u/santiago_ndiaye

more water means more units for the same dose, which means finer resolution

the concentration on the vial in marker is the most important step

No. This is the kind of confident post that gets copied into a screenshot and repeated for years. Where is the evidence.

Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell you what to investigate, not what to expect.

Sceptical. If this were true we would see it reflected in the data and we do not.

never post a calculation as advice without stating the concentration

Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 81 weeks to accept.

20mg vial, 2mL water, concentration is 20/2 — write it on the vial afterwards

What was the vial size and how much bac water?

i am begging people to write down the concentration

bacteriostatic and sterile water are not interchangeable, do not use them that way

Cosigning. The concentration on the vial in marker is load-bearing.

Yeah, showing the arithmetic is the fastest way for someone to spot the error.

Week 9 or week 29?

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

Strongly agree.

Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 90 weeks to accept.

Yeah, that is totally normal for week 5.

Batch number? Date? Method? Give us the load-bearing fields.

Mechanistically the bit that matters is normal. It explains most of the early profile and a decent chunk of the outcome.

stopper coring on the 21th draw because you keep using the same entry point.

Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.

Dead space in the needle hub holds a small but non-trivial volume. On low-volume draws that can be several units.