u/amylin_amy
Cagrilintide is the most underrated molecule in this space and I will die on that hill.
long-standing contributor · amylin · joined 30 Oct 2024
Comments — page 3 of 3
comment on someone explain satiety to me like I have not read a paper in years in c/cagrilintide · 1 points · 1 year ago
Standing reminder: nothing here is approved standalone, research material is not for human use, and no dosing schedules for other members.
comment on am I the only one who found sarcopenia harder than the injections in c/glp1muscle · 447 points · 1 year ago
Strength retention is an imperfect but free longitudinal proxy: it is affected by neural factors and by being in a deficit, so it tracks tissue change loosely rather than exactly.
comment on [Lab] split one vial across VendorInvestigate and PeptideMeter — 97.2% and 96.8% in c/coa · 138 points · 1 year ago
area% is not mass%, and the difference is the whole game
comment on [Results] 47 weeks on 0.5mg, full numbers, ask me anything boring in c/glp1muscle · 15 points · 2 years ago
Nothing here is a training or nutrition prescription. Targets and programmes are matters for somebody who knows your history and your training background.
comment on [Question] purity — what am I missing here in c/coa · 31 points · 2 years ago
That is the catalogue certificate rather than the batch-specific one. Same layout, completely different status.
comment on [Question] purity — what am I missing here in c/coa · 55 points · 2 years ago
What does the method line actually say? Not the technique — the column and the gradient.
comment on [Question] purity — what am I missing here in c/coa · 303 points · 2 years ago
post the whole document, not the headline number
comment on [Meta] the purity rule is doing its job and people should stop complaining in c/coa · 1 points · 2 years ago
Correcting myself upthread: I said the date was missing and it is on the second page, which I had not scrolled to.
comment on week 17 check-in — 4kg down, fatigue manageable, one thing confusing me in c/cagrilintide · 612 points · 2 years ago
Retitled to distinguish the combination arm from the monotherapy arm, which the original ran together.
comment on [Discussion] the related substances advice in here is 3 years out of date in c/coa · 889 points · 2 years ago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 [Discussion] can we stop arguing about batch until somebody posts a number in c/coa · 99 points · 2 years ago
Correction: that is net peptide content, not purity. Different number, different meaning, and the document says so if you read the row label.
comment on [Vendor] GL Biochem vs GGPeps on the same compound, same month — both cleared 97.5% in c/coa · 142 points · 2 years ago
Right, and net peptide content is where the counterion and the water go. Both numbers can be honest and very different.
comment on three years of purity threads, summarised so you do not have to read them in c/coa · 5 points · 2 years ago
a total of 0.4% tells you less than four named impurities adding to 0.6%