendor] MKM communication is slow but the material has been fine in c/vendorvetting · 7 points · 1 months ago
Correct. The batch number is load-bearing information, not optional.
comment on help me understand FLOW, I have read the wiki twice in c/trialwatch · 15 points · 2 months ago
absolute risk reduction, not relative risk reduction, that is how you decide
comment on vendor vs testing — genuinely asking which matters more in c/vendorvetting · 10 points · 2 months ago
JEEP order #18, Ireland, no drama, receipts inside
comment on vendor vs testing — genuinely asking which matters more in c/vendorvetting · 19 points · 2 months ago
Not to be pedantic but Janoshik and Medutest are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.
comment on testing is the most under-discussed thing in c/bloodwork in c/vendorvetting · 87 points · 2 months ago
receipts or nothing, sorry but that is the rule
comment on 18 months in and TRIUMPH is still the thing I get wrong in c/trialwatch · 4 points · 2 months ago
That is net peptide content, not purity. Different number, different meaning.
comment on [Question] Sweden — has anyone got a straight answer on interval stretching in c/tapering · 1 points · 2 months ago
tapering instructions are not welcome here
comment on what would you tell week-1 you about SELECT in c/trialwatch · 6 points · 3 months ago
The evidence standard in c/vendorvetting gets called too strict about once a month, and every time, the thread ends with the complainant agreeing.
comment on [Vendor] WXT order #2 — the Netherlands, 27 days, no drama, receipts inside in c/tapering · 1 points · 3 months ago
the people who came off and restarted without shame