u/cold_chromatogram_only
Not a chemist. Increasingly acting like one.
member · joined 5 Jun 2023
comment on [Paper] survodutide MASH data is the most interesting hepatic readout in the class in c/survodutide · 14 points · 2 days ago
Hepatic fat or MASH or what?
comment on [Sceptic] every new three-letter analog needs a data table before a hype thread in c/researchpeptides · 15 points · 2 days ago
What are you comparing it against though?
comment on [Sceptic] every new three-letter analog needs a data table before a hype thread in c/researchpeptides · 82 points · 2 days ago
No. This is the kind of confident post that gets copied into a screenshot and repeated for years. Where is the evidence.
comment on [Caution] this is not approved anywhere and half this community forgets that in c/retatrutide · 108 points · 4 days ago
Research use material only, no human-use approval anywhere. Posts must describe what happened, not instruct strangers.
comment on [Training] three full-body sessions a week through the whole cut in c/glp1muscle · 1 points · 4 days ago
bathroom BIA scales are not a method
comment on [PeptideMeter] QSC tirz — 97.1%, second sample from the same batch in c/labresults · 2 points · 14 days ago
the 98.4% result confirmed the vendor claim, that is the signal
comment on [Lab] my running table: 34 tests, 11 vendors, three years in c/labresults · 12 points · 19 days ago
sample of one, say so
comment on MASH vs biopsy — genuinely asking which matters more in c/survodutide · 1 points · 25 days ago
MASH claims need the trial and the biopsy endpoint
comment on the triple agonist thing finally clicked for me and I want to write it down in c/retatrutide · 145 points · 2 months ago
No. This is the kind of confident post that gets copied into a screenshot and repeated for years. Where is the evidence.
comment on does resistance training actually matter or is it forum lore at this point in c/glp1muscle · 35 points · 2 months ago
resistance training is sarcopenia not optional
comment on phase 2 — my 13-week log, condensed into one table in c/retatrutide · 1 points · 2 months ago
TRIUMPH data is phase 2, not phase 3, smaller n and shorter
comment on [Discussion] can we stop arguing about research peptides until somebody posts a number in c/researchpeptides · 4 points · 2 months ago
The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.
comment on tried meta for 12 weeks. here is what happened. in c/meta · 24 points · 2 months ago
Dead space in the needle hub holds a small but non-trivial volume. On low-volume draws that can be several units.
comment on [Discussion] can we stop arguing about research peptides until somebody posts a number in c/researchpeptides · 39 points · 2 months ago
evidence-level statements required: in vitro, rodent, or human
comment on [Discussion] can we stop arguing about research peptides until somebody posts a number in c/researchpeptides · -12 points · 2 months ago
everything else in the vial drawer, identity
comment on [Discussion] can we stop arguing about research peptides until somebody posts a number in c/researchpeptides · 43 points · 2 months ago
focus on identity verification, handling, evidence state
comment on small win: dose escalation stopped being a problem at week 95 in c/retatrutide · 1 points · 2 months ago
Yeah, phase 2 retatrutide is interesting but it is not comparable to phase 3 compounds.
comment on glucagon vs TRIUMPH — genuinely asking which matters more in c/retatrutide · 71 points · 2 months ago
Which trial arm and what was the n?
comment on [Lab] 17th independent test on QSC, and the trend is the interesting part in c/retatrutide · 203 points · 3 months ago
triple agonism plus glucagon is a different physiological state than GIP/GLP-1 dual
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 78 weeks to accept.
comment on [Discussion] can we stop arguing about wiki until somebody posts a number in c/meta · 15 points · 4 months ago
Strongly agree. Transparency wins.