u/cloudy_vial_carol

Not convinced.

Disagreeing with this line: that paper is in a rodent model and it is being quoted as a human result.

It is a fifteen-residue peptide with a published sequence, which makes synthesis straightforward and makes identity verification the meaningful test rather than an optional extra.

Is that a first-day sensor reading?

What analytical method was used — this is not the usual peptide assay question?

Have you taken this to modmail first?

The registered protocol is public. Comparing the registered primary endpoint with the reported one is a two-minute check and it is how outcome switching gets caught.

the regret is usually about pace, not about the decision

This. The absence of food and water timing restrictions is the practical difference people will actually notice.

Discontinuation rates are a tolerability result. A trial with a strong efficacy number and heavy discontinuation is telling you two things and people only quote one.

Push back: the ranking is not hiding anything. The formula is published and you can reproduce the ordering.

no referral links, no affiliate links, not once

Edited a wiki page for the first time and nothing bad happened, which is apparently the point.

discontinuation rate is a result, not a footnote

STEP is semaglutide obesity, SURMOUNT is tirzepatide obesity, they are not interchangeable

Complained about a rule without proposing anything and was politely pointed at this page. Fair.