Dr.CardioMD said:The useful move here is to separate what is established from what is widely repeated.
Same experience, arrived at from the opposite direction. Posting only so the count is not one.
FDA_TrackerJim said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
I read this differently from FDA_TrackerJim, on substance rather than tone. I would resist the confidence. Half of what this board was certain about two years ago has since been quietly dropped, and nobody went back to correct the threads.
Happy to go further on any of that.
FDA_TrackerJim said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsFDA_TrackerJim said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. Taking it to my next appointment.
Moderator note: the sourcing question belongs in the vendor section and has been split out.