u/britta_boateng
Contributes reviews on supplier material. Based in Osaka.
member · joined 15 Jun 2025
Overview — page 3 of 3
comment on [Discussion] we are measuring regain at the wrong time and calling it noise in c/tapering · 44 points · 1 year ago
Small fix — you have described interval stretching and called it a taper. The exposure profiles differ.
comment on is it normal to get constipation at week 11 in c/newbiequestions · 34 points · 1 year ago
ask the dumb question, three other people are searching for it
comment on why does nobody talk about shortage in c/glp1aus · 194 points · 2 years ago
Subsidy criteria and authority requirements are published. For eligibility questions those documents are authoritative and this board is not.
comment on SURPASS — 12 things I got wrong before I got it right in c/trialwatch · 27 points · 2 years ago
Careful with that mean. The distribution around it was wide enough that it describes very few individual participants.
comment on [Discussion] the purity advice in here is 2 years out of date in c/labresults · 10 points · 2 years ago
the log is cumulative, that is the whole value of it
comment on [Discussion] the purity advice in here is 2 years out of date in c/labresults · 22 points · 2 years ago
GL Biochem BPC, batch matched the paperwork, PeptideMeter came back 97.8% against a claimed 97.0%. Paid for it myself, posting it because the log is only worth anything if people do.
comment on [Lab] 14th independent test on GGPeps — 98.3% on a claimed 97.5%, and the trend is the interesting part in c/labresults · 1.2k points · 2 years ago
Chain of custody is why member-funded testing is worth more than a supplied certificate: the vial tested is the vial that arrived at a member’s door.
comment on [Lab] HJ tirz — Janoshik came back 97.4% against a claimed 97.0% in c/scamalerts · 3 points · 2 years ago
A report is useful here when it carries dates, the exact domain, what was requested, what arrived and what did not. Everything else is atmosphere.
comment on help me understand below spec, I have read the wiki twice in c/labresults · 1 points · 2 years ago
Agreed — the template exists because a result without the batch and the claim is unanchored.
Disagreeing with this line: that gap is ordinary variance, not a contradiction between the lab and the certificate.
comment on does Medutest actually matter or is it forum lore at this point in c/labresults · 104 points · 2 years ago
Chain of custody is why member-funded testing is worth more than a supplied certificate: the vial tested is the vial that arrived at a member’s door.
comment on [Discussion] we are measuring below spec at the wrong time and calling it noise in c/labresults · 1 points · 2 years ago
inter-lab variance runs a point or two, plan your outrage accordingly
comment on how much of what we believe about scam actually comes from group buy threads in c/scamalerts · 175 points · 2 years ago
Group buys concentrate custody, payment and communication in one person with no structure behind it. That is not an accusation about anyone — it is a description of the risk shape.