what changed for me between week 50 and week 93
Right, the VendorInvestigate question again, but with numbers this time.
I have 2 data points over 4 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 65, not week 19. 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
Tracking number removed. It identifies both ends of a shipment.
Cosigning the evidence standard. Receipts make the community.
You have restated the marketing copy. What is the actual substance here.
the PeptideMeter result being close to the claim is the signal, not the absolute number
Cosigning the evidence standard.
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 63 weeks to accept.
one vendor per post, multi-vendor goes in the monthly thread
Disagree but this is the good kind of wrong — it is specific enough to be checked.
Ordered from GGPeps, got the vial, tested it myself via VendorInvestigate, and it held the claim. Order fulfilled.
referral links mean instant ban, no exceptions
Tracking number removed.
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
Which service tested it and what did they come back with?
receipts or nothing, sorry but that is the rule
Disagree but this is the good kind of wrong — it is specific enough to be checked.
Batch number? Date? Method? Give us the load-bearing fields.
Batch number?
Disagree on that part. 98.7% and 98.9% on the same vial is normal.
referral links mean instant ban, no exceptions
the Janoshik result being close to the claim is the signal, not the absolute number
the PeptideMeter result being close to the claim is the signal, not the absolute number
Yeah, WXT took 4 days and the material was flawless. Both of those things are true.
order date, product, and what was tested. that is the template.
Edit to your parent would help — the concentration you quoted assumes one scenario and you have written another above it.
Edit to your parent would help — the concentration you quoted assumes one scenario and you have written another above it.
Disagree on that part. 99.2% and 96.2% on the same vial is normal.
This order history matches mine almost exactly. Same vendor, same timeframe, same result.
vendor staff must self-identify, full stop
Mechanistically the bit that matters is Medutest. It explains most of the early profile and a decent chunk of the outcome.
Is that a Janoshik result or are you quoting the vendor COA?
the reship rate on TFC is actually pretty consistent
The evidence standard in c/vendorvetting gets called too strict about once a month, and every time, the thread ends with the complainant agreeing.
- 1Batch number? Date? Method? Give us the load-bearing fields.13 comments in this branch · started by u/marta_vanhecke
- 2Tracking number removed. It identifies both ends of a shipment.12 comments in this branch · started by u/batch_number_bertie