KevinCompounds said:I did not do what was suggested, I did something adjacent, and it worked; posting the difference in case it matters to somebody.
Second this.
KevinCompounds said:I did not do what was suggested, I did something adjacent, and it worked; posting the difference in case it matters to somebody.
Second this.
KevinCompounds said:I did not do what was suggested, I did something adjacent, and it worked; posting the difference in case it matters to somebody.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. The useful move here is to separate what is established from what is widely repeated. Those two sets overlap less than the confident tone of most write-ups suggests, and the second set is where nearly all the disagreement on this board comes from.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine. Half the figures circulating in this community trace back to a secondary summary that dropped a qualifier.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsFollowing on from KevinCompounds — and this may be the naive question:
How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?
quinn_sf 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 do not accept the framing. The question has been narrowed to the version that has a tidy answer, and the part that was dropped is the part the OP actually asked about.