u/milos_trevino
Contributes reviews on supplier material. Based in Rosario.
member · joined 14 May 2025
Comments — page 4 of 5
comment on stalled for 18 weeks at 5mg and I refuse to panic this time in c/labresults · 18 points · 1 year ago
reship and retest is the honest way to handle a low result
comment on tried PeptideMeter for 23 weeks. here is what happened. in c/labresults · 14 points · 1 year ago
reship and retest is the honest way to handle a low result
comment on tried PeptideMeter for 23 weeks. here is what happened. in c/labresults · 214 points · 1 year ago
the vial you ordered versus the vial you received might be different batches
comment on [Results] 96 weeks on 12.5mg, full numbers, ask me anything boring in c/coa · 75 points · 1 year ago
Cosigning. The batch number is load-bearing information.
comment on stalled for 12 weeks at 10mg and I refuse to panic this time in c/coa · -5 points · 1 year ago
the batch number or it did not happen
comment on three years of certificate of analysis threads, summarised so you do not have to read them in c/coa · 160 points · 1 year ago
area% is not mass%, and here is exactly why it matters
comment on three years of certificate of analysis threads, summarised so you do not have to read them in c/coa · 227 points · 1 year ago
PDF metadata is checkable in fifteen seconds
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
comment on three years of certificate of analysis threads, summarised so you do not have to read them in c/coa · 203 points · 1 year ago
The COA I was holding said 96.8% area and I thought it was trash. Turns out the method was solid and the impurity profile was clean.
comment on related substances is the most under-discussed thing in c/scamalerts in c/coa · 1 points · 1 year ago
post the whole document, not the headline number
comment on related substances is the most under-discussed thing in c/scamalerts in c/coa · 1 points · 1 year ago
area% is not mass%, and here is exactly why it matters
comment on three years of SELECT threads, summarised so you do not have to read them in c/trialwatch · 1 points · 1 year ago
Edit to your parent would help — the concentration you quoted assumes one scenario and you have written another above it.
comment on switched from 1.7mg to 1.0mg and the fatigue got better, not worse in c/coa · 41 points · 1 year ago
I am going to push back on this slightly.
comment on what would you tell week-1 you about area percent in c/coa · 60 points · 1 year ago
Asked FGP for the batch-specific COA and they sent it within six hours, full document, batch number, date, everything. That is the baseline.
comment on what would you tell week-1 you about area percent in c/coa · 98 points · 1 year ago
Crossposting this to c/semaglutide because the people who need it are not reading this community.
comment on someone explain batch to me like I have not read a paper in years in c/labresults · 7 points · 1 year ago
Strongly agree. Below-spec results matter as much as good ones.
comment on week 61 check-in — 46kg down, early fullness manageable, one thing confusing me in c/bloodwork · 34 points · 1 year ago
ferritin from 21 to 29 is movement, not noise
comment on [Results] 16 weeks on 7.5mg, full numbers, ask me anything boring in c/bloodwork · 128 points · 1 year ago
Same lab both times?
comment on [Discussion] the endpoint advice in here is 5 years out of date in c/trialwatch · 42 points · 1 year ago
STEP, SURMOUNT, SURPASS, SELECT, FLOW, TRIUMPH — read the appendix
Adding to this: TRIUMPH is doing more work than the comment implies.
comment on Janoshik is the most under-discussed thing in c/sideeffects in c/labresults · 10 points · 1 year ago
Strongly agree. Below-spec results matter as much as good ones.
comment on Janoshik is the most under-discussed thing in c/sideeffects in c/labresults · 148 points · 1 year ago
Yeah, the PeptideMeter number matching the claim is the actual signal.