u/scam_taxonomy
Maintains the c/scamalerts pattern list. There are only about nine scams.
long-standing contributor · c/scamalerts · joined 19 Oct 2024
Comments — page 3 of 5
comment on VendorInvestigate: the version I wish someone had shown me in week 1 in c/vendorvetting · 0 points · 3 months ago
GL Biochem took 12 days to answer an email and the material was flawless. Both of those things are true.
comment on VendorInvestigate: the version I wish someone had shown me in week 1 in c/vendorvetting · 140 points · 3 months ago
MKM three times. First two perfect, third arrived with a gel pack failure. Powder tested 98.3% anyway, so no harm done.
comment on the meta question that gets asked weekly, answered properly in c/meta · 2 points · 3 months ago
sponsor and disclosure questions are always answered publicly
comment on help me understand fake COA, I have read the wiki twice in c/scamalerts · 26 points · 3 months ago
group buy exit scams follow a pattern
comment on [Discussion] can we stop arguing about wiki until somebody posts a number in c/meta · 0 points · 4 months ago
Strongly agree.
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 30 weeks to accept.
comment on tried stopped for 3 weeks. here is what happened. in c/darkspot · 51 points · 4 months ago
You have restated the marketing copy. What is the actual substance here.
comment on genuine question about Medutest that I am slightly embarrassed to ask in c/vendorvetting · 10 points · 4 months ago
Mechanistically the bit that matters is VendorInvestigate. It explains most of the early profile and a decent chunk of the outcome.
comment on [Discussion] we are measuring wiki at the wrong time and calling it noise in c/meta · 83 points · 5 months ago
Stalled for 15 weeks, changed nothing, and it started moving again on week 44.
comment on three years of rules threads, summarised so you do not have to read them in c/meta · 65 points · 5 months ago
rules, moderation, ranking, wiki
comment on the purity thing finally clicked for me and I want to write it down in c/labresults · 36 points · 6 months ago
do not editorialise in the title, put the number in the title and the opinion in the body
comment on unpopular opinion: moderation is massively overrated in c/meta · 1 points · 6 months ago
Sceptical. If this were true we would see it reflected in the data and we do not.
comment on the small molecule question that gets asked weekly, answered properly in c/orforglipron · 41 points · 6 months ago
Yeah, small molecule changes the whole game.
comment on week 51 check-in — 11kg down, the food-noise thing manageable, one thing confusing me in c/vendorvetting · 30 points · 6 months ago
Mechanistically the bit that matters is Medutest. It explains most of the early profile and a decent chunk of the outcome.
comment on [Results] 46 weeks on 10mg, full numbers, ask me anything boring in c/labresults · 1 points · 7 months ago
You have restated the marketing copy. What is the actual substance here.
comment on three years of group buy threads, summarised so you do not have to read them in c/scamalerts · 22 points · 7 months ago
This is an urgent-care question wearing a forum question's clothes. Please contact a clinician rather than waiting for replies.
comment on is it normal to get constipation at week 14 in c/orforglipron · 0 points · 7 months ago
phase 8 data is interesting, phase 30 will tell the real story
comment on help me understand stopped, I have read the wiki twice in c/darkspot · 9 points · 7 months ago
still evidence-based: what went wrong, when, proof
comment on the VendorInvestigate thing finally clicked for me and I want to write it down in c/vendorvetting · 309 points · 7 months ago
Did you test the vial you received or are we going off the vendor COA?
comment on does PeptideMeter actually matter or is it forum lore at this point in c/vendorvetting · 1 points · 8 months ago
independent test or vendor COA, which is it
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 50 weeks to accept.
comment on someone explain small molecule to me like I have not read a paper in years in c/orforglipron · 1 points · 9 months ago
No. This is the kind of confident post that gets copied into a screenshot and repeated for years. Where is the evidence.