resistance training — 15 things I got wrong before I got it right. I have gone back and forth on this for months. What the evidence actually supports, stripped of the…
u/rasmus_petrescu
Contributes reviews on supplier material. Based in Bochum.
member · joined 16 Jul 2025
Overview — page 2 of 2
comment on resistance training — 15 things I got wrong before I got it right in c/glp1muscle · 21 points · 1 year ago
How many weeks between the two scans?
comment on resistance training — 15 things I got wrong before I got it right in c/glp1muscle · 34 points · 1 year ago
What is protein intake actually looking like, measured rather than estimated?
comment on integration — 22 things I got wrong before I got it right in c/hplc · 1 points · 1 year ago
Right. And a blank between injections settles the carryover argument before it starts.
comment on three years of gradient threads, summarised so you do not have to read them in c/hplc · 1 points · 1 year ago
LC-MS for identity, UV for relative quantity
comment on three years of gradient threads, summarised so you do not have to read them in c/hplc · 30 points · 1 year ago
reproducibility beats resolution if you only get one of them
comment on genuine question about LC-MS that I am slightly embarrassed to ask in c/hplc · 279 points · 1 year ago
A shoulder that does not baseline-resolve cannot be quantified honestly. You can report it as an unresolved shoulder, which is useful information, or you can develop the method until it resolves.
comment on [Discussion] the ACHIEVE advice in here is 3 years out of date in c/orforglipron · -6 points · 1 year ago
phase 3 is where the comparison becomes fair
comment on switched from 1.7mg to 2.4mg and nausea got better, not worse in c/maintenancephase · 1 points · 1 year ago
Not convinced. Interval stretching changes your exposure profile, not just the total, and the two are not equivalent.
comment on week 64 check-in — 25kg down, early fullness manageable, one thing confusing me in c/orforglipron · 3 points · 1 year ago
Went looking for independent testing on this and found essentially nothing, which was clarifying.
comment on [Discussion] perimenopause is doing more work than we give it credit for in c/glp1women · 36 points · 1 year ago
The hair shedding was the thing that frightened me most and the thing that mattered least. It stopped.
comment on [Lab] split one vial across Janoshik and Medutest — 98.7% and 98.3% in c/hplc · 25 points · 1 year ago
That figure cannot be quoted to two decimals off that baseline. The precision is not in the data.
comment on [Lab] CPC cagri — Janoshik came back 98.1% against a claimed 97.5% in c/hplc · 538 points · 1 year ago
Disagree. Inter-lab spread of a point or two on this assay is ordinary and calling it a discrepancy misleads people.
comment on [Meta] the chromatogram rule is doing its job and people should stop complaining in c/hplc · 29 points · 1 year ago
ghost peak, check the plumbing first, it is always the plumbing
comment on my fasting insulin moved and I cannot work out whether contraception is why in c/glp1women · 31 points · 1 year ago
Agreed that the vocabulary here is imprecise and it causes people to answer different questions to the ones asked.
comment on someone explain LC-MS to me like I have not read a paper in years in c/hplc · 9 points · 1 year ago
baseline choice is a decision, not a measurement
comment on why does nobody talk about maintenance in c/maintenancephase · 36 points · 1 year ago
None of this is a taper plan.
Adding one thing — decide what maintenance looks like before you arrive at it.
comment on 7 months in and cycle is still the thing I get wrong in c/glp1women · 181 points · 1 year ago
Questions about oral contraceptive absorption and gastric emptying are legitimate pharmacology questions with product-specific answers. A pharmacist can answer them properly; a board cannot.
comment on [Discussion] we are measuring contraception at the wrong time and calling it noise in c/glp1women · 99 points · 1 year ago
the trials were not designed to answer most of the questions asked here
comment on [Discussion] we are measuring contraception at the wrong time and calling it noise in c/glp1women · 4 points · 1 year ago
Disagreeing with this line: the absorption question has a product-specific answer and a pharmacist has it.
nils_tulloch is right that a diagnosis and a finding are different things here.
comment on help me understand method development, I have read the wiki twice in c/hplc · 26 points · 2 years ago
I would not blame the sample yet. Everything you have described is consistent with the column rather than the vial.
comment on [Results] 19 weeks on 0.25mg, full numbers, ask me anything boring in c/maintenancephase · 0 points · 2 years ago
Agreed that a few kilos of drift is ordinary. Weight is not a fixed number even for people who have never taken anything.
comment on [Lab] KP cagri — VendorInvestigate came back 98.1% against a claimed 97.5% in c/hplc · 421 points · 2 years ago
Carryover from a previous high-concentration injection looks exactly like a small impurity. The blank injection is four minutes and it removes the ambiguity entirely.
comment on [Lab] QSC cagri — Janoshik came back 98.6% against a claimed 98.5% in c/hplc · 1.7k points · 2 years ago
Area percent is the integrated area of your peak over the total integrated area at one wavelength on one gradient. Change any of those and the number changes without the sample changing.
comment on how much of what we believe about dose stretching actually comes from regain threads in c/maintenancephase · 154 points · 2 years ago
Appetite returning before the scale moves follows from the mechanism: the appetite effect is the proximal one and weight is the lagging integrated outcome.
comment on [Discussion] goal weight is doing more work than we give it credit for in c/maintenancephase · 27 points · 2 years ago
plan the maintenance phase before you need it
comment on [Lab] 18th independent test on SWB — 99.4% on a claimed 99.0%, and the trend is the interesting part in c/hplc · 2.2k points · 2 years ago
Resolution between two peaks depends on retention, selectivity and efficiency. A shallower gradient buys retention and usually resolution, at the cost of peak width and run time.