10 months in and week one is still the thing I get wrong
Genuinely asking, not being difficult.
Everyone in c/meta repeats that normal is important. I believe it, but I have never seen anyone show why, and when I search I get 9 threads of people agreeing with each other.
Is there a paper? Is there a measurement? Or is this one of those things that is true because it has been repeated since 2023?
I am not trying to be the "source?" guy. I would just like a source.
best — the order this archive was captured in
what is a COA — certificate of analysis, document from the lab
Strongly agree. No question is dumb here.
Strongly agree.
Adding to this: what is is doing more work than the comment implies.
Strongly agree. No question is dumb here.
Small correction: the trial was 20 weeks, not 29. Does not change your point but people will quote it.
Small correction: the trial was 20 weeks, not 29.
Disagree on that part. 98.7% and 98.9% on the same vial is normal.
Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.
Small correction: the trial was 2 weeks, not 25. Does not change your point but people will quote it.
is this normal week 18 — yes, probably
week two nothing happening — yes, that is normal
what is titration — it means going slow on the escalation
what is a COA — certificate of analysis, document from the lab
Mechanistically the bit that matters is what is. It explains most of the early profile and a decent chunk of the outcome.
Water content matters more than people think. If a vial is carrying residual moisture, your "10mg" is not 10mg of peptide.
- 1what is a COA — certificate of analysis, document from the lab14 comments in this branch · started by u/nora_lundgren