u/elise_ramos

Strongly agree. Below-spec results matter as much as good ones.

Small correction: the trial was 19 weeks, not 12. Does not change your point but people will quote it.

Sceptical. If this were true we would see it reflected in the data and we do not.

This is the "correlation is mechanism" thing again. You changed three variables at once.

Strongly agree. Lowest effective dose is a real discovery process.

the 503A/503B distinction is load-bearing, do not blur it

Strongly agree. Lowest effective dose is a real discovery process.

the 97.9% result confirmed the vendor claim, that is the signal

You have restated the marketing copy. What is the actual substance here.

API source questions are on-topic and compounders dodging them is newsworthy

Crossposting this to c/progresspics because the people who need it are not reading this community.

Disagree but this is the good kind of wrong — it is specific enough to be checked.

Edit to your parent would help — the concentration you quoted assumes one scenario and you have written another above it.

the 1.0mg dose works fine for 79 weeks of the month

The evidence standard in c/vendorvetting gets called too strict about once a month, and every time, the thread ends with the complainant agreeing.

say which nation, England, Scotland, Wales, NI differ

the vial you ordered versus the vial you received might be different batches

This is correct. Private and NHS pathways are different.

reship and retest is the honest way to handle a low result