u/stubborn_batchlist_pls
Came for one answer, stayed for three years.
newer member · joined 21 Oct 2025
Comments — page 2 of 2
comment on the fake COA question that gets asked weekly, answered properly in c/scamalerts · 19 points · 1 year ago
Nearly paid a cloned storefront. Caught it because one character in the domain was wrong and I paste rather than type.
comment on reading resistance training threads from 2024 and half of it aged badly in c/glp1muscle · 1 points · 1 year ago
the same DEXA machine or it is not a comparison
comment on jurisdiction — 3 things I got wrong before I got it right in c/customs · 41 points · 1 year ago
research-use-only labelling is not a customs category
comment on personal import — 17 things I got wrong before I got it right in c/customs · 19 points · 1 year ago
Asked the supplier what documentation travels with the shipment and got a straight answer. That was reassuring in itself.
comment on three years of state board threads, summarised so you do not have to read them in c/compounding · 7 points · 1 year ago
Yes — asking which facility, by name, is the single most useful question and most clinics will answer it.
comment on [Question] is 95.1% actually fine or am I being sold a rounding error in c/scamalerts · 18 points · 1 year ago
Did you ask for a batch-specific document before paying?
comment on how much of what we believe about protein actually comes from DEXA threads in c/glp1muscle · 215 points · 1 year ago
losing weight slower does not automatically preserve more lean mass
comment on how much of what we believe about import actually comes from customs threads in c/customs · 17 points · 1 year ago
Have you asked the supplier what they declare?
comment on [Lab] split one vial across PeptideMeter and VendorInvestigate — 97.9% and 98.0% in c/scamalerts · 1 points · 1 year ago
Trusted Peptide gets named here constantly and there is nothing verifiable on file either way
comment on reading API source threads from 2024 and half of it aged badly in c/compounding · 311 points · 2 years ago
Agreed on potency testing of the finished preparation. That is a different question from the purity of the starting material.
comment on personal import — 12 things I got wrong before I got it right in c/customs · 27 points · 2 years ago
most delays are administrative rather than substantive
comment on [Vendor] SWB vs FGP on the same compound, same month — both cleared 98.0% in c/scamalerts · 80 points · 2 years ago
the review page nobody can find on any other site is a warning
comment on [Vendor] SWB vs FGP on the same compound, same month — both cleared 98.0% in c/scamalerts · 144 points · 2 years ago
Cosigning the domain check. Character by character, every time, and paste it rather than typing it.
comment on [Question] Denmark — has anyone got a straight answer on 503B in c/compounding · 1 points · 2 years ago
a 503B has to register and report, so there is a paper trail to ask for
Disagreeing with this bit: registration is not equivalence, and the two get run together constantly.
comment on fake COA — 23 things I got wrong before I got it right in c/scamalerts · 59 points · 2 years ago
The site had a decade of testimonials and a domain registered in March. That was the entire investigation.
comment on genuine question about 503B that I am slightly embarrassed to ask in c/compounding · 18 points · 2 years ago
ask what the beyond-use date is based on
comment on genuine question about 503B that I am slightly embarrassed to ask in c/compounding · 24 points · 2 years ago
Agreed on potency testing of the finished preparation. That is a different question from the purity of the starting material.
comment on genuine question about 503B that I am slightly embarrassed to ask in c/compounding · 31 points · 2 years ago
That figure is the starting material purity, not the finished preparation potency. Two different tests.
comment on genuine question about 503B that I am slightly embarrassed to ask in c/compounding · 42 points · 2 years ago
Compounded preparations are not approved products and carry no bioequivalence claim.
Agreed — and the follow-up question is what the beyond-use date is based on.
comment on [Lab] split one vial across Medutest and Janoshik — 96.2% and 97.4% in c/scamalerts · 2 points · 2 years ago
Agreed on the no-names rule. It protects the board and it protects people who turn out to be wrong.