One concrete data point for the thread. If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way. Most of the apparent contradictions in these threads dissolve at that step.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
One thing that is still open after DebRD_ATL’s answer:
How much of the oral variability is the SNAC absorption window and how much is dose, because the two get conflated constantly?
quinn_sf said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsReporting back.
Update — I went back to the injectable. Not because the tablet did not work, but because the fasting window and my mornings were never going to agree.
VanRx_Mike said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Agreeing with VanRx_Mike, and the qualification matters more than the agreement. Worth adding that the tablet is taken daily, so a missed dose costs far less than a missed weekly injection. That is a genuine advantage nobody lists.