3.5k
[Results] 87 weeks, 17kg, and PCOS was the hard part
87 weeks, 17kg, and PCOS was the hard part, logged the same way every week so the comparison is at least internally fair. The relevant figures are 87 weeks and 17kg,…
u/bastian_moreau
Contributes reviews on supplier material. Based in Gdańsk.
member · joined 15 Jun 2025
5,673post karma
6,123comment karma
4submissions
61comments
Overview — page 2 of 2
comment on unpopular opinion: most of what gets said here about area percent is guesswork in c/coa · 16 points · 1 year ago
Started keeping a folder of every certificate I have been sent. The ones that itemise impurities are a small group and they are mostly the same suppliers.
comment on unpopular opinion: most of what gets said here about area percent is guesswork in c/coa · 18 points · 1 year ago
a total of 0.4% tells you less than four named impurities adding to 0.6%
comment on [Discussion] can we stop arguing about ranking until somebody posts a number in c/meta · 39 points · 1 year ago
Same view — strict evidence rules make this board slower and make the archive worth reading in three years.
comment on [Results] 87 weeks, 17kg, and PCOS was the hard part in c/glp1women · -21 points · 1 year ago
Perimenopausal, or is that a separate question?
comment on [Results] 87 weeks, 17kg, and PCOS was the hard part in c/glp1women · 262 points · 1 year ago
Telogen shedding follows a period of significant weight change rather than a specific compound, and it resolves.
comment on the batch question that gets asked weekly, answered properly in c/coa · 2 points · 1 year ago
the related substances line is where the story is
comment on what changed for me between month 7 and month 12 in c/newbiequestions · 268 points · 1 year ago
That is area percent from a certificate, not the amount of peptide in the vial. Two different numbers and a very common mix-up.
comment on [Question] how do you actually verify cycle in c/glp1women · 17 points · 1 year ago
Perimenopausal, or is that a separate question?
comment on three years of week one threads, summarised so you do not have to read them in c/newbiequestions · 78 points · 1 year ago
The injection was scarier in my head than in reality. It took about ten seconds and I felt slightly silly afterwards.
comment on three years of week one threads, summarised so you do not have to read them in c/newbiequestions · 19 points · 1 year ago
The vocabulary, once, since half the questions here are really vocabulary questions.
rt_shift_reggie has explained this better than the wiki does, which is saying something.
comment on how much of what we believe about beginner actually comes from what is threads in c/newbiequestions · 153 points · 1 year ago
Push back on the advice above: nobody here can tell a member what dose to take, however confidently it is phrased.
Agreed, and for anyone finding this later: that is the normal experience, not a warning sign.
comment on three years of water content threads, summarised so you do not have to read them in c/coa · 246 points · 1 year ago
Sent one vial to PeptideMeter and VendorInvestigate. 97.7% and a claimed 97.0%. Cost me more than the vial and I would do it again.
comment on [Results] 16 weeks, 5kg, and basics were the hard part in c/newbiequestions · 72 points · 1 year ago
This. Ask the basic question; the answers are what make the board searchable for the next person.
comment on insulin resistance — my 21-week log, condensed into one table in c/glp1women · 35 points · 1 year ago
Perimenopause and all of this at once, and there is essentially nothing written about the combination anywhere.
comment on how much of what we believe about batch actually comes from related substances threads in c/coa · 86 points · 2 years ago
Is water content on the document? It changes your concentration arithmetic.
comment on purity is the most under-discussed thing on this board in c/coa · 315 points · 2 years ago
Small fix — 214nm, not 280nm. It matters here because the impurity you are asking about barely absorbs at the longer wavelength.
comment on how much of what we believe about COA actually comes from area percent threads in c/coa · 5 points · 2 years ago
Yes. The structure of the document matters at least as much as the number printed on it.
comment on [Discussion] can we stop arguing about batch until somebody posts a number in c/coa · 191 points · 2 years ago
The PDF creation date being later than the analysis date is usually a re-issue or a re-export. It is worth one question and it is not evidence of anything on its own.
comment on [Lab] 16th independent test on WXT — 99.3% on a claimed 98.5%, and the trend is the interesting part in c/coa · 25 points · 2 years ago
My first certificate had a compound name, a percentage and a logo. I thought that was normal. It is not, and now I know what to ask for.
comment on [Lab] 16th independent test on WXT — 99.3% on a claimed 98.5%, and the trend is the interesting part in c/coa · 1 points · 2 years ago
Water content 3.8%, acetate 6.2%, purity 99%, net peptide about 90% of label weight. All four numbers honest, and I had to read it twice.
comment on [Lab] 16th independent test on WXT — 99.3% on a claimed 98.5%, and the trend is the interesting part in c/coa · -17 points · 2 years ago
Sent one vial to VendorInvestigate and PeptideMeter.
Agreed, and the practical version is: ask for the itemised table. If it exists, you get it.
2.2k
[Lab] 16th independent test on WXT — 99.3% on a claimed 98.5%, and the trend is the interesting part
16th independent test on WXT — 99.3% on a claimed 98.5%, and the trend is the interesting part. I will put the method line and the batch identifier up front because…
comment on the certificate of analysis question that gets asked weekly, answered properly in c/coa · 201 points · 2 years ago
water content is on there and everyone skips it
comment on [Discussion] the area percent advice in here is 2 years out of date in c/coa · 85 points · 2 years ago
the counterion is part of the mass you paid for