Been lurking in c/tirzepatide for about 20 months and finally have something worth posting. Short version: week 15, 2.5mg, and Medutest is the bit I still cannot get a…
u/signe_villalobos
Contributes reviews on supplier material. Based in Kristiansand.
member · joined 17 Aug 2025
Overview — page 2 of 5
comment on [Question] Australia — has anyone got a straight answer on rodent data in c/bpc157 · 6 points · 1 months ago
Every time this gets posted it hits the front page and every time someone has to re-explain it.
comment on am I the only one who found heart rate harder than the injections in c/sideeffects · 17 points · 1 months ago
The sulphur burps passes. I kept a log and the timeline was the only useful thing. 16 weeks and it was basically gone.
comment on [Question] Sweden — has anyone got a straight answer on order records in c/vendorvetting · 23 points · 2 months ago
receipts or nothing, sorry but that is the rule
comment on what would you tell week-1 you about heart rate in c/sideeffects · 37 points · 2 months ago
hair loss is real and usually reversible when you stabilize
comment on phase 2 vs triple agonist — genuinely asking which matters more in c/retatrutide · 121 points · 2 months ago
I am going to push back on this slightly.
comment on tried EU for 16 weeks. here is what happened. in c/glp1eu · 102 points · 2 months ago
Disagree but this is the good kind of wrong — it is specific enough to be checked.
comment on Medutest — 22 things I got wrong before I got it right in c/vendorvetting · 64 points · 2 months ago
Ordered from WWB, got the vial, tested it myself via VendorInvestigate, and it held the claim. Order fulfilled.
comment on Medutest — 22 things I got wrong before I got it right in c/vendorvetting · -19 points · 2 months ago
WXT three times. First two perfect, third arrived with a gel pack failure. Powder tested 98.6% anyway, so no harm done.
comment on help me understand glucagon, I have read the wiki twice in c/retatrutide · 30 points · 3 months ago
Water content matters more than people think. If a vial is carrying residual moisture, your "10mg" is not 10mg of peptide.
comment on [Lab] SSA reta — Medutest came back 97.4% against a claimed 96.2% in c/retatrutide · 37 points · 4 months ago
the dosing is steep, the constipation reports are real, and nobody knows the human safety yet
comment on my triglycerides moved and I cannot work out whether tendon is why in c/bpc157 · 5 points · 4 months ago
Slight fix: the number was 98.4, not 98.3. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.
comment on [Question] Ireland — has anyone got a straight answer on sulphur burps in c/sideeffects · 1 points · 4 months ago
Went to A&E convinced it was pancreatitis. Lipase normal. It was gallstones. Get checked, do not post and wait.
comment on my triglycerides moved and I cannot work out whether tendon is why in c/bpc157 · 7 points · 4 months ago
BPC pentadecapeptide is a naming problem, three things are called this
comment on [Discussion] we are measuring Janoshik at the wrong time and calling it noise in c/vendorvetting · 70 points · 4 months ago
WWB order #23, Sweden, no drama, receipts inside
comment on [Question] Australia — has anyone got a straight answer on dual agonist in c/tirzepatide · 53 points · 4 months ago
Not to be pedantic but SURPASS and SURMOUNT are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.
Adding to this: Mounjaro is doing more work than the comment implies.
comment on France: EU, and what it actually costs here in c/glp1eu · 35 points · 4 months ago
EMA and national agency claims need citation
comment on what changed for me between week 65 and week 19 in c/tirzepatide · 16 points · 4 months ago
week 77 on Mounjaro and the appetite profile is genuinely different from sema
comment on what changed for me between week 65 and week 19 in c/tirzepatide · 72 points · 4 months ago
the 15mg is the top of the pen, not the required dose
comment on [Question] New Zealand — has anyone got a straight answer on constipation in c/sideeffects · 28 points · 5 months ago
Disagree but this is the good kind of wrong — it is specific enough to be checked.