week 11 check-in — 47kg down, the food-noise thing manageable, one thing confusing me
Right, the VendorInvestigate question again, but with numbers this time.
I have 6 data points over 20 weeks. The pattern is consistent enough that I do not think it is chance, and boring enough that nobody is going to screenshot it, which is usually a good sign.
The thing I would flag for anyone new: the effect I am describing showed up at week 5, not week 54. People give up long before the interesting part.
Interested in whether this matches other people's logs or whether I am an outlier.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Water content matters more than people think. If a vial is carrying residual moisture, your "10mg" is not 10mg of peptide.
Batch number? Date? Method? Give us the load-bearing fields.
vendor staff must self-identify, full stop
Cosigning the evidence standard. Receipts make the community.
receipts or nothing, sorry but that is the rule
independent test or vendor COA, which is it
order date, product, and what was tested. that is the template.
I love that this community will spend 40 comments on a detail. That pedantry is why the numbers here matter.
CPC took 5 days to answer an email and the material was flawless. Both of those things are true.
the batch number or it did not happen
referral links mean instant ban, no exceptions
Order date, product, and result, in that order please?
one vendor per post, multi-vendor goes in the monthly thread
This is an urgent-care question wearing a forum question's clothes. Please contact a clinician rather than waiting for replies.
MKM order #21, Poland, no drama, receipts inside
receipts or nothing, sorry but that is the rule
Cosigning the evidence standard. Receipts make the community.
did they reship, credit, or ghost you?
GL Biochem took 17 days to answer an email and the material was flawless. Both of those things are true.
Order date, product, and result, in that order please?
Yeah, SSA took 7 days and the material was flawless. Both of those things are true.
That is net peptide content, not purity. Different number, different meaning.
Not to be pedantic but order records and VendorInvestigate are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.
Edit to your parent would help — the concentration you quoted assumes one scenario and you have written another above it.
GGPeps order #24, Ireland, no drama, receipts inside
Cosigning the evidence standard. Receipts make the community.
I love that this community will spend 40 comments on a detail. That pedantry is why the numbers here matter.
This order history matches mine almost exactly. Same vendor, same timeframe, same result.
positive and negative reports both need the same evidence standard
- 1referral links mean instant ban, no exceptions11 comments in this branch · started by u/liv_kuipers
- 2Batch number? Date? Method? Give us the load-bearing fields.5 comments in this branch · started by u/gustav_lindholm