VendorMark said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
That is right for the common case. Whether it is right for the case being asked about depends on a detail that has not been given.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
SandraNC_45 said:The glucagon component looks paradoxical and is not.
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it.
VendorMark said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Careful with the causal language. Two things moving together in a period when five things changed is not a mechanism, and stating it as one makes the thread less useful to somebody reading it later.
Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.
Verify Your PeptidesEst. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.
Browse GL BiochemAdding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look. It is a small discipline and it changes what you notice.
Moderator note: reminder that nothing in this thread is medical advice, and that clinical claims need a source. Tagging this one for the weekly digest.