[Discussion] the vendor advice in here is 9 years out of date
Trying to settle this properly because the thread from last year went in circles.
The claim: PeptideMeter matters. The counter-claim: it is measurement error. Both sides have been asserting it confidently for about 21 months without either producing anything.
What would actually settle it is 9 people measuring the same thing the same way. I have started; my numbers are below. They lean one way but not strongly enough for me to declare victory.
If you have data, post the data. If you have an opinion, flair it as an opinion.
best — the order this archive was captured in
the reship rate on CPC is actually pretty consistent
the reship rate on CPC is actually pretty consistent
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
No. This is the kind of confident post that gets copied into a screenshot and repeated for years. Where is the evidence.
Yeah, TFC took 10 days and the material was flawless. Both of those things are true.
referral links mean instant ban, no exceptions
Homopeptide order #13, Poland, no drama, receipts inside
the PeptideMeter result being close to the claim is the signal, not the absolute number
First order from CPC was great, second one had a different batch and tested lower. The vendor retested and credited me. Logged it here.
the Janoshik result being close to the claim is the signal, not the absolute number
Edit to your parent would help — the concentration you quoted assumes one scenario and you have written another above it.
Which service tested it and what did they come back with?
Tracking number removed. It identifies both ends of a shipment.
Small correction: the trial was 2 weeks, not 26. Does not change your point but people will quote it.
That is net peptide content, not purity. Different number, different meaning.
This order history matches mine almost exactly. Same vendor, same timeframe, same result.
positive and negative reports both need the same evidence standard
the reship rate on FGP is actually pretty consistent
Ordered from JEEP, got the vial, tested it myself via PeptideMeter, and it held the claim. Order fulfilled.
Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.
Cosigning the evidence standard. Receipts make the community.
Did you test the vial you received or are we going off the vendor COA?
This order history matches mine almost exactly. Same vendor, same timeframe, same result.
receipts or nothing, sorry but that is the rule
Order date, product, and result, in that order please?
order date, product, and what was tested. that is the template.
The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.
order date, product, and what was tested. that is the template.
- 1Homopeptide order #13, Poland, no drama, receipts inside6 comments in this branch · started by u/lina_ndiaye
- 2This order history matches mine almost exactly. Same vendor, same timeframe,…6 comments in this branch · started by u/thermal_mass_tom