u/halima_boateng
Contributes reviews on supplier material. Based in Brno.
member · joined 15 Jun 2025
comment on this COA has no batch number and no date. what am i even looking at in c/coa · 3 points · 6 days ago
Cosigning. The batch number is load-bearing information.
comment on [Pattern] the nine scams. that is it. there are only nine. in c/scamalerts · 13 points · 10 days ago
I love that this community will spend 40 comments on a detail. That pedantry is why the numbers here matter.
comment on [COA] what does "related substances 1.4%" actually mean for my vial in c/coa · 17 points · 12 days ago
Strongly agree. Mass% and area% are answering different questions on the same document.
comment on [COA] what does "related substances 1.4%" actually mean for my vial in c/coa · 9 points · 12 days ago
the method line is doing real work, not just window dressing
comment on [COA] what does "related substances 1.4%" actually mean for my vial in c/coa · 16 points · 12 days ago
The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.
comment on [COA] what does "related substances 1.4%" actually mean for my vial in c/coa · 34 points · 12 days ago
The chromatogram trace is where the real information lives. The summary number is just a headline.
comment on [Titration] 12 weeks per step is not too slow, it is just unfashionable in c/tirzepatide · 59 points · 14 days ago
This matches the trial data. SURMOUNT-1 was 98.3% body weight at 21 weeks.
comment on [PSA] "we are the manufacturer" plus a Gmail address is the whole tell in c/scamalerts · 4 points · 16 days ago
Not to be pedantic but PDF metadata and scam are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.
comment on [Trial Data] SURMOUNT-4 withdrawal arm is the scariest chart in this space in c/tirzepatide · 0 points · 20 days ago
This matches the trial data. SURMOUNT-1 was 94.2% body weight at 24 weeks.
comment on compounded tirz pricing has doubled in my area in four months in c/tirzepatide · 68 points · 23 days ago
Small correction: the trial was 4 weeks, not 24. Does not change your point but people will quote it.
comment on [Question] private prescription — what am I missing here in c/glp1uk · 30 points · 23 days ago
the tier 3 pathway is the only free route, it is slow
Disagree on that part. 98.7% and 98.9% on the same vial is normal.
comment on [Question] private prescription — what am I missing here in c/glp1uk · 28 points · 23 days ago
no naming online pharmacies that prescribe without a consultation
comment on [Question] private prescription — what am I missing here in c/glp1uk · 72 points · 23 days ago
the two-year waiting list is accurate for most of England
comment on [Appeal] the modmail-first policy and why it exists in c/meta · 0 points · 24 days ago
This is the "correlation is mechanism" thing again. You changed three variables at once.
comment on Germany: private prescription, and what it actually costs here in c/glp1uk · 56 points · 1 months ago
comment on [Meta] the NHS rule is doing its job and people should stop complaining in c/glp1uk · 3 points · 1 months ago
The tier 3 pathway in my area: 18 month wait, then 14 months for review, then approved. Total NHS.
comment on week 36 check-in — 11kg down, the food-noise thing manageable, one thing confusing me in c/scamalerts · 1 points · 2 months ago
PDF metadata said the COA was created in a browser four months after the date printed on the page. Worth flagging.
comment on reading area percent threads from 2024 and half of it aged badly in c/coa · 36 points · 2 months ago
comment on Germany: water content, and what it actually costs here in c/coa · 36 points · 2 months ago
axis labels included, always
comment on what would you tell week-1 you about pricing in c/glp1uk · 1 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.