GLPHubglpresearchhub.com
Read-only archive. GLP Research Hub is a static community record — nothing here is for sale, no account is needed, and no vote you cast is counted. Why?
1k
c/scamalerts·posted 1 months ago by u/neha_mwangi

is it normal to get constipation at week 94

Resolved Receipts ×7 Cold Box ×2

Confession thread, sort of.

I went from 1.7mg to 0.25mg much faster than I should have because the scale had stalled and I got impatient. The stall broke about 7 weeks later, at which point I had no way of knowing whether the dose increase did anything or whether it would have broken anyway.

So now I have sulphur burps I did not need and a data point I cannot interpret. Two lessons in one.

Posting it in the hope that somebody at week 81 reads it before doing the same thing.

1,209 up / 163 down88% upvoted46 commentsid rioo8d12 Jun 2026

46 comments

18 in this archive, depth 6

best — the order this archive was captured in

u/cold_chromatogram31-1 point·1 months ago

This is evidence. The metadata is checkable and it is odd.

replysharereportpermalink
u/camila_sandvik1 point·1 months ago

Not to be pedantic but PDF metadata and fraud are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.

replysharereportpermalink
u/solene_ilunga1 point·1 months ago

the reship offer that never sends anything is worth noting

replysharereportpermalink
u/ferran_batista1 point·1 months ago

Disagree. What you are describing is consistent with cloned site, not with what you concluded.

replysharereportpermalink
u/neha_mwangiOP1 point·1 months ago

PDF metadata said the COA was created in a browser four months after the date printed on the page. Worth flagging.

replysharereportpermalink
u/sena_teixeira1 point·1 months ago

PDF metadata said the COA was created in a browser four months after the date printed on the page.

Adding to this: group buy is doing more work than the comment implies.

replysharereportpermalink
load more comments (1) →
u/rui_only_ro45 points·1 months ago

The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.

replysharereportpermalink
u/santiago_rasmussen28 points·1 months ago

This is evidence. The metadata is checkable and it is odd.

replysharereportpermalink
u/neha_mwangiOP33 points·1 months ago

PDF metadata said the COA was created in a browser four months after the date printed on the page. Worth flagging.

replysharereportpermalink
u/rui_only_ro27 points·1 months ago

This is evidence. The metadata is checkable and it is odd.

replysharereportpermalink
u/bianca_demir6 points·1 months ago

the batch number appearing across three vendors is a red flag

replysharereportpermalink
u/ledger_modmod · vetting9 points·1 months ago

fake COAs always have the same tell: perfect results, zero variance

replysharereportpermalink
[removed]7 points·1 months ago

[removed by moderator]

replysharereportpermalink
u/neha_mwangiOP28 points·1 months ago

The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.

Adding to this: PDF metadata is doing more work than the comment implies.

replysharereportpermalink
u/whois_wanda8 points·1 months ago·edited

Yeah, the batch number across three vendors is a real signal.

replysharereportpermalink
u/blunt_coldbox_notes19 points·1 months ago

no doxxing, company registration is fine, individuals are not

replysharereportpermalink
u/rui_only_ro19 points·1 months ago

group buy exit scams follow a pattern

replysharereportpermalink
Permalinked branches
Deep branches get their own page so a single reply chain can be linked and read on its own.
About c/scamalerts

Documented fraud: cloned storefronts, recycled COA PDFs, batch numbers appearing across unrelated vendors, fake test reports, group-buy exit scams, and the small number of patterns that account for almost all of it. Accusations without evidence are removed — not because we doubt you, but because unverifiable accusations make the community useless.

58kmembers
95submissions
Sep 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

PeptideMeter Analytics

Independent testing plus vendor-level trend data. Community-funded, unaffiliated.

peptidemeter.com
More in c/scamalerts
c/scamalerts rules
  1. Evidence required: dated screenshots, PDF metadata, order records or an independent test. No exceptions.
  2. No doxxing. Company registration details are fine; individuals are not.
  3. If a dispute resolves, edit the post and say so. We keep the record honest in both directions.
  4. Independent community. Nobody here sells anything, and anyone who tries is banned.
  5. Not medical advice. Describe what you did; never prescribe to a stranger.
  6. Claims need evidence. Batch numbers, dated screenshots, independent test reports, or a citation.
  7. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Permanent ban, no appeal.
  8. No contact handles, wallet addresses or tracking numbers — they identify people.
  9. Be recognisably decent. Disagree hard, insult nobody.
Full rules and how they are enforced →
Moderators
u/ledger_modu/scam_taxonomyu/coa_forgery_watchu/whois_wandau/sock_puppet_spotter
Volunteers. Unpaid, unaffiliated, and reachable through modmail only.
Before you read on

Several compounds discussed on GLP Research Hub are sold for research use only and are not approved for human use anywhere. Nothing here is medical advice and none of it is written by your clinician. If a post reads like an instruction, treat it as a description of what one stranger did.

Full disclaimer →