u/receipts_or_nothing
Screenshot, date, order id, or it did not happen.
long-standing contributor · vetting · joined 30 Jan 2024
Comments — page 2 of 2
comment on SELECT: what the trials say vs what this community says in c/trialwatch · 13 points · 1 year ago
phase 2 finds a dose, phase 3 measures the effect
comment on [Lab] 5th independent test on SGN — 98.3% on a claimed 98.0%, and the trend is the interesting part in c/vendorvetting · 107 points · 1 year ago
That is a report count, not a test count. The table lists both and they are very different numbers.
comment on [Lab] 5th independent test on SGN — 98.3% on a claimed 98.0%, and the trend is the interesting part in c/vendorvetting · 294 points · 1 year ago
Minimum order and lead time — did they quote both up front?
comment on [Lab] 5th independent test on SGN — 98.3% on a claimed 98.0%, and the trend is the interesting part in c/vendorvetting · 86 points · 1 year ago
Small fix — the figure you quoted is the claimed purity from the certificate, and the independent result was the higher of the two.
comment on someone explain testing to me like I have not read a paper in years in c/vendorvetting · 11 points · 1 year ago
the interesting column is spread, not maximum
comment on how much of what we believe about Medutest actually comes from PeptideMeter threads in c/vendorvetting · 24 points · 1 year ago
Limitless Life shows up in threads constantly and has almost nothing on file
comment on [Lab] 20th independent test on QYB — 97.9% on a claimed 97.0%, and the trend is the interesting part in c/vendorvetting · 61 points · 1 year ago
Not convinced by the ranking-by-vibe approach here. The community number is derived from reports; your feeling is derived from four posts you remember.
comment on [Discussion] can we stop arguing about VendorInvestigate until somebody posts a number in c/vendorvetting · 26 points · 1 year ago
lead time quoted at checkout is the number to hold them to
comment on [Discussion] can we stop arguing about VendorInvestigate until somebody posts a number in c/vendorvetting · 262 points · 1 year ago
Removed pending evidence. Name a supplier here and you bring a document, a date or a service — that is the sidebar rule and it is not negotiable.
comment on [Lab] HJ tirz — Janoshik came back 97.8% against a claimed 97.0% in c/vendorvetting · 31 points · 1 year ago
Independent testing is worth more than a supplied certificate for one structural reason: the chain of custody. A member who buys, ships and pays is testing the same thing you would receive.
comment on the VendorInvestigate thing finally clicked for me and I want to write it down in c/vendorvetting · 246 points · 2 years ago
Cosigning on lot matching. It sounds trivial and it predicts almost everything else about how an operation is run.
comment on [PSA] write the concentration on the vial. that is the whole post. in c/trialwatch · 14 points · 2 years ago
trial populations get support that nobody on this board gets
comment on the STEP thing finally clicked for me and I want to write it down in c/trialwatch · 31 points · 2 years ago
Why comparing across trials almost never works, with the specific failure modes.
Different populations: an obesity programme and a diabetes programme enrol different people with different baseline characteristics. Different endpoints: body weight change, glycaemic control and cardiovascular events are not convertible. Different durations: 68 weeks and 72 weeks are not the same, and the curves have not flattened by either.
Different analysis populations: one paper reports intention-to-treat, another emphasises completers. Different support: some trial designs include structured lifestyle contact that no member of this board receives.
Stack those and the "X beats Y" tables that circulate here are comparing five things at once and attributing the difference to the molecule.
comment on [Lab] split one vial across PeptideMeter and VendorInvestigate — 99.0% and 99.1% in c/vendorvetting · 1 points · 2 years ago
a supplier that answers method questions in writing has already told you a lot
comment on [Lab] split one vial across PeptideMeter and VendorInvestigate — 99.0% and 99.1% in c/vendorvetting · 972 points · 2 years ago
Paradigm Peptide shows up in threads constantly and has almost nothing on file
comment on how much of what we believe about testing actually comes from Janoshik threads in c/vendorvetting · 422 points · 2 years ago
Amino Asylum shows up in threads constantly and has almost nothing on file
comment on someone explain Janoshik to me like I have not read a paper in years in c/vendorvetting · 52 points · 2 years ago
Flair set to Vendor. Also a reminder that we take no money from any supplier in the directory.
comment on reading Janoshik threads from 2024 and half of it aged badly in c/vendorvetting · 388 points · 2 years ago
Flair set to Vendor. Also a reminder that we take no money from any supplier in the directory.
comment on how much of what we believe about Janoshik actually comes from vendor threads in c/vendorvetting · 62 points · 2 years ago
Same view. A record you can read beats a rating you cannot inspect, every time.
comment on someone explain reship to me like I have not read a paper in years in c/vendorvetting · 13 points · 2 years ago
Regional stock made more difference to my planning than anything else — ordering from a warehouse in Denmark took the customs question off the table entirely.