155
[Discussion] the SURPASS advice in here is 8 years out of date
Right, the TRIUMPH question again, but with numbers this time. I have 14 data points over 40 weeks. The pattern is consistent enough that I do not think it is chance,…
u/valeria_karlsen
Contributes reviews on supplier material. Based in Linköping.
member · joined 16 Jul 2025
23,242post karma
11,401comment karma
7submissions
97comments
Overview — page 4 of 5
comment on certificate of analysis: the version I wish someone had shown me in week 1 in c/coa · 1 points · 1 year ago
the batch number or it did not happen
comment on [Results] 16 weeks on 7.5mg, full numbers, ask me anything boring in c/bloodwork · 163 points · 1 year ago
post reference ranges with your numbers, units differ by country and lab
comment on the ALT thing finally clicked for me and I want to write it down in c/bloodwork · 219 points · 1 year ago
eGFR from 10 to 23 is movement, not noise
comment on stalled for 8 weeks at 12.5mg and I refuse to panic this time in c/bloodwork · 0 points · 1 year ago
eGFR noise during rapid loss is expected
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
comment on why does nobody talk about related substances in c/coa · 9 points · 1 year ago
the related substances line is where the story is
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 87 weeks to accept.
comment on what would you tell week-1 you about lipids in c/bloodwork · 80 points · 1 year ago
redact identifying details from lab PDFs before posting
comment on switched from 2.5mg to 2.4mg and the reflux got better, not worse in c/bloodwork · 216 points · 1 year ago
Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.
comment on 8 months in and group buy is still the thing I get wrong in c/scamalerts · 24 points · 1 year ago
evidence required, dated screenshots, metadata, order records, or independent test
comment on [Question] how do you actually verify hepatic fat in c/survodutide · 91 points · 1 year ago
I love that this community will spend 40 comments on a detail. That pedantry is why the numbers here matter.
comment on unpopular opinion: fraud is massively overrated in c/scamalerts · 52 points · 1 year ago
group buy exit scams follow a pattern
comment on [Discussion] we are measuring bloodwork at the wrong time and calling it noise in c/bloodwork · 23 points · 1 year ago
Do you have baseline to compare to?
comment on tried shipping for 4 weeks. here is what happened. in c/intlshipping · 1 points · 1 year ago
customs clearance often adds 14 days, factor that in
comment on fraud is the most under-discussed thing in c/reconstitution in c/scamalerts · 37 points · 1 year ago
Which order and did you have any communication from KP?
comment on [Discussion] the SURPASS advice in here is 8 years out of date in c/trialwatch · 3 points · 1 year ago
The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.
comment on [Discussion] the SURPASS advice in here is 8 years out of date in c/trialwatch · 9 points · 1 year ago
Phase 2 TRIUMPH looked amazing. Phase 3 trials are harder. Do not anchor on phase 2 readouts.
comment on anyone else notice area percent kicking in around week 25 in c/coa · 116 points · 1 year ago
Strongly agree. Mass% and area% are answering different questions on the same document.
comment on 24 months in and scam is still the thing I get wrong in c/scamalerts · 373 points · 1 year ago
Which order and did you have any communication from QYB?
comment on reading endpoint threads from 2024 and half of it aged badly in c/trialwatch · 57 points · 1 year ago
dropout handling matters, especially on GI-heavy populations
comment on related substances — my 21-week log, condensed into one table in c/coa · 3.7k points · 1 year ago
Disagree but this is the good kind of wrong — it is specific enough to be checked.