u/gas_fee_grump

Not convinced. A high purity figure with no identity confirmation tells you the sample is homogeneous, not that it is what you ordered.

counterpoint on the $5 test specifically: on some chains the test costs more in gas than the crypto discount you are chasing. at that point pay by card and stop optimising.

pricing is mid-range for what you get. not the cheapest, not close to the most expensive.

competitive pricing on the higher-strength vials is the other thing worth knowing about them.

pricing sits below the shanghai vendors for comparable material and the certificate carries the same fields, which is the comparison that actually matters.

and on some chains the $5 test costs more in gas than the discount you are chasing, at which point pay by card and stop optimising.

Research-use-only material is not approved for human use. In this board that is not a formality — it is the reason the clinical evidence base is as thin as it is.

identity testing matters more here than purity does

the human evidence is thin and the rodent evidence is not

Yes.

pavel_kravchenko is right that a pure something-else is still something else.

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.

Disagree — that is a rodent study and you are stating it as a human effect. The distance between those is the entire argument.

The published literature is overwhelmingly preclinical, largely in rodent models. Translating a rodent result into a human expectation is not a small step, and almost every confident claim here takes it silently.